Fair Warning: Perhaps you have already spotted the ‘subtle’ tone change in the title? Yes, Lyle has not penned this post. Which can mean only one thing, that I have hacked his administrator password and locked him out. Actually, Lyle has asked me to be a regular guest writer, and who says no to Lyle? Not I. Perhaps he wants a day off? (deservedly so) Or maybe he doesn’t have enough things to worry about it life and wants to add just one more thing…my reckless abandon. Regardless, it is my privilege to do it, as it is to come here to read every post/comment on what I feel is the finest online community of electric car enthusiasts the internet has to offer.
This week brought a new media frenzy to market by GM, with the center of it being the corporately induced viral media campaign “What is 230?” and we saw the spawn of another ‘social media’ website from GM. (How many is that now?)
At the heart of this campaign is a number so large (230MPG) it seems to render itself almost inert, that is except for this phrase tucked inside the press release, “GM expects the Volt to consume as little as 25 kilowatt hours per 100 miles in city driving”
As many people know, I am not one to gloss over the details, or avoid doing math, so I asked John Lauckner how this did not translate to a 32 mile AER in the city (at best), to which he answered:
“Hey statik. We are still confident that we will deliver 40 miles of autonomous electric range (AER) on both the official EPA city and highway tests, so no change there. The EPA draft methodology reduces the laboratory result take into account a number of factors such as the use of air-conditioning, more passengers in the vehicle, cargo, etc. So, that’s the difference between the “up to 40 miles” that we stated for some time…”
To my ears, I heard this:
“Hey statik. We believe the typical driver is a orphaned 18 year old girl, with no friends, personal belongings, and that is allergic to the both the A/C and heater, and never uses the radio…and the Volt will never, ever carry the average family of 3.14 people, a set of golf clubs, or all the other random useless junk that families tend to pile up in the trunk.”
Ok, most people don’t hear like I do. But for most people, deep down, we really don’t believe…well, lets say we have a healthy skepticism, and these types of undercurrents give us pause. 230 is just too big a number. (Nissan wasted little time ‘tweeting’ out their own dreamy, tri-centurion number in response, 367).
To the public, we see the asterisk beside 230 as surely as we see the asterisk beside Barry Bond’s 73 homeruns. For the most part this has been the media response in general to the campaign, ‘catchy number…but c’mon’
That skepticism is akin to the statement, “We expect more than 80 percent of Volt owners will never use or burn gasoline because they commute 40 miles a day or less,” and references/links to that study again, (‘How many miles one-way do you travel from home to work’ http://tinyurl.com/U-S-DOTStudy), which sounds great, until you realize that people working 5 days in a row don’t go straight to and from work. If you even add on 10 miles of need ranged to that lowered 32 mile max expectation, for ‘picking up a loaf of bread, going out for lunch/supper, visiting friends, or just being a poser and driving around in their electric car where people them in it,’ that number slips to 50% of people will burn gas each workday. It is all perspective and hyperbole.
Therefore, my suggestion to GM is that it is time. Your Easter 2008 is now. It is time for those first public test drives, you know what I’m talking about…the real ones. The ones that make Frank Weber get so nervous he only speaks in German. The kind where you hand the keys over, and you let them drive off by themselves.
While 230 MPG may well indeed be the average mileage overall, it certainly will not be the norm for most Volt drivers. Also, most Volt drives themselves will be in a ‘untypical’ configuration ie) number people, cargo onboard, driving styles, situations, etc. We want to draw our own conclusions on our own AER, extended range MPG…and overall gallons we will burn in a typical week/year.
On July 20, 1969 we all didn’t step on the moon, but we all got to see and live it first hand, we didn’t just hear the president say, “yupe, we did it…it all went as planned.” Likewise, it is time for your moonshot to become more than just PR. The competition is at the doorstep now, and pretty soon orders are going to be taken. It’s time to start handing out keys and say, “Have her back by sundown. We think you’ll be pleased.”
/we are ready. Are you?
This entry was posted on Saturday, August 15th, 2009 at 6:50 am and is filed under Op-ed. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:09 am)Hello Statik and thanks for the topic. I think you’re right, 50% of Volt drivers will burn gasoline in minimal amounts.
I spent $30 on gasoline last week. The longest drive (away and back to home) was about 60 miles.
My total Voltec measured gasoline use for the week would have been about 1/2 gallon. Total cost, including recharge, would have been $7.
Good to see your post and will watch for more soon.
=D~
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:09 am)Welcome back! Now I’ll go back and READ the post. (lol)
Be Well
Tagamet
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:11 am)Look out…Statik as guest poster! Title gave you away man!
About the 230 claim, I think GM needs to run away from that. With something that is as difficult as the Volt is to explain to people on the world outside the walls of this site, throwing a whopping huge number like that out there with a bunch of “yeah, but” and well, if…”‘s along with college level Calculus theorems to produce that number, I think people will be mightily (and justifiably) angry when they don’t achieve that. I don’t need fuzzy math, and I think most people would agree with me on that. Just sell the car on it’s own merits and over-deliver on the promises already made. There’s still time. Rather than 40 mile AER, give us 50 mile AER with A.C. running, etc., etc.
I need a cup of coffee.
side/good to see you again. Don’t be a stranger!
-3
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:15 am)Thanks for the entertainment…’ been missing it. Lyle needed a counterpart with more of a “raw edge”. Your 1st official thread reminds of me of jalopnik.com .
Hope Lutz is not too upset about the tie.
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:20 am)You there. It’s great to enjoy the full brunt of your wit and misuse of the keyboard again.
Now being recently elevated from a mere commenting mortal, can you confirm that that 25KWh is coming out of the battery or out of the wall or was the conversation with Laukner specific enough to be considered the complete answer?
So…does mean we lobby for Lyle and Statik to get two of the first Volts? Pretty sneaky. Let us know when you get your hands on the pink tie and whether it is employed at the time or knot (Ha!).
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:21 am)I agree with you about the test drives, but more data is almost always better data. Bring it back by the end of the Week/month/year sounds much better to my ears. People from this site could gather a huge amount of real world data through On-Star (as though we wouldn’t keep our OWN data (lol)).
Just a thought,
Be well,
Tagamet
PS It’s really good to “hear” from you again. I look forward to the Yin to my Yang!
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+13
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:29 am)Woo hoo… an official Statik post.
I think you’re correct but there’s something else that is going to happen once the cars get out into the real world.
Yes people will start driving them like they do any other car. Extra junk in the trunk, 2.5 kids + a white picket fence and a dog, etc… They’ll do their daily work commute and then go home and turn right around and run back out to grab a gallon of milk.
They’ll start doing everything like normal but then I think something rather amazing is going to happen. That nifty cool display screen is going to go “bing! you’ve just started using gas!” and the driver is going to pause and think. That’s the really big deal. Driving around a car that uses no gas will be addictive and when that “bing! you’re now using some gas” message shows up it’s going to make that driver stop and think.
“Maybe I could have just picked up milk on my way home from work instead of going home and then running back out.”
“Maybe I don’t really need to run the ac/heater on full blast the entire time I’m in the car.”
People get upset about gas prices but they still drive around like it’s free. They only really think about it when they fill up. They don’t think about the energy they are using while they are driving and how their driving effects that energy use.
I think the Volt will change driving HABITS which has the potential to have much more impact on fuel usage than the Volt itself.
- Xed
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:33 am)Also, who gets to choose the accompanying image?
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:34 am)Good to see you again Stacik.
The truth is that there will be thousands of Volt owners that will not use ANY gas for several months in a row.. and so they will get the ridiculous average mileage of 999 mpg.
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:36 am)Very true and you already see this from current hybrid drivers with good display feedback.
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:43 am)Schmeltz,
(I hope the coffee kicked in) I DON’T think that GM should run away form that 230 number. They just need to gather real world data like Project Driveway, only with the Volt. This way the data would be A) real life, in vivo data and B) may well be significantly HIGHER than the 230 number (great fodder for the ads (Your mileage may be even Better!)
JMO
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-2
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:45 am)I think the tie would make a great “uniform” for statik!
He should get it.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:48 am)We want more pretty girls!…Yeah!..
+5
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:48 am)i have always taken the 40 miles to mean – you can get 40 miles if you drive this car in hyper fuel saving manor. I take the 230 to mean the same. actually, the method of calculating this 230 upper limit is now open to all the competition too. so there is still a level playing field for plug in cars.
I do however have a funny feeling we may get some undisclosed surprises. When GM set out on this quest to build the Volt and picked their supplier based on batteries provided, batteries have still been constantly improving; and will continue to do so over the next year. It may happen by the time the batteries are actually produced, the output will be better than the expected 16kw, or the window of discharge may be increased – providing our 40 miles a bit more assuredly.
If this is the case, do not expect people to be “given the keys” just so soon. Actually this would in any case be crazy, as GM would want to protect their trade secrets for as long as possible.
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:50 am)“People get upset about gas prices but they still drive around like it’s free.”
The Volt will bear the brunt of the driving chores in households will multiple cars, the SUV will sit parked waiting for the weekend-tow-the-boat-to-the-lake chore.. that will throw off the statistics a bit.
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:50 am)Huzzah! ( I think that’s the way you say it?)
So nice to hear from an old friend.
With respect to your blog, I do agree that GM needs to get the show moving. I want, more then many, to finally get this vehicle in the hands of a impartial, 3rd party. As Tag pointed out to me in the last post, Lyle’s contribution and dedication to the Volt is second to none. And while I would LOVE to hear Lyle’s review of a TRUE test drive (yes, actually experiencing the EREV portion), I also want to hear from those further removed from the Volt program.
Perhaps the best case scenario would be for both Lyle and yourself, to get to “borrow” a Volt for a week and give it a workout. Run it into that mysterious, charge sustaining mode, and then take on one of those big hills.
Welcome back, and looking forward to Statiks test drive. Come on GM, pull down your pants and let Dr. Statik take a look!
/GM ain’t ever gonna let Statik take one out by himself….
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:55 am)Woo Hoo, Statik my friend, i am smiling from ear to ear. Mind you I was smiling yesterday whilst watching the video as well.
My trip to work and back is under 10 miles so no matter how I drive it I will NEVER use gas around town. (90% of my year.)
On my trips, I will use plenty so on average I expect I should beat the 230 mpg claim.
However I think GM needs to be up front and say:
230 MPG projection is based upon AVERAGE drive cycles.
Individual results will vary
Putting the small print in bold IS important, and marketing needs to lead on this. Customer Perceptions Matter
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:56 am)Now…about the thread. The asterisk on the 230 is a great idea…and GM should have used it from the start. They could have played off the use of the asterisk for the sports players that have been caught using performance enhancing substances. However in this context, an asterisk portrays negative thoughts…but anything can be spinned.
Reporter: Mr. Lutz…Now that you have explained the numbers 23 and the smiling electrical recptacle…can you explain the asterisk?
Mr. Lutz (smiling): Sure…it is difficult to fully explain the Volt’s efficiency in just MPG. The asterisk indicates that you need to read more to get the full story. We having been explaining GM’s version of EREV for the last 2 years and want to get the message out to the car drivers that may have not even heard the details about the Volt yet.
Reporter: Isn’t it risky to use the asterisk for a performance number since the sports world has used it to “black ball” an althele’s accomplishment after discovering performance enhancing substances were used?
Lutz: Not at all…the use of the asterisk is quite the opposite in the case of the Volt. EREV offers the driver the ability to take advantage of the best attributes of a pure electric and a pure ICE vehicle. For the 1st 40 miles the Volt uses only the energy from the grid…and the ICE kicks after that. The asterisk is to indicate that there is much more to the story of the Volt. The people with the drive to learn more will step up to hear more.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:59 am)JEC,
Well put, but I don’t think that the last sentence is true. I think Statik’s reputation as a critic would be EXACTLY why GM would/should put one in his hands (maybe with a mental health professional riding (literally) shotgun (lol). If you can make statik smile you have something that over 2% of the general population would enjoy (just kidding on that last part statik).
Be well,
Tagamet
PS Huzzah is correct!
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+6
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:59 am)Xed,
You know I never gave that a thought, but I really like what your saying. People give little thought to driving and how much energy they are using.
Just maybe, this will make more people, drive more effectively and efficiently. Even a small change in our driving habits, as a whole, can have a significant impact on the amount of oil we consume.
Thanks for the post. I like the way you think!
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:59 am)Wow, I’m proud of you! I’ve never seen so many correctly spelled words from a Statik post.
Good to hear from you!
Matt
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:01 am)I think I know that answer.
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:05 am)This is just so fitting. I have to post it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVS3WNt7yRU
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:06 am)Herm,
I wonder if the display allows you to keep track of the actual fuel burned along with the mileage(s). That’d be another neat measure to have e.g. I burned 2 gallons this month.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:06 am)From the article: While 230 MPG may well indeed be the average mileage overall, it certainly will not be the norm for most Volt drivers.
—————————————-
I’m still trying to figure out exactly what this means.
???
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:21 am)“We expect more than 80 percent of Volt owners will never use or burn gasoline because they commute 40 miles a day or less,”
====================================================
Boy, I really have to stop myself from going down this path again, but the music is just to irresistible.
Reality is that the Volt will use gas, if for nothing else, to keep that battery in its thermally, happy state. Just how much, I have no idea, since GM has not provided any specifics on battery thermal management (I realize, they are not going to give away any technical secrets, also). But the fact of the matter is, if you live in a climate that is either hot or cold, your Volt will need to use the ICE for thermal management. Yes, I know the battery could be tapped into to do some of this, but only to a point. If you leave the car outside for an extended period (not sure how extended, again, we do not have enough info. to interpolate that number), you will eventually need to supplement energy from the ICE.
Will the amount of gas used be significant for most? Maybe, but maybe not. We just need more information. “I don’t know, what I don’t know. When I know it, I won’t ask”
/wishing I had a link to this never ending argument….
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:22 am)I think the Volts mileage number should be listed as whatever mileage it gets while in charge sustaining mode. 40-50mpg? In that mode it uses gas measured in gallons. Thus the term Miles Per Gallon. I don’t think you can buy a Gallon of electricity. And I don’t want to have a mathematician do the conversion for me. Let buyers shop that number and be pleasantly surprised when they find themselves charging the car religiously and not buying any gas. Then come out with an add campaign that says n % of Volt owners are wondering if they’ll ever buy gas again.
Under promise, over deliver!
NPNS!
-3
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:29 am)I figured with all the Volt publicity lately Lyle didn’t need shameless gimmicks to draw more people. haha
Great to have you back Statik! It’s always enlightening to have your perspective.
And to GM, summer is winding down so if you want the batteries to be tested by real people under optimum weather conditions so the numbers look good I’d suggest moving on this ASAP!!!
The worst that could happen is the truth comes out which will happen eventually anyways.
The best that could happen is real people discover real problems that can get fixed before November 2010
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:33 am)230 is great PR for GM but we need to use measurements that more directly relate to resource consumption such as 0.44 gallons per 100 miles. Then if consumption rises to 0.50 gl/100m due to extra load, no one will get so excited as they would if their mpg dropped below 200.
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:41 am)I have to say, the 230 number and the conditions briefly stated to achieve it did give me some pause. I’m truly interested in real world conditions more than an expectation or theory.
I agree with statik in that GM’s best interests are served by letting people test the Volt now, today. The positives from that far outweigh any potential negatives. Surely any negatives resulting from real world testing would be trumped by the good things this vehicle brings to the table.
So come on, GM, let people try it out!*
*let -me- try it out!
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:42 am)Herm,
That’s statik’s er, niece.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:44 am)I believe the 230.mpg rating is very misleading. If you drive 100 miles a day you will not get 230.MPG, also if you drive 30 miles a day you may excide the so called 230.MPG equivalent. Any driving in between will be, who knows what your MPG will be.
The EPA should give these types of vehicles a Dual Rating. 1. Should be the rated using fuel such as regular fueled vehicles & hybrids, 2nd all electric range of KW per mile. This would be the best way of judging each vehicles efficiently no matter what energy sources we use in any combination. I believe this rating system was to give the public a favorable view of this type of vehicle because of its high cost to purchase. Don’t get me wrong, I believe the volt is a excellent start to the electrification of the auto industry, but the current MPG rating system is misleading…
.
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:45 am)The last news story I heard on NPR said that the only way you would get 230 MPG would be if you drove 51.1 miles.
I don’t want to know the combined AER and MPG. It’s not helpful. I want to know the MPG in range extended mode.
I want to know how much gas it will use on long trips of 300-800 miles or more.
300 – 40 AER = 260 @ 50mpg = 5.2 gallons used
800 – 40 AER = 760 @ 50mpg = 15.2 gallons used
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:54 am)Dave G,
I too, eead the article that has so often been referred to here (and linked above by statik). Commuting/work related trips account for ONLY 16% of daily trips (chart in appendix A)! This is a real eye-opener! The lion’s share of daily travel in that study are for pleasure and around town trips by the family (86%!!)(read the definitions in Appendix B). This should actually allow more daily charging opportunities and therefore HIGHER mpg (if I’m reading it correctly).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:00 am)This is my first post. I have been a lurker for a long time though.
I agree. It seems to me that things could be much simpler if they just list all the usual mpg numbers of a regular car along with some new electric numbers. Why not just give these numbers:
The typical ICE numbers:
gas tank size: ?
miles per gallon when in extended range mode: 40-50?
then add these numbers for electric mode:
miles per kWh: 4 (100 miles with 25 kWh)
usable kWh a single charge holds: 8kWh
2 methods of propulsion, 2 sets of numbers. This would make it much easier for the average potential buyer to have an idea of what they might see for their typical commute.
Think about it. If I drive 44 miles one way to work, how does the number 230 tell me anythinng about how much electricity and gas I will typically use? It doesn’t. But with the 4 numbers above I could figure it out easily. I can also figure out typical total range before I need to fill up on a long trip and my cost based on my local gas and electric rates.
Bill
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:04 am)Good morning Tag. I would be very happy to be wrong or just over reacting to their claim of 230 mpg. Is just seems to go against the grain of the under-promise, over-deliver creed in my view. If the claim can be substantiated as true for most people in most circumstances, and it can be explained to non-techy folks in a way they can assimilate, than I’m absolutlely cool with it. The burden is on GM to get this right.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:06 am)Herm,
I agree, but doing the daily chores are likely to change the behavior of “just plugin at night” I think they’ll be plugged in between (some) daily trips to get even more AER range and therefore more mpg (if gas is used at all). I’m not a fan of the methodology that study used (they overlapped some of their percentages like “long trips” and commutes >50 miles), but it also shows that the majority of trips are around town – not commutes.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:06 am)I still think we need 3 lines on the MPC-MPG and the average expected mpg for a year.
Without that third line the Prius and others will FALSELY appear to get better milage.
It would be great if the volt had a display to show your actual average MPG over the life of the car. Up dated constantly, mile after mile weather in BEV or ER.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:07 am)Schmeltz,
Wade through the sited study.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:08 am)Just click on the Volt with numbers (1 and 8 ) in the image at the following link for jalopnik’s take on the 230 MPG
http://jalopnik.com/5337460/six-completely-outrageous-automaker-claims/gallery/?skyline=true&s=i
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:09 am)This would be great except GM has to convince car buyers that the Volt is worth $10-50K premium before tax incentives. Very few will ever buy the Volt unless they understand the benefits that EVs and 40 miles AER bring. They have to market these and 230mpg City EPA Rated is probably the single best way to do that. That said, they need to ulitimately be forthright with all of the relavant information to acertaining the Volt’s personalized performance.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:11 am)Yeah, there probably is a couple days a week I would go over 40. I might go all the way up to 50 miles. So I’d use a fifth or quarter of gallon of gas. That sounds way better than 2 gallons to me.
So instead of spending $5+ on gas I will spend around 50 cents.
When gas goes to $10 bucks a gallon I will be sitting pretty.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:17 am)But you don’t want to know what your MPG for the year or month was? I know you can do the math, but many would not. The Volt must have more than just a MPG and MPC rating or the uneducated/uninformed buyer will not see the advantage of the Volt over the Prius type cars.
A buyer who is not up to speed on the meaning of MPC will most likely ignore it and fix on the MPG and see no advantage to the Volt.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:18 am)I’m all for giving the engineers until October 2010 to tweak the new drivetrain, especially the software. They should be able to squeak out just enough to make most people happy.
They can also do some sneaky things like open up the usable battery capacity for a year or so and then slowly reduce it to increase the battery life. Just enough to get the early owners the passing numbers. Heh.
They might also come up with different modes for drivers so the anal retentive can get the most while the performance seekers can get the least (range). Let’s say you just got fired or quit your Internet posting addiction and want to really get the most range. Hit option A. If you finally get that hot date you thought you were going to get by driving a cool electric car you can get the peppy performance by hitting option B.
So, I think we should be a bit patient and let those geeky guys with the soft bodies (sorry for the stereotype but if the shoe (stretchy pants) fits…) tap away until the wee hours of the night perfecting the Voltec system. Seems fair to me.
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:18 am)Statik said
“If you even add on 10 miles of need ranged to that lowered 32 mile max expectation, for ‘picking up a loaf of bread, going out for lunch/supper, visiting friends, or just being a poser and driving around in their electric car…”
—————————————————————–
That has been my point in many of my blogs for the last year on this site when the pure battery electric vehicle crowd pipes in, ie. WITH THE VOLT YOU DO NOT NEED TO CHANGE YOUR LIFESTYLE, and the is no worry about ever running out of juice.
With the Volt, you CAN go the long way home.
You CAN decide to drive to Las Vegas after work on Friday night.
You CAN forget to plug the Volt in when you get home and still get up the next morning and go to work.
With the Chevy Volt, you drive WORRY FREE with no range anxiety.
With current technology and infrastructure, pure BEV’s with have to be an “EXTRA” car to most people. They will still need another conventional car sitting faithfully in the garage waiting to do the long range jobs.
The Volt, however, could easily be one’s only car.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:20 am)The goal of the Govt is to make it simple for people to compare. Using a statistical sample of typical driving patterns and judging and equivalent mpg rating from that makes a lot of sense.
The average Joe who buys the Volt will know that his mileage may vary. By using the statistical averages it should work out that for the group that gets less than 230mpg and complains, there will be another group to counter that with much higher mpg ratings.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:20 am)/Or they could just let us down in Florida test it year round, HUZZAH!
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:27 am)NZDavid,
If I’m reading that study correctly (a dry read, but highly recommend it) the Commuting trips are the vast majority of trips taken any given day, so the “YMMV” may actually mean that “Your mileage will likely be significantly BETTER”. THAT would be cool in bold print on the window sticker.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:29 am)He’s back Quicker then I thought. So much for the long good bye post! Like I said after he posted the long good bye, I find those post very funny. After posting them the person almost allways comes back.
Look at it like Statik would of GM
“I seen a long good bye post about not hijacking the site, from some who needed more attention and got it. Every one posted how great he is and how much we will miss him. Then wow maybe he should come back and start his own post from time to time so he can have even more attention. Ok so now you realy have hijacked the site and Statik what are you going to do with it?”
Just pulling your chain buddy, Glad your back anyway Statik.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:31 am)JEC,
Some of the answers are in the article linked by statik above (and they are GOOD answers).
HTH,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:34 am)Nelson,
But the Catch 22 is that first they have to BUY the Volt to be “pleasantly surprised” (and I think that they WILL be surprised). We’ll have to wait and see what the genset mileage is and work from there.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:43 am)Lyle, hope everything is going well. Who is this mystery poster anyway. Boy o’ boy, is he long winded or what?
Classic Statik, “The ones that make Frank Weber get so nervous he only speaks in German.”
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:45 am)Glad to see you’ve finally quit wasting all that time on the internet and decided to go out and get a job.
/looking forward to more “thread hijacks”
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:47 am)# 7 XED
Good post !
For many volt owners old habits will change.
Volt owners will just HATE to be seen gassing up !
Volt owner “sport” will be pulling into the station, buying a cup of coffee, newspaper, etc and making it known they’re not there to buy gas.
Early adopters fast learners.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:50 am)old man,
I totally agree. If the task cost (read if the consumer has to THINK too much) is too high, they just won’t do it. It has to be spelled out in a manner that will at LEAST make them question it and then you have the teachable moment.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:51 am)______________________________________________________
Welcome back Statik…great article post…I look forward to reading your next one.
I’m a big Volt fan….but
The 230mpg # is gibberish!
The 230mpg# will cause more rather than less confusion as to the benefit dynamics of the Volt.
______________________________________________________
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:53 am)Can anyone point me in the direction of where the heck in that set of statistics does it say that 78% of commutes are 40 miles or less? I’ve mixed and matched the numbers and no luck.
Anyone?
Thanks,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:53 am)Behavior modification through enhanced feedback display… Hmmm. So there is a cure for this melodramatic handicap called “Range Anxiety”.
I knew it!
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:57 am)My 2010 Fusion Hybrid does that…. total run time + distance + fuel used…. My average after not quite a month is 5.5 L/100 KM (51.4 MPG Canadian) It can be reset but I want to see how low it will get before the frost hits ( about 2 weeks now)
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:57 am)“They might also come up with different modes for drivers so the anal retentive can get the most while the performance seekers can get the least (range). ”
Just finished watching “Terminator 3 : Judgement Day”, Skynet takes over the world.. how appropriate
The Volt could even learn your driving patterns and adjust the SOC all by itself.. if you are a righteous driver with a soft right foot then it could open up the SOC, if you are not then….
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:01 am)Jay,
I see you’ve switched from the audience to the stage – good on you! (Not that you would have been able to stay in the audience much longer without someone ushering you out for your constant ditsturbances and muttering about the play). I’m thrilled to have you penning the articles – and you make a very good point with this one. The competition between volt and others is now becoming real as release dates loom on the horizon. It’s time to demonstrate the qualities of each product to the consumer. That will be the time the volt truly causes a spark in the mind of the buyer.
Jay, after serving your term at GM-volt.com, please feel free to take an executive position at GM itself and lets see you reeally put your money where your mouth is.
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:09 am)I think you are right, people will get motivated to plug it in every chance they get.. they can see the results instantly.
That will also influence shopping behavior.. if you know Piggly-Wiggly across town has free plugs just for the customers then you are likely to go there.. and other grocery stores will pay attention to this.
This frequent recharging and resulting shallow cycling of the battery will extend its life.. good for GM and the warranty.
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:25 am)That’s what happened when our grocer added a parking place right there next to the buggy hitches.(g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:26 am)Very true XED & JEC,
GM could make a difference with their display and conveying that information to the drivers in a provocative but “safe on the road” way.
Ford Fusion’s version from Jalopnk. ” In one mode the car even “grows” leaves when you’re driving extra conservatively” and the Honda Insight version “When you push the “Eco” mode button, the speedo turns green when you’re being frugal or blue when you’re hooning it, also a panel grows “leaves” to reward short term driving and displays the long term performance as well.”
Having that feedback instead thinking, wow my gas bills were high last month, maybe I should take it easy, will mark a big change for most drivers. May not make us a nation of hypermilers, but over large numbers should make a difference.
______________________________________________
Tag: You probably said this long ago but I would like to see an hours running time meter for the engine also.
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:27 am)Statik: “… it is my privilege … to come here to read every post/comment on what I feel is the finest online community of electric car enthusiasts the internet has to offer.”
Amen. Too bad it is so addictive…
Now, back to business.
On the one hand, the 230mpg number brings new meaning to the phrase “your mileage may vary”. A traveling salesman, not being accustomed to driving the EPA cycle, could get lower than 50mpg. However a family’s second car for daily errands could get 950mpg! No car on the market has this kind of potential range of mpg possibilities, so it is hard to get one’s mind around the truth unless you are a daily devotee of gm-volt.com. But that is not realistic (or healthy!) for most people.
On the other hand, the 230mpg has a real meaning in a certain sense. Remember the A in CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) stands for Average. If you are the EPA, then you are interested in national objectives regarding oil independence and pollution, not individual objectives. So coming up with a number that shows the net national impact has real value, even if it has less meaning for the individual trying to make a rationale buying decision. I believe that the 230mpg number is a fairly accurate blended average and a reasonable measure for national objectives. I believe that this number will change as more data is collected on national driving behavior. I believe that this number is not that useful for the individual.
I also believe GM when they say that the AER will be 40 miles city/highway on the current EPA drive cycle. I also believe it will consume about 8kwhr (20kwhrs/100 miles) of battery energy to do so.
I also believe that with the new EPA guidelines for EVs, 250kwhrs/100 miles is a more accurate way to measure actual Volt electricity usage. We always knew that there would be parasitic losses due to such things as charging efficiency and battery conditioning. There is no contradiction here.
All these numbers measure different things and a fully rationale decision (who does that?) requires understanding of all the above.
Perhaps I’m being naïve, but GM has been pretty open so far. So, when the dust settles on a consistent way to measure things, I believe that they will publish such things as AER highway/city mpg, CSM highway/city mpg, and real kwhr consumption per 100miles, all of which will be more meaningful to the individual consumer than 230mpg.
I also think that the algorithm’s for CSM operation must be very complex with many lines of code. Getting the bugs out of such a large and complex software system will be quite time consuming. So I’m not surprised that GM is holding off on demonstrating that mode of operation. But I believe they will nail it, firstly because it is technically achievable, and second because they have to.
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:27 am)“I want to know how much gas it will use on long trips of 300-800 miles or more.”
That is fine if you want to know that, but all that GM (and the EPA) is telling you is that your average long term mileage will be 230 mpg.. I personally think the 230 number will be a bigger help in helping to plan my weekly-monthly budget.. your number will be better for planning those long vacation trips cross country.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:28 am)If we assume the Volt gets 45 MPG in generator mode, I think its easiest to just think of the Volt as getting 45 MPG + 1 free gallon of gas per trip. About the same as most other hybrids, but with an increasing bonus the more short trips you make.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:29 am)The Volt will be a good trainer in the way towards pure BEV.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:30 am)GM should put out another number. 115. That’s the MPG on the city drive cycle with four 300lb people in the car with the radio on 11, AC and heat at the same time with the headlights and wipers going. Would that make people happy? I’d be fine with that as I am with 230. The point of the 230 campaign is to get people hooked into learning about the Volt. By the time the Volt hits the showroom, the MPG in charge depleted mode will be well known and people can do their own math for their own commutes. Most of us are going to get between triple digits and infinity in gas mileage and be very happy.
PS- Welcome back Statik. Things just edgy and uneasy around here again.
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:31 am)Thats a good one.. imagine a Volt owner sneaking to the gas station at midnight so no one will see them.
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:34 am)Corvette
As the charge depletes more and more current is routed to the driver’s SEAT (until of course, it’s plugged in).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:35 am)http://www.bts.gov/publications/omnistats/volume_03_issue_04/html/figure_02.html
GM also uses the 2003 Southern California Association of Governments study. That’s a better study IHMO because it actually measured the distance. The DOT numbers are from surveys.
-2
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:39 am)STATIK
I hope you will again [SOON] start posting regularly. It seems that I have climbed to the top of a mountain called Irrational Exuberance and I may need help getting back down to the level ground of reallity. And, am hopeing you do not consider Volt reality as a dark, humid, and hot pit with unexplained sounds of dispair.
WELCOME BACK!!!!
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:40 am)DonC,
THANKS, I’ll curl up with that this weekend. On it’s face, I’m worried that that particular population is “skewed”. I’m not saying that all Californians are all skewed up, but they sure may not reflect Penna too well.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:41 am)I think the number of daily detours from work to home is a bit exaggerated from this author. I see most people go directly from work to home after a long days work. I think most will agree.
What he is implying is not accurate. GM’s assessment is more accurate!
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:45 am)Oh yes, another thing.
I’m always 10-30% below the EPA ratings, depending on many factors. So I’d expect to be around 32 miles AER in my Volt.
GM said 40 miles AER on the EPA cycle. They said up to 40 miles for the average consumer. They said more than 40 miles if you are very careful under great conditions. I cannot find a single official pronouncement where GM lied or was deliberately misleading.
There’s historical justification for being cynical, but let’s also give credit where credit is due.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:46 am)I’m glad to see a more critical commentary on the Volt.
I would think that in maybe 5 years people will truly think in terms of kW’s and this new combined/limited range, but for now it’s not a number people will really get nor care about. GM might as well provide a number for the miles per kilogram of plutonium. Since you might never use any plutonium if you keep the battery charged, it should be a pretty good number!
I agree with Statik, it’s time for GM to start the process of taking their lumps and getting the public criticism out in the open. They still have time to make “some” changes if the criticism is valid. The longer they wait, the worse the failures will be perceived. of course, they are just now building the car so they might accelerate the exposure.
Yesterday’s video was just about as exciting as the initial reveal of the concept car. We need more and it need to be as broad as possible.
I love technology shifts!
-2
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:46 am)LOL, welcome back Statik. I knew you would help us to be more grounded
Now lets get Tagamet to post too, just to balance things out
I agree to some of your arguments and GM should be careful to play the PR stunt too far as it will backfire.
But I’m still exited about this car, Lyle video is just the best PR GM could get, even more then this 230 MPG.
They should focus on the EV experience, show people how exiting driving in EV mode and show us when you reach the SOC point how cool it is not to be stuck on the side of the road (passing by the LEAF). Is it that hard to make people understand?
-3
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:47 am)Agreed but it appears GM wants to sound edgy by using only the new EV range calcs (as if anyone other than the geeks understand their significance).
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:48 am)GM is diving into misleading advertising which is getting to be the norm in this country. They do not need to do that if they have a good sound package to market. The 230 crap is not at all honesty so I will have to think about the honesty that will be afforded me as a consumer of the product.
Been with the GM family for many years to include watching them grow after WWII in which they did great PR. GM used to have fairs and truck new models around the country to show off and now with our new computer kids in charge, they want to sell cars on the internet.
It might be a good idea to show the public a real car and not a video of somebody driving a bunch of newseys around.
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:48 am)I think the 230 number is masking a secret that GM doesn’t want to be known just yet and no one here has yet to mention.
While it is pretty clear that the Volt can run about 40 miles all electric (without the ICE), GM has stonewalled all attempts to observe the charge sustaining mode of operation (ICE operation). I believe that this pattern of obfuscation is hiding the fact that the ICE does not run “steadily” during charge sustaining mode but instead changes RPMs (as planned) and even turns on and off at irregular intervals (not as planned).
Early on GM suggested that there would be several RPMs that the ICE would run at depending upon operating conditions. I suspect that once they got to actual real world testing, that theory didn’t work well. They discovered that, at times, they had to run the ICE very hard in order to just keep up and even that was probably insufficient. At other times, they had to shut off the ICE because the motor wasn’t requiring much/any charge and a significant recharge of the battery was occuring. Probably in reality, the ICE cycles on and off and changes RPMs based upon load, predictive algorithms, SOC and other factors that are still being programmed into the software.
This means that reporting the MPG while in charge sustaining mode is every bit as meaningless as the 230 number itself. It’s just possible that traditional MPG figures are meaningless because the Volt never experiences any significant length of operating time with the ICE running steadily.
And beyond that, a single number like “230″ sounds like something that comes out of the marketing department, not engineering!
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:48 am)It’s not gibberish. See my post below for why.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:55 am)I think GM is just seizing on the new EPA standard to boast. Hey, they didn’t make them up but if the numbers look good regardless of their validity, why not. Welcome to capitalism and marketing.
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:58 am)GM will more than likely have that feature.
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:01 am)As Tag says, Statik….. “It’s really good to “hear” from you again. I look forward to the Yin to my Yang!” I agree ….and you’ve both brought a lot of comic relief to this blog! Starting with your online names! (Tag? Statik? ….ludicrous, obscure, laughable choices!) But at least the name “Statik(c)” actually implies something resembling what you have to contribute here most of the time, Statik…….
namely, “interference”!
/Hey, I’m just messin’ with ya, man —ya KNOW I love ya!
//How’s the pay as a guest writer?
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:07 am)Tagamet,
Yeah, that makes sense, but there are other variables.
First off, if EREVs go mainstream, I really believe there will be some sort of motivation to discourage people from plugging in during the day. They could have much higher rates during the day, or there may be social pressure, especially if people start blaming EREVs for blackouts. In addition, I think plugging/unplugging many times a day will get to be a hassle. So the “Utility Factor” (UF) that drove the 230 MPG EPA method assumes only 1 charging cycle per 24 hours.
Secondly, you say commuting/work related trips account for ONLY 16% of daily trips . This sounds about right, but I’m pretty sure the commuting/work-related trips would be much longer on average than other daily trips. So the daily miles driven for commuting would be a lot higher than 16%.
Third, statistically, I believe most cars fit into one of two general categories:
• Cars that are used mostly to drive to/from work
• Cars that are used mostly for errands
For the first type of car above, I believe the majority of miles will be for commuting, and in general, extra trips for this type of car will be fewer. For the second type of car above, I believe most of the trips will be shorter on average. Obviously, there are many exceptions, but statistically, I believe this general trend is correct, so this should help keep most cars under 40 miles a day.
In any event, when they came up with the method for 230 MPG, I believe they used a fairly large survey of daily miles driven.
+6
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:07 am)If it were Toyota seizing the new EPA standard, nobody would be making nasty remarks or give a hoot about it. Instead, there would be nothing but praise.
-2
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:08 am)Hi Statik, as usual your observations hit pretty close to the mark. All I can add is amen.
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:11 am)nasaman,
I’ve had the same “handle” for decades (since Tagamet was a little known prescription med – now it’s OTC). And since Tagamet is a palliative to acid stomach (dyspepsia) often precipitated by, er, well, Statik we still seem superbly matched.
Be well,
Tagamet
/I hear the pay czar has already capped Statik’s pay (g)
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:14 am)On the engineering section of this sights forum an “insider” was suggesting the volt may have morphed into a series/parallel hybrid (i.e. Ice will drive the wheels directly).
Seems unlikely, but it was an interesting observation referencing photos and 2-mode patents.
All the secrecy does spawn speculation.
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:15 am)congratulations to Statik then.. that must be his new car also
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:22 am)Dave G
Plugging in during the day is all the more incentive for people to spin up home renewable energy. IF I had solar or a wind turbine, I could store the “juice” in my VOLT. I assume that daytime electricity is more expensive than night time power, but here in PA they don’t even have time of day metering (huge sigh).
I still have to read the Calif study, but the one linked here doesn’t speak to using a particular car for a given duty (like commuting).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:23 am)Herm,
“…if not then” your taxes will go up (g).(kinda).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:28 am)230 MPG by my calculations means 50 mpg on gas after the inital charge is depleted. They use 51.11 miles as the average mileage driven by us Americans. Subtract 40 electric only miles from that and you get 11.11 miles on gas in their calculation. That is less than 1/4 of a gallon…come on. Give us the real numbers under realistic driving.
If 50 mpg is correct, that is impressive but say it how most of us understand. Not some bogus formula based on how the “average” American drives.
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:28 am)To my ears, I heard this:
“Hey statik. We believe the typical driver is a orphaned 18 year old girl, with no friends, personal belongings, and that is allergic to the both the A/C and heater, and never uses the radio…and the Volt will never, ever carry the average family of 3.14 people, a set of golf clubs, or all the other random useless junk that families tend to pile up in the trunk.”
The question was great. The answer he heard perhaps less so. The simple explanation has been given here by Steel, who has pointed out that the EPA number appears to be a wall to wheels number. Since the number GM uses is from tank to wheels — actually GM hasn’t given a wh/mile number they’ve given an EV range number of 40 miles and we’ve translated that into a 200 wh/mile number — all we’re looking at is battery efficiency. IOW with an 80% total charging efficiency (the actual number may be 82%), 250 wh/mile = 200 wh/mile.
If this is true, then my friend Jay has missed the boat by conflating two distinctly different numbers — wall-to-wheels and tank-to-wheels — and all the talk of “If you even add on 10 miles of need ranged to that lowered 32 mile max expectation … that number slips to 50% of people will burn gas each workday” are simply musings on a bunny trail to nowhere. Before going off on some rant about misleading numbers perhaps it would be a good idea to understand what the numbers mean. Simply stated, there may be no inconsistency whatsoever in the EPA 25 kWh/100 mile figure and GM’s 40 mile EV range number. Without confirming what the numbers are measuring, what we have is wild and potentially misleading speculation.
Which brings us to a far more interesting question: Does anyone CARE what the wall to wheel number is? I don’t and my guess is that no one else will either. I care about the tank to wheel number because that is a measure of EV range. The wall to wheel number measures efficiency and ultimately cost. But with the cost of electricity at $.11/kWh does it really matter if you use 25 kWh or 20 kWh to go 100 miles? If you run the numbers that’s less than a cent per mile. Not measurable IHMO.
My hope would be that GM keeps talking about range and we can forget about the EPA number if that reflects wall-to-wheel.
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:36 am)—
That skepticism is akin to the statement, “We expect more than 80 percent of Volt owners will never use or burn gasoline because they commute 40 miles a day or less,” and references/links to that study again, (’How many miles one-way do you travel from home to work’ http://tinyurl.com/U-S-DOTStudy), which sounds great, until you realize that people working 5 days in a row don’t go straight to and from work.
—
You are right. There are a couple of problems with this.
- The study asks “typical one way distance to work”. This doesn’t take care of side trips we all have to do …
- More importantly it doesn’t take into account weekend travel
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:40 am)I am not sure if this is a good comment in this post, but i believe we should have the 230 Mpg logo some-where in the home page of GM-Volt.com.
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:42 am)IIRC, someone said that most of the U.S. will be converting to new power meters that will charge by time-of-day, but this is rolling out at a slow steady pace. So maybe you’ll get yours is 3 or 4 years.
I like home roof solar power, especially if they can get the price of the solar panels down. But once they roll out time-of-day metering, you could still be better off charging the Volt at night. This way, you might sell electricity to the grid during the day at a higher rate, and then buy it back at a lower rate at night. In any event, power companies love it when people install solar panels, since these produce the most power during peak electrical demand on the grid – on sunny summer days.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:50 am)Dave G
Yeah, Pennsylvania Power and Light SAYS they will be moving to the smart meters, and I’ll believe it AFTER I see it. I have plenty of roof for panels, and absolutely no way to purchase them. Currently they’d cost more than the house did!
Some day….
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:10 pm)Better think about that again. It is can NOT be thought about like ” 45mpg + 1 free gallon of gas per trip, about the same as most other hybrids”.
It is the exact opposite. It is NOT the same as “most other hybrids”.
With the Volt you START with 1 free gallon of gas per trip, THEN get, in your example, 45mpg per trip.
BIG difference.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:11 pm)See my post below.
It is not the same at all.
This more evidence of the education required to understand this car’s advantages.
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:15 pm)LInky to forum discussion with photos showing volt setup and 2 mode hybrid setup looking veeeeerrrry similar.
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2402&page=12
+5
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:15 pm)I agree; the double standards that exist between GM and Honda/Toyota are astonishing at times.
+5
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:20 pm)Statik sez :
- “The Volt is vaporware. It is just GM smoke and mirrors, and will never be built. ”
- ” …ahem … I meant it will never be built “on time” . ”
- ” ….ahem ….OK, OK .. it will be built “on time” , but it won’t meet it’s original scope. ”
- “…. ahem ….the generator doesn’t work.”
- “…..I’m not posting anymore. You people just won’t give my gripes enough consideration”
- ……I’m not posting anymore, except now and then.
Here’s my idea – hold off on the GM and Bob Lutz bashing until the car is commecially launched, then you can start your own website to broadcast all the shortfalls and disapointments. Quit trying to hijack this one.
PS – I think you should publicly apologize everytime one of your “intuitions about Volt shortcomings proves incorrect. I’ve yet to see one yet.
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:22 pm)“If we assume the Volt gets 45 MPG in generator mode, I think its easiest to just think of the Volt as getting 45 MPG + 1 free gallon of gas per trip”
That will make a lot of families lose faith in the EPA once they notice they have not purchased gas in 8 months.. “Mabel, I think this here Volt is doing a lot better than 45mpg”
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:27 pm)thats a good idea..
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:29 pm)One of the main points of the post is where statik says “Likewise, it is time for your moonshot to become more than just PR. The competition is at the doorstep now, and pretty soon orders are going to be taken. It’s time to start handing out keys and say, “Have her back by sundown. We think you’ll be pleased.” That is, time for some test drives by outside people.
————————————
Here’s why I don’t think gm sees it that way.
First and most, they don’t yet have production cars. Frank Weber was pointing out that some parts are not production intent, and they didn’t want to over-stress the other ones. IVers are advanced prototypes, but still prototypes built to test and improve features of the car. Posters were saying they have the wrong head lights and tail lights. Mr. Weber said they have missing and non-production parts. That likely does not matter for whatever testing they need that particular car to do, but the car is not the same as an early production car, and maybe not sufficient for an impressive demonstration to a critical outsider. Personally I’m glad they are still making improvements. I hope it means there won’t be as many “not quite ready” or “good enough to get by” items as has been the case on some earlier gms.
Second, and maybe even more important, they probably do not want to send cars out for test drives just now. After all, gm has some kind of schedule that lasts through calendar 2010, and they want to have events along the way. This week we read about one event. In another month or two we’ll see another event. Besides, somebody is sure to drive a Volt on mainly ICE and say “actually got only 30 mpg” or some such.
So I too wish for some test drives by Lyle or others, but it may be a while.
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:36 pm)Tag.
I had a town hall meeting with PP&L a few months ago during a renewable energy drive where they claimed to be the first company in the states to have already installed smart meters in 100% of homes. Indeed, they showed a website where after you register you can get a very detailed usage from that meter. Most people who tried it there and then were able to get that info. Also, with the new sunshine program in PA almost 60% of the cost of a solar installation is paid for you (30% grant+ 30% tax rebate). A system just for the volt would cost just over $20,000 before incentives. As silly as it sounds PP&L does not have smart meters yet for those people who have RE systems.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:40 pm)Any discussion re 230 mpg must at least touch on SAE J1711. GM’s bold (or as a lot believe – reckless) 230 mpg claim is 100% predicated on J1711. Which BTW, J1711-2009 version is not ratified. It follows then if GM wants a fair shake then how about getting a J1711 draft on THIS site. The J1711 lead coordinator is Argonne Lab (which brings back fond memories when my company supplied leading edge then unheard of digital data collection equipment for the ZGS c.1963) Now let’s assume someone from J1711 will hear this. 1. When will J1711 be finalized? 2. Wouldn’t all concerned be better off for Argonne to make a statement – you know .. like – “we never heard of GM”. (Just kidding) 3. How do we find a draft J1711?
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:43 pm)Ford lets lots of people drive their plug in hybrid prototype. In fact, they’ve got them scattered out all over the country (and Canada) with the power companies.
If it’s a quality product, why not capitalize on the good press by lots of exposure right now?
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:52 pm)That’s jalopnik for you…
GM really does need to just get the Volts on the road to prove to skeptics that they get over 230 mpg. But then again they also still need to take their time- the Volt needs to be absolutely perfect before it hits the streets or the GM bashers will have more fodder.
I am confident the Volt will get very high real-world mileage, I just hope they left some wiggle room with the 230. If they under-promised and over deliver on this it will be huge. I hope they were not dumb enough to pull a certain “West Coast Startup” maneuver and do the opposite.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:56 pm)Apparently because gm feels it is a potentially good product but one that is not ready yet. That’s reasonable, as it is still more than a year to the nominal introduction, so gm still is getting revised parts from suppliers and changing around all sorts of things, maybe even big things.
It does bring coverage when outsiders drive, but inevitably they are going to find things wrong, and then the development process begins to center on outside comments. I’m not sure that’s a good thing at this stage.
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:56 pm)GM had a powerpoint presentation that explained there justification for the Volt and their long term EV plans. I believe it included a slide from the LA study and that’s where the 78% came from. There are a lot of references and even threads about it a while back.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:57 pm)______________________________________________________
Shaft,
With all due respect, your attempt to rationalize the gibberish 230mpg# is in itself gibberish.
Manufacturers are required by law to post their vehicles’ fuel-economy ratings, as certified by the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), so that a consumer can make an informed buying decision taking into consideration what fuel economy they can expect from the car.
When a prospective buyer walks up to a new car window sticker and reads the EPA rating, that prospective buyer has the expectation that if he purchases that car he will experience somewhere between the hwy & city numbers. No prospective buyer of a new car, has in the history of the world, ever walked up to a new car window sticker and considered the stated EPA rating (as you suggest) “a number that shows the net national impact”.
______________________________________________________
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (12:59 pm)we need more info on the displays
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:01 pm)It is interesting that one of the “Major Consensus Items” of J1711 is “Do not combine fuel and electricity into a composite MPG”
but rather
“Report both MPG and AC Wh/mi (from plug) separately”
so whatever happened that got us to 230 mpg was not according to J1711.
see
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/merit_review_2009/vehicles_and_systems_simulation/vss_05_duoba.pdf
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:03 pm)I think he is talking mode vs. mean here. I interpreted it as:
“The mean may well be 230 mpg, but the largest number of people will get less”.
I gather that Statik thinks the distribution will be skewed right by the crazy hypermilers or people who only drive short distances. This may well be true.
I disagree, however, with his skepticism of the 40 mile per day/ 80% of the population figure. The DOT survey is careful and doesn’t neglect all those short trips to the grocery/etc. What I’m worried about is that the average Volt driver (being fairly well-off) may be more mobile than the rest of the population and their mpg numbers will be worse than they would be for “average” drivers.
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:03 pm)______________________________________________________
I still say the 230epa# is gibberish…see why in my below comment to your #27 below.
_____________________________________________________
-4
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:04 pm)I don’t remember him ever saying it won’t be built. I remember him saying that the generator probably wasn’t working properly when they woult not let people test drive it, and GM confirmed later it was not working the way they wanted yet.
I do remember him saying that it wouldn’t be built on time, and that has yet to be disproved.
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:05 pm)A lot of cars already “learn” your driving patterns and adjust the fuel mixture, etc. accordingly. I could see these algorithms being implemented in the Volt.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:13 pm)2 words, Snowball effect.
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:15 pm)We need more info on the displays (I’m looking at you GM)
-4
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:15 pm)I don’t think it’s like that at all.
Sure he has been proven wrong on many points, but he has also been right quite a bit (can anyone say “bankruptcy”?).
He has nothing to apologize for. In fact, being such a skeptic his final endorsement of the Volt will mean quite a lot. He may not be sure if he will fall in love with the Volt when it finally gets here (on time!
), but I wager he will be head over heels. Especially because GM will throw in a pink tie and a pretty girl riding shotgun 
.
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:15 pm)I second the motion… or third… or… whatever.
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:19 pm)Not to be a self-hating Californian, but looking at our financial situation you would probably be justified in calling us “skewed” up.
…And guess whose taxes are going to help rectify this situation
No Volt for me for a long time.
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:20 pm)Bear in mind the Volt is still over a year away. They could let drivers borrow a car for a week next spring and still have plenty of time to make adjustments or whatever they would do w/the data.
I’d rather not rush the engineers. It pisses us off. And I’ve dealt with those German engineers that go back into the language of their homeland when you start chopping deadline dates. Yes, we are all familiar w/the phrase “Eventually you have to just shoot the engineer and start production”, but there’s time. Let’s be patient regarding the real world testing, and try to get as much other info from GM as we can.
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:28 pm)Tag,
I cannot see any links except the one regarding miles driver per day.
I probably am looking right at it, but not seeing it.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:38 pm)______________________________________________________
Embeds vs. Old-School Comment Style…
Statik,
I know that you had mentioned your not a big fan of the comment embeds (vs. the old-school comment style). I believe that you even mentioned it as a contributing factor of your taking your Volt-com sabbatical. Question: Now that you have had an opportunity to look at the comment embeds style from an “article author” point of view, has your opinion on the embed comment style changed?
I find the embed comment style much harder to track and less often visit Volt.com than before the embed.
______________________________________________________
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:41 pm)Must be extremely hard for Statik to not respond to all these comments.
I can just seeing him, sitting on the computer and just itching to fire back a few well thought out retorts with lots of specs and links.
Patience is a virtue…right? Wait for it….wait for it….
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:48 pm)Well, since we’re talking gas mileage here, I will interject the usual formula for determining your MPG with the Volt:
MPG = 50 x M / (M – 40)
So, if lyou go on 50 mile trip:
50 x 50 = 2500
50 – 40 = 10
2500 divided by 10 = 250
Your mileage for that trip would be 250 MPG.
The closer your trip is to the gas-free 40 mile range after charging up, the closer your “mileage” is to infinite.
The farther you travel after charging up, the more rapidly the “mileage” drops.
For example, let’s put in a 100 mile trip:
50 x 100 = 5000
100 – 40 = 60
5000 divided by 60 = 83 MPG
This is, of course, an estimate based on the information we have about the Volt. Your all-electric range could vary, so you might go more than 40 miles all electric, or less that 40 after charging up.
Your MPG in range-extended mode could vary too. You might get more than 50MPG, or less.
Average your trips out for a year and it is easy to see why the “230″ number is perfectly achievable. Almost 80% of Americans drive less than 40 miles per day, so they would typically use NO GAS at all.
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:15 pm)The competition is becoming real? Really?
The biggest competitor looming is the LEAF, right?
Nissan is leaning against leasing the batteries, but hasn’t made that commitment. Supposedly they’re more advanced but definitely not warranties for 10 years/ 150000 miles. They’re going to start leasing to fleets only. The first private consumers must have a garage and fill out an application. They must be coached on how to care for the car. To increase the versatility of the car Nissan is pushing a fast charge scheme, which will probably add to on-peak demand. There’s been no videos of “Hey, let’s go for a spin in this LEAF mule or IVer” that I’ve seen.
I think criticism or “static” of GM has made its efforts stronger.
But juxtaposing the GM and Nissan, why is Nissan getting a pass.
(And toyota and nissan have historically gotten huge support from their government, so no fair throwing in the bankruptcy and saying Nissan’s being a good capitalist. )
+3
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:16 pm)Very good points by all. As you can see from my comments, I take a very broad view of the concerns and quickly digest both the technical and social elements as well as the engineering and manufacturing concerns and constraints, while energetically engaging these elements from many points of view. Hence I believe we can all concur that I would be an excellent tester. Thank you in advance for your support – Jeff
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:26 pm)Or pulling up the the pump on a bicycle to put 3 gallons of gas in a big red gas can!!!!
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:28 pm)John Lauckner, “We are still confident that we will deliver 40 miles…”
Statik, “…until you realize that people working 5 days in a row don’t go straight to and from work.”
My workplace in Santa Barbara, California allows EV charging. They also pay $50 a month bonus to all who walk to work, or ride a bike, or ride a motorcycle. The bonus is available IF you use alternative transportation at least 80% of the time. We employ over 1000 people.
=D~
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:32 pm)Everyone following this blog knows what the VOLT can and cannot do as far as actual and theoretical mileage numbers.
But for the masses: Perception “IS” Reality.
I doubt there will be too many commercials from GM pointing at the 230 MPG figure, but they might. And if they did long enough and often enough, eventually most of the masses would believe it. Those who don’t believe might be like me; “CUT that 230 figure in half… Yep. It still sounds good. I think I’ll check it out.”
So far, it seems that GM is simply focused on building a really great car with a very high standard of quality-fit-and-finish. Only the bloggers and news media are focused on “is it a better deal than the Prius or the LEAF..?”
Once the car is in REAL production I hope that the NEW GM Marketing guys focus on the REALITY that the VOLT has too many luxury features to be compared to a Prius or LEAF, and that they take the higher road and MAKE CLEAR the ‘perception’ that the VOLT is best compared to other Luxury Hybrid/Electrics from Lexus, Mercedes, and yes, even Tesla.
And that focus should be directed straight at the news media. There the ones dishing out the daily jokes about GM’s solvency. Get them on board and all will be right with the world.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:38 pm)They shouldn’t pay bonuses for motorcyle use. Many get worse mileage than economy cars.
-5
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:38 pm)Real men don’t use spell checkers. Guess Lyle had it edited for you.
Why didn’t you sign off with /friggin’ Bob Lutz ? Woulda been a nice kicker.
230 mpg for the Volt reminds me of the trip to the GM dealer where they tried to sell a 70 year old man a $150 fuel system cleansing on a 2008 car, sureally inexplicable.
Wish GM would spin off Voltec to a capital enterprise.
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:40 pm)Yeah, why try to fake it, we’re totally skewed!
_____________________
DonC I like SCAG’s numbers because 1) I was a member of SCAG at one time and 2) because they seem to often be the only ones that make sense at times in the general cacacophony of public opinions
As proof of SCAG’s pivotal position of elevated common sense in Southern California, I offer this as proof. During each recession Southern California governments try to fire most of SCAG’s working members. Don’t know if there is a correlation between California quality of life and that fact, but it sure makes me go Hmmm.
-2
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:53 pm)blog ghost
Has ppl changed their billing yet to time of day? Apparently I missed the info on the smart meters – probably because my wife pays all the bills and may have seen envelope stuffers hailing the new meters. I’ll need to start talking to my wife (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (2:57 pm)Yeah, before you know it cars will be pushing old Bess out of her shady spot. Sigh, and some call this Progress??
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (3:01 pm)But probably to young. SMILE
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (3:03 pm)And I STILL like the trunk lights telling the guy behind you how little gas you’ve used. “Miles driven without gasoline – Total:… Current MPG: ……..” Etc.
It’ll drive them MAD (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (3:15 pm)ARGH! Vast MINORITY of trip are the commute. I know, I know, “Check your meds….”
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (3:20 pm)ccombs,
Penna’s budget woes rival Calif’s. One difference though is that we don’t have referendums to fund. We were over a month late getting a budget and only recently did the state workers start getting paid again (ouch). At least we don’t get IOU’s from the State (yet).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (3:28 pm)jeffhre,
OK, I’ll bite: What’s a SCAG. Southern Calif Assoc of Govt’s? Just a WAG. (stifles jokes about blind dates….)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (3:37 pm)CDAVIS,
So what you you propose as an alternative?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-2
Aug 15th, 2009 (3:55 pm)JEC,
IN that study (the one you just mentioned) it sorts out how much people drive for work, for personal business, etc. The way *I* read the study (which I don’t think was done well at all, but that’s another thread) Far more mileage was done locally, and for personal runs, not work commutes. Maybe I’m miss reading it, and I would welcome correction. Their use of statistics looks to be done by a 5th grader. Just percentages (that over-lap groups) and simple Sd. No Analysis of variance (ANOVA), nuttin. Granted the numbers are huge, but all the better! Rats, now I wandered down that trail I’d hope to avoid. I need to read that Calif study too.
Be well,
Tagamet
PS I seem to have misread your earlier post and for that I apologize. My bad.
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:09 pm)Thanks for the post Statik. I always enjoy your reality check viewpoints!
-3
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:19 pm)ccombs,
I totally agree with your assessment of statik. For all his warts he’s never been shy about going out on a limb, and jumping up and down with an opinion!
Statik just isn’t of the ilk that would behave as mentioned above by guido. Of course, then there’s the issue of projection from which guido’s post might prove evident.
JMO
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:23 pm)I hope to just drive through the gas station on all electric and wave/smile at the people purchasing gasoline. I checked and, as long as it’s not to avoid a traffic signal, it’s legal in Penna.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:26 pm)I can’t believe some one was kind enough to give me a plus one for that one…
What I do really beleive is that If GM ever has a part of their test fleet in public hands or has a limited release to the public, to advance and augment their testing, that going to GM-Volt.com for aid would not only get them the highest possible results payback for their efforts, but would also give the best possible results to the participants at GM-Volt who have come along with GM for this Iconic ride.
I have learned so much from the folks here that I will never look at driving or vehicles or manufacturing or transportation the same way again.
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:28 pm)Public charging during the day could be beneficial if V2G is used.. one way to do would be if the charging stations were provided by the power company, you would get a free charge and they get some use out of your battery. That usage would be very limited, otherwise it would affect the life of your battery.
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:30 pm)The last news story I heard on NPR said that the only way you would get 230 MPG would be if you drove 51.1 miles.
If you know what the MPG in charge sustaining mode was AND you knew the EV range then you could do the math. But AFAIK both those numbers are unknown so this is just speculation hardly justifying the type of precision suggested by a number like “51.1″.
You’re expecting the MPG number to give you information that it’s simply not designed to give. In fact, your lack of understanding of the number leads you to ask for crazy things. For example, you say you want the City MPG to apply to your 800 mile trip. Well, the FTP cycle assumes an average speed of 21.2 MPH. This means that to go 800 miles would take about 38 hours, which is, when I last checked, more than a day. And the MPG number is based on one full charge a day.
Moreover, as Herm has mentioned, the EPA methodology uses real world data to calculate the MPG over an extended period of time not any one day. If you drive 12,000 miles a year you drive an average of 32.9 miles a day. Obviously some days you’ll drive more and some less. Now while the 230 MPG number is just for the City cycle and won’t give you the MPG number you should expect over the course of a year, the combined MPG number, which will eventually be released and which GM says will be in triple digits, should. But it won’t, repeat won’t, ever give you the MPG that you can expect on any given day. Some days it will be more and some days it will be less.
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:31 pm)They do help to reduce congestion even if they were to get less commuting mileage than a single occupant SUV. And taking a mid sized single occupant vehicle off of the road has to do some good?
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:32 pm)‘old man’ should drive and ‘jeffhre’ should ride shotgun
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:33 pm)me too.
Reading back, you never know what was written in response to what, because the time sequence is lost, unless you spend a long time in detective mode.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:34 pm)“Wish GM would spin off Voltec to a capital enterprise”
That would be nice. Know any with a few billion handy and ready to deploy who will stick with it. And then resist the temptation sell it to Chevron when the going gets tough?
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:36 pm)“The closer your trip is to the gas-free 40 mile range after charging up, the closer your “mileage” is to infinite.”
———–
Indeed right, because at 40 the formula has a divide by zero. So all close-by distances are very much influenced by that “close-to divide by zero” (or ‘pole’ in more technical jargon) and thus extremely sensitive to every minor error in the data provided. That’s why nobody is going to get 230 mpg, a number that is technically correct but not reproducible.
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:40 pm)That’s where quality sales people can educate during the process, instead of the dealers uninterested nephew I worked with one time who would say, “yeah, yeah, yeah, 230 miles of course, just sign right here.”
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:41 pm)Statik,
It was the potential for this type of post that caused GM to launch the chevroletvoltage.com site.
Thankyou for proving them right.
As for your post – first of all, you are suggesting GM has defined the typical driver, when, in fact the EPA did, which is their mission. If you disagree with their approach, then address them, not GM.
Second, as I’ve posted before, I don’t call the EPA or any automaker fraudulent, just because my driving habits cause me to get worse mileage than listed on the sticker.
Finally, if you don’t like the EPA’s methodology for calculating mileage, then provide us your statistical sampling, data reduction and suggested test methodology. What’s that? No? You don’t have anything? That’s what I thought. You just want to toss up gorilla dust to undermine GM’s advertising campaign.
Your gripe is with the EPA, not GM. 230 mpg gives a good comparison of the Volt to all other vehicles, showing the near elimination of gasoline consumption for the typical consumer. You are just sour grapes.
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:44 pm)The DOT survey isn’t just from CA AFAIK. I think it’s a national survey.
I mentioned CA because there is a second study done by the CA Association of Governments. I prefer this study because the DOT asked people what they did whereas in the the SCAG study they actually wired the cars and recorded the actual drive history of the vehicles. It’s like asking people how often they exercise and putting a monitor on them and recording how often they do it.
Interestingly enough the studies didn’t vary that much, which increases your confidence that they’re accurate. You’d know about that from psychological studies.
FWIW if you want to spend some time reading something, I’d start with this interview. It’s probably the best explanation of the advantages/disadvantages of a serial hybrid you’ll find. As a bonus is contains the data from the SCAG’s study.
http://green.autoblog.com/2008/02/13/autobloggreen-qanda-peter-savagian-talks-about-studying-driver-be/
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:51 pm)You’re misunderstanding the two separate numbers. You have a wall-to-wheel number of 25 kWh per 100 miles. That’s one number. Then you have the 230 MPG number. That’s the second number. Two numbers, one for electricity and one for MPG.
FWIW the reason you want two separate numbers is that you can’t easily convert gallons into kWh. There is such a thing as MPG(e), which uses energy equivalents, but MPG(e) is completely irrelevant to consumers.
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:56 pm)Bing bing bing; sorry I don’t have an appropriate prize for the winning guess though! Southern Calif Assoc of Govt’s – she ain’t pretty, but she’s a winner for Tag any way!
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (4:57 pm)I like that, you could have a very tasteful 3 digit display on the back of the car, with the running total average mpg for the week. It would be like free advertising for GM
-3
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:00 pm)Interesting out of four or five thousand comments some one remembers a couple things Static stuck his neck out on and predicted years in advance incorrectly (hopefully).
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:04 pm)First of all, an electric car is powered by an electric motor which does not need a transmission……and the two mode is a transmission. An electronic motor speed controller is used to control the speed of a motor. So he Volt will not have the two mode transmission.
To believe that the Volt might be a series/parallel hybrid instead of a series is like disbelieving everything GM says.
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:19 pm)The retail label will have AER and electric propulsion efficiency, mpg highway and mpg city. MPG city is by necessity a composite that has been debated up the wazoo. Mpg city for an extended range electric will always be a more complicated derivation, there is no way around it except to withhold that information from the retail label. At this point it would read 230, if the EPA system is approved.
It’s been suggested that salespeople have a chart where drivers can plug in their daily mileage and a city mpg for their expected miles can be derived (simple version) or a spreadsheet with your exact anticipated driving pattern (complex version) could be used. A tremendous amount of folks would see their long term city mpg above 200 at any rate, using the survey results taken from 2001 – 2003.
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:20 pm)I did not see where Statik said the 230 number fraudulent, he called it too big to comprehend, and that the media jumped on it.
Where attacked GM was holding onto the 40 mile number, not the EPA at all. In fact he used the EPA rating of 25 KWH over 100 miles back at GM, and GM gave a pretty weak response.
Didn’t the EPA even put out a statement saying they couldn’t back up what GM was saying because they have never tested a Volt? I think we need counterbalace to the Chevroletvoltage.com sites of the world.
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:26 pm)All this Sturm und Drang over the 230 MPG number just seems silly. At some point people will figure out they need to add the two numbers together AND that the numbers are more for yearly averages not an individual drive AND that the numbers are for the average driver.
For example, say the combined numbers were 25 kWh per 100 miles and 200 MPG. Then if you drove 10,000 miles a year you’d expect to use 2500 kWh of electricity during the course of that year PLUS you’d use 50 gallons of gas during the year. Multiply the kWh and the gallons by the price you pay and viola, you have your yearly fuel cost. Doesn’t seem that hard.
Having said that, a separate city cycle MPG number does seem potentially misleading, especially without the Highway and Combined numbers. But those will show up long before the sale. At this point it’s just a PR exercise.
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:35 pm)Very strong hints that the Leaf will be sold somewhere below $30k, WITH the batteries.. and then you can take off the $7500 fed tax credit for a total cost of $22.5K
I think it will be a huge success at that price level.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:37 pm)I’d say the same thing only a bit differently. The 230 MPG number was like hitting the public over the head with a 2X4. Now that GM has the public’s attention it needs to sell the car.
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:38 pm)My Insight does that. Lifetime 60.8 MPG for 59,000 miles.
Take Care,
TED
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:38 pm)As long as I don’t hit the pole it is actually quite meaningful to me and in a most distractingly interesting way, to a fault.
If I hit the pole, who cares any more, because it’s “mission accomplished” and on the the next thing.
Instead of being concerned about the mathmatical prospect of having to divide by zero, I should have the perspective to stop the perplexing cycle of scratching my forehead and rubbing my chin and give the Volt engineers a figurative high five because the solution of the maximum gasoline efficiency equation is solved – simply because I’m no longer using any!!
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:39 pm)Why wouldn’t these people buy the Nissan Leaf?
Assuming , of course, that it’s cheaper than the Volt due to the lack of engine and simpler vehicle integration, and also assuming that the hype actually condenses into a real car…
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:39 pm)Well put Mr. Hendler!
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:50 pm)______________________________________________________
For EREVs the EPA rating should be (using Chevy Volt ~#s):
Sticker:
MPC (Miles Per Charge) City: 43
MPC (Miles Per Charge) Hwy: 39
ER-MPG (Extended Range MPG) City: 41
ER-MPG (Extended Range MPG) Hwy: 37
_____________________________________________________
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:51 pm)Statik,
Now that you’ve got an “in” with GM – can you please, please, please get them to bring back the Aztec.
Maybe a voltec version called the Aztec-Statik, in limited edition pink. Lutz will be all over it.
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (5:57 pm)I suggest all you foreign-car-buying misanthropes go contemplate your navels for a while and get enlightened into the modern world and the new Millenium.
GM is about to change the world of automobile transportation forever.
The Chevy Volt is on the cutting edge of green technology. The Japanese will follow eventually, but for now just face it – the company you love to bash has blown the lid off everything you cherish so dearly.
It’ a new world. Believe it – the Volt will routinely provide MPG figures as stated. Probably more.
Get over yourselves and your antiquated and tiresome opinions.
Aug 15th, 2009 (6:16 pm)Herm at 10:09am
That sure would be nice if the warranty wasn’t affected by multiple recharges a few days a week! More shallow depth of discharge situations might indeed hopefully offset numerical numbers of total DOD@30% recharges. Perhaps there might be some way that this could be known beforehand or during the practice of it and the owner advised accordingly. That would be really nice to know.
-9
Aug 15th, 2009 (6:35 pm)230 MPG ? This don’t compute.
The Volt is vastly overrated.
O*V*E*R*R*A*T*E*D
Back it down a notch and try giving reality a chance.
Aug 15th, 2009 (6:38 pm)Jeffhre
I thought the bing, bing was warning me I’d been driving irresponsibly (lol).
Don C,
Thanks for the link. I’ll check if it’s one I’ve read (but I think I have). I visit that site pretty regularly, but have never posted there – too many radicals (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-2
Aug 15th, 2009 (6:41 pm)Tasteful schmach-full, I just to want to make them ASK,/b> about it. Teachable moment or road rage, whatever (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (6:43 pm)The 2-mode FWD transaxle looks similar to the Volt transaxle because they reused the case (most likely the CAD tooling and molds).. but the guts are totally different for both. A GM guy stated this in some interview I read.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (6:52 pm)DonC,
I honestly think that you’re giving our buying public waaaaay too much credit for “doing the math” AND knowing what it means. That’s just not going to happen. MAYBE if the salesman has a little automatic calculator that the victim, er, I mean buyer could use to “figure things out”, it’d have a chance. Even with CDAVIS’ method, they’d need it. Personally, I think it’s going to take some “learnin” on everyone’s part. GM or Lyle should put such a calculator as a flash element of the websites. Just punch in your daily drive and it shows your average city (and eventually hwy) mileage and how much electricity you’d expect to burn (extra) at home. Maybe add an “Energy Star” rating on the window sticker too – just like on an appliance.
JMO
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (6:57 pm)Patrick,
Interesting approach. It’d depend on what your other car got for mpg though. My Jeep gets 20 mpg so assuming a single charge/day I’d get 2 free gallons and all the miles are (almost) free if I stay under 40 miles.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:02 pm)Matt from Mich
Excellent point! He must have really worked out that spell checker!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:02 pm)What I’m saying is …
The “reduction gear” housing or whatever you want to call it for the volt looks to be nearly identical (from the pictures) to the 2MT70 hybrid transaxle housing that was going into the saturn vue hybrid.
Maybe that piece just happened to fit for the volt but it does seem a little odd that 2 such very different applications would end up with the same housing.
It would be surprising but not inconceivable (to me) that GM ends up going the same general direction as Ford and Toyota on plug in hybrids. (which they are anyway, with the plug in CUV)
/And, it would only be a half lie from GM, it’d still be a series hybrid . . . sometimes . . sometimes not. More of a “late in the game- ok THAT didn’t work” if you will. —-just speculation,
//another thread in the engineering forum had discussed that the transaxle housing could be used for a 2 speed transmission for the electric motor — something tesla tried for but was unsuccessful.
///BTW, no original thought on my part, just stuff I saw on the forum section.
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:06 pm)hermant #45.2…
I agree, many large motorcycles get around 40mpg. The idea is to lessen the use of gasoline and/or take the pressure off the parking system. I currently do not qualify because I ride my motorcycle only 50% of the time.
=D~
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:10 pm)Joe #35.3…
You sure you want to go there?
=D~
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:10 pm)DonC
Now you’re REALLY going to confuse Mr. Joe Sixpack when he walks onto the car lot. They’ll have enough trouble without the muddy water (methinks). JMO
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:15 pm)Why is it impossible for GM to EXCEED it’s “schedule”? If it’s not because there simply needs to be too much built (as in factory lines) that’s one thing, but if it’s “perfection being the enemy of the good (or success), I’d say “go for it”! But that’s just me (and my Independence Day fantasy).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:21 pm)Actually GM’s logo with a 23 followed by a standard 120V outlet is somewhat an oxymoron.
They are stating 230 mpg, using the electric outlet as part of the symbol, while mpg and electricity are two distinct measures.
I really do not care either way, but just saying.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:23 pm)JEC,
LOL I’ve been picturing that too. It’s hard to type with the tears in my eyes (from laughter).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:26 pm)Did he happen to give any details on the “guts” , or say anything about using such a large case for no more than what the volt should need inside?
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:27 pm)RB,
You had me until that last sentence, then the raspberry machine went off.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:33 pm)jason,
Did we read the same article? If we did, one of us really misunderstood it.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:35 pm)Tag
I imagine they can build a few if they decide to do it.
My guess as to the reason they cannot build a lot by then is that they have or will have contracts with outside suppliers that all have to come together on fixed dates. There’s not much value in having engines if gm does not have bodies, right down to the small but essential items, e.g. knobs. As the details (at least) of the car are still in development, they may not have enough time to get quantities built by then, by suppliers.
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:38 pm)DonC says I misunderstand.
——————
With greatest respect, I don’t think I misunderstand
“Do not combine fuel and electricity into a composite MPG”
What that sentence says do not do is what the 230 mpg is.
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:39 pm)Good news, Bad news
Went back to a Chevy dealer today and checked on my position on the wait list. No list after first striking out altogether and then having them START a list months ago. Good news is that they now have heard about the Volt. Bad news: “lost” the list (started a new one). Good news they had some basic correct info on the Volt. Bad news: they had some significant stuff totally wrong – “Oh that’s not coming out until 2013″ ARGH.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:41 pm)RB, I guess I just assumed that having 500 of all the parts wouldn’t be too onerous. I do understand that in full production, they do the “just in time” production.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:47 pm)Once again, me three.
While it may be easier for the infrequent lurker to come and graze (i.e. hit count) through a thread, it seems to me it’s at the sacrifice of the regular posters.
To come back and find out what’s been said after a break you have to have some sort of “search system” worked out or you just have to scroll up and down — takes toooo much time.
/maybe the embedded system could be modified with some visual cue that lets you know how long a post has been up — say a 12 hour bar across the top of each post that slides towards zero as time passes — or something similar.
// better yet, after you read a post you click it and it turns color — guess that color would be red (read) hah
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:51 pm)Tag,
Maybe there ought to be a special program for commentaries like yours, where, people that are are likely to be relentlessly yet objectively positive might “move to the head of the class” in some sort of representative status to be offered Gen 1 Volts firstly.
I say that because you would certainly be capable of defending the Volt from carelessly casual commentary that has not any merit. (And, I would be certain that would occur frequently until it is in service for many months. That way, “seeing is believing” provides the intellectual “locus” in the brain where true facts find a place).
Aug 15th, 2009 (7:58 pm)Dan,
I LOVE the way you think! Sage advice! I’d like to form the Office of Goodwill Ambassador ( and apply for it in the same breath). I’m retired so I could spend ALL my time on the road “educating” all who’ll listen (and many who won’t). My dear wife will never miss me – married 37 years (two of them happily). It’s a win-win-win situation!
Thanks and
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:05 pm)I’d love to go on the road too if there was a salary that could also have me pay a part timer to take care of my cat and the home-office to a slight extent.
Imagine how much fun all that would be. I’d talk their ears off just like I do to/for L-1 advanced techs. (I would make several DVD’s of my perfected diagnostic sequenced seminars for ICE, and sell the rights), then go see the World in a Volt about 18 to 24 times a year as long as it was in the contiguous lower 48 States!
Although the Great State of Texas would have me busy enough I’m sure. Nice possibilities indeed if GM wanted to contract to us “eager Volt TECHS”!!!
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:12 pm)“they had some significant stuff totally wrong – “Oh that’s not coming out until 2013″ ARGH.”
Did you consciously mean to post this on Statik’s thread. If he can hold his tongue on this one, I’ll truely be impressed
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:17 pm)Coast-To-Coast with Tag-N-Dan (or Dan-N-Tag). I’d especially like to see SOMEONE set Cavuto and his minions on the correct path.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:20 pm)Skeptic I mean Static. I think you are little off base about the Volt mileage.
There are plenty of scenarios where the reported mileage fits well enough. All GM has to do it explain it in more detail. The 230 mpg city vs 100 mpg highway gives you the hint that these mileage figures ultimately reference the driving speed but mostly the amount one drives between recharges.. (I know you might say if you don’t drive at all you get even more mileage hahaha.) GM will have to provide a simple guideline in a table from distance driven between recharges vs mileage at given speed. The table would be easy to put together once we are informed of the ICE mileage, which we have not heard officially announced (50 mpg?). The variables that you so humorously list can be bundled with a table suggested here. Remember the blend of driving mode (electric vs gas) will have far greater impact than any of the conventional factors weighted in an ICE alone. By far the greatest influence is the recharge capability. A 24 hr cycle (110 v. overnight recharge) probably represent the best standard for now.But the greater the recharge capability and efficiency the higher MPG would be. Obviously the more electric miles can be driven by any definition of a cycle the more effect (the higher the MPG is.) As ridiculous as this may sound by convention thinking about mileage, any MPG value is achievable by the right mix of driving. This is the point of the Volt. The higher this value is calculated to be the more you reach the ideal for this car, i.e minimizing but emissions and operating costs. My point is this one can match ones driving requirements to the above referred table and determine the Volt’s suitability for one’s purpose. Since these values are also used for cost calculations, obviously the cost of charging need to be factored in.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:25 pm)CDAVIS
Exactly. I see no other way of conveying the information any more directly and precisely.
People understand MPG, and now they will understand MPC.
If the 230 mpg gets people to start looking, so be it. But, when you go to purchase a car you need succinct information. No time to sit down with a calculator and run some spreadsheet with fancy graphs and assumptions baked in.
Your proposal is the right one (their, now everyone can stop talking about this silly mpg number)
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:25 pm)koz,
I’m getting too transparent (and not a peep from statik (lol)). Tap, tap, tap, statik, are you IN there?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:28 pm)All they could say is a polite “nothing”. But I really believe the excitement-to-cause-change has got to come from long-term loyal enthusiastic people spreading out across the country and planet.
That vocal energy is what excites people to “take a second look”, even if they have a need to hold onto misconceptions.
I was looking at a story the day before yesterday about a group of people that do recycling of metals, Gerson Group, and, there was a man named Jack Lifton who commented that the “Volt will not succeed”. Well, not for him it won’t because there is not enough potential business in it for him anyway apparently.
It’s certainly OK by me, at first, to have 98% of the planet be technically-unaware of Voltec (possibly in maintenance of my meager chances of getting one), but, nothing since the Genisys Scan System (waveforms) diagnostics (which is what I teach) has anything come along in the last 7 years that has captured me as has Voltec. For me, it is a way to possibly shut down a great amount of CO2, and possibly help leave a livable planet for the future. I think that is our obligation. I think Volt is our obligation. There is a lot of educational work to do.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:35 pm)I think GM just needs to help create a general perception that moving to EVs is a good thing, an essential thing. Once the audience is receptive, even Joe Sixpack, they will much more easily accept and understand the Volt’s value. They still may not be able to afford one or it may not meet their needs, but they will wish they could afford one and it did meet their needs.
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:36 pm)LazP
I’d just replace the tables with an automatic calculator. It’d probably be cheap enough to hand them out to potential buyers (free).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:37 pm)Tag
Please note that I am not saying that nobody will get a number as high as 230, for indeed many will. Some will get 450, 990, and over 1000. (The key will be to use a gas station that is slightly closer than 50 miles from start, so that one uses a little gas, but no much.) Others, who don’t get to the gas station until, for example, 200 miles, will produce much lower numbers. It is not that 230 is a “bad” number, but it is not reproducible. That’s what happens near a pole — extreme sensitivity to small changes. It will however produce a lot of good fish stories.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:38 pm)CDAVIS #27.7 …
(Miles Per Charge) & (Extended Range MPG)
And since the Volt is electric, the sticker could also list the EYOC.
Estimated Yearly Operating Cost.
EnergyGuide $365
=D~
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:39 pm)My post at number 50 was suppose to go here as a reply, not a new topic;
I did not see where Statik said the 230 number fraudulent, he called it too big to comprehend, and that the media jumped on it.
Where attacked GM was holding onto the 40 mile number, not the EPA at all. In fact he used the EPA rating of 25 KWH over 100 miles back at GM, and GM gave a pretty weak response.
Didn’t the EPA even put out a statement saying they couldn’t back up what GM was saying because they have never tested a Volt? I think we need counterbalace to the Chevroletvoltage.com sites of the world.
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:39 pm)Seems like he gets to see more of what it’s ike to be in Lyle’s shoes. I can’t imagine Lyle can stand it looking at some of the posts and thinking, what an idiot I hope they never comment again. But then we, I mean they, usually redeem themselves with later comments
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:41 pm)Dan,
A 98% population of potential students would be excellent. The opportunities ample, and the DIVERSE elements of the population (tree huggers to oil independence folks to school kids, Seasoned citizen, to the just flat, er, “thrifty”) Gm should have lesson plans posted for kids from grade school through high school to help teachers (science, ecconomics, etc) TOO.
I think it’d be the chance of a lifetime.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:45 pm)koz,
Amen to that. “Little steps, for little feet!”
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:45 pm)This is exactly one of the goals of my participation on this most valuable site, is to share as much as I can in providing as much “real world” experience as is possible for readers of this site to help others to also understand the need and promotion of Voltec.
(Time to call it a day. Good night all).
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:50 pm)RB,
I’d say that reproducing it would be “difficult” simply because of all the variables. Even driving from “this post to that post (51.1 miles away) would still vary with temperature. To my little mind, nothing is impossible.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:50 pm)Tag
Good practical point you make. I just wanted to put the concept out there.
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:51 pm)What is still unknown is the efficiency of charging/discharging the battery.
Let’s suppose it takes 10 kWh out of the outlet to get 8 kWh out of the battery. (20% loss in heat)
Then 25 kWh from the wall means 20 kWh out of the battery.
100 miles with 20 kWh is equivalent to 40 miles with 8 kWh.
So if the “25 kilowatt hours per 100 miles” is metered at the garage outlet and theres a 20% loss in the charge/discharge process, that means 40 miles with 8 kWh.
According to wikipedia, the efficiency would be in the 80-90 % range.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery
So driving in conditions equivalent to the “EPA draft methodology”, I would expect more than 32 miles AER. But 40 miles is really the upper bound, in those conditions.
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:54 pm)jeffhre,
Yeah, I tend to be an empathetic sort, so I’ve said that to myself a thousand times related to what Lyle must be thinking about some of their, er, our posts. In fact I’ve ranted on that from time to time (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:56 pm)CDavis,
We are (almost) in agreement. I also think your numbers (see CDavis post below) should be posted so individuals can make their decisions. (I pretty much suggest the same numbers in my post if you read it carefully!)
As someone who’s also concerned about a world without oil, the 230mpg is a meaningful number to me (even if it’s not for you) because it could be achieved on average by a large population of people. Now that’s a real contribution to the national economy and security!
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:56 pm)I second that….Could use at least one here in JAX.
PS:Damn good to see you Statik!
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (8:57 pm)Dan,
Well put. I’m going to pack up soon. The first post usually comes early around here (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:16 pm)230mpg.
It’s not silly. It’s not gibberish. It has profound significance for reductions in oil consumption. Sorry, but you guys are simply not getting it. Think big. Think aggregate.
230mpg is just not a number that is helpful for a consumer who has to make a decision to buy the Volt. CDavis’ numbers are more helpful for that purpose, I’d agree. And I’m betting GM will publish them (or something similar) whether the EPA requires them or not. We’ll see.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:18 pm)If you look closely at the revised center console, on the lower left-hand side is a button with a leaf on top, and the word “Sport” on the bottom.
I think the leaf motif is getting out of hand, but I’d be willing to bet money that the leaf equates to “Econo”.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:39 pm)I expect and hope GM will publish them, but Frank Weber’s recent comments on a recent Live Chat on that “other” website don’t support this.
“In theory we could share the charge sustaining fuel economy number, but that number would not reflect how the car is actually going to be used and would therefore be misleading.”
“How would you address criticism of the 230 rating as contrived, or meaningless? Wouldn’t discrete ratings per mode of operation (kWh/mi & gal/mi) better convey the true picture of fuel economy?
5:14 Frank Weber: There will be discrete ratings 230 mpg and in addition 25 kW hours of electric energy on the label.”
Maybe in his efforts to dodge answer the questions GM doesn’t yet want answered, he inadvertantly implied they don’t plan on disclosing them.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:39 pm)Any more than three major players and I get confused…
This is begining to be like reading tarot cards.
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:41 pm)One Concept.
Blended Mode Plug-in Hybrids.
People are constantly getting stuck on this when looking at the Volt’s 230 MPG AND 25 kWh/100 mile number
A better system can be developed for the Volt. But this system will only apply to E-REV type cars. The system would not work for ICE cars, nor for BEVs, nor for other types of Plug-Ins.
The EPA looked at creating a system that would allow adequate comparison of all PHEV type cars currently planned.
The Volt was classifed as a PHEV. The EPA applied the test to the Volt that was made for PHEV. The results are remarkable, but will be comparable to other PHEV type automobiles.
For example, the rough numbers for the Hymotion, Escape PHEV conversion is 45 mpg and 13 kWh/100 miles. I can see that with the Volt, I would use much more electricity, 2x as much, but much less gas, 1/5th as much.
Which is the intention of EPA testing for MPG, etc
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:48 pm)Dude, Cool…
Aug 15th, 2009 (9:59 pm)Although I agree with your points 100%, I think GM left themselves wide open for this
They use a Methodology no one has heard about, and didn’t do a very good job explaining it or even linking to a place where it can be explainined.
It seems clear now that the EPA is using some function of SAE J1711 which through internet searches one can get a reasonable feel for… but without Nasaman, I doubt this would have become clear.
GM should just come out and be more clear about -their- methodology rather than just pointing back to the EPA.
For Example, potential asterisk note,
Upto 230 MPG*
* Based on draft EPA methodology that combines Urban Cycle, Cold Weather Cycle, and Air Conditiong Cycle versus Average Driving Conditions and Driving Distances on a yearly basis.
Upto 25 kWh/100 miles*
* Based on draft EPA methodology that combines Urban Cycle, Cold Weather Cycle, and Air Conditiong Cycle versus Average Driving Conditions and Driving Distances on a yearly basis. Measured from the Wall.
If they had included this clearly in the press release, or advertised
230 + 25
I think they would have been much more secure
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:09 pm)Note for the editor: this article seems to have no author attribution, and needs it, certainly as an “op-ed”. From the comments, I see that the author is apparently “Statik”. Please correct. Thanks!
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:29 pm)This works great for E-REV type cars that are 100% BEV or 100% ICE.
It does not work for PHEV that are 20% BEV 80% ICE then 100% ICE.
People need to remember, the draft EPA method is for ALL PHEVS not just EREV
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:48 pm)Good points, Koz. But the good news is that anyone can measure these numbers, and so I think it will be in GM’s best interest to take the lead before incorrect information gets propagated.
As we are discovering, the internet is a quick (and sometimes brutal) equalizer!
Aug 15th, 2009 (10:54 pm)…Don’t hold your breath on anyone handing over the keys to a Billion Dollar project a year plus before it’s release….
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:00 pm)You confuse me
GM says
230 MPG AND 25 kWh/Mile
and you think 230 MPG only?
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:07 pm)Question…. aren’t there timestamps clearly marked on the top of each post.
But I agree 100% that the current system gives ALOT of scroll. Some improvements in my mind are
Non-Fixed column width for comments. I have a 1920 wide screen and this site uses barely a third of the width, leading to excessive scroll…
Cookie based return. Some systems allow already read comments to be shortened to a title/Author/Timestamp on refresh. If I only had to read titles, even 300 + posts group right would only take a few seconds to reveal the Full Length New post and a few clicks could reveal only the posts to which you want to see….
+1
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:22 pm)Tag:
“but if it’s “perfection being the enemy of the good (or success), I’d say “go for it”!”
WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
The Volt has only one shot, and it has to be perfect out of the starting gate, or it is game over for GM and probably all E-REV’s.
This car is already being pushed out at a very fast pace. Just because we here at GM-Volt.com are watching it every day for years, if you look at the time it really takes to get out a new vehicle, the Volt is moving along quite nicely.
I know we are all impatient, but it takes as long as it takes…..
The date is Nov, 2010. I will give them every day of it to get it right!
-1
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:36 pm)Jim I,
But seriously, wat do you REALLY think (g). I was just wondering out loud about analysis paralysis. At some point, any problem can be “over-thought”. I THINK we all agree that GM only gets one chance to make a (new) first impression, and that that impression darn well better be a good one, but can they survive a minor flaw? I hope so, because NOTHING is perfect, not even our Volt. Just maybe getting some preproduction Volts in civilian hands would provide the key data point to bring it closer to perfection. Just a thought.
See what happens when I read statik (lol)?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:44 pm)I agree
Consider that Tire Pressure System are now mandatory on cars, I find it difficult to understand why Gasoline Consumption Meters are not.
They could easily boost average fuel economy 5-10% by people realizing that gasing to a red light does indeed waste fuel.
Aug 15th, 2009 (11:51 pm)I never said mandatory. I just thought that it’d be a fun option – probably a personalized one (as in they’d sell exactly one – not really cost effective). I’ll bet an aftermarket co could do it pretty easily though.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:05 am)Statik:
I knew the “Big Goodbye” was never going to last…. The conspiracy theory types might think it was all planned in advance by you and Lyle, not that I am one of those people….
Your “op-ed” makes some valid points, except for one big one, IMHO:
“It is time for those first public test drives, you know what I’m talking about…the real ones. The ones that make Frank Weber get so nervous he only speaks in German. The kind where you hand the keys over, and you let them drive off by themselves.”
So because you think it is time, then GM should just do it? Sorry, but I don’t agree. The is a very big project for the company, with over one billion dollars spent so far. It has a radically new propulsion system, with lots of new hardware and all new software to control it. So maybe the crossover from pure battery power to E-REV isn’t quite ready for prime time yet. Do you want Fritz to go on stage and make that announcement, and have Lutz fall on his sword for missing his “Easter Day” date? It is ridiculous. Even a hint from anyone that there is a delay with any part of this project would be a P/R nightmare for GM and a P/R bonanza for Toyota….
I think if it was your company, and your project, you would do the same thing.
Have you ever designed anything of significant complexity from scratch? There are usually a few unforseen things that come up well into the project that just take a bit more time to complete than was originaly planned. That does not mean the job will not be finished on time, but that a few benchmarks are pushed back a bit.
They have many more months to get it perfect. I have no problem giving them the time. I think the wait will be worth it.
-4
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:06 am)Because the LEAF may or may not *actually* get 100 mpc, given things like ambient temperature, aggressive driving or pure “hype”. Lyle has a Mini-e whose 100 mpc in real life is closer to 70 (I think that’s what he quoted). And with a LEAF – when you are out of juice, you stop. Period. Even coming up a couple of miles short on a marginal commute is still quite a hike home.
Be well,
Tagamet
PS The LEAF also has an extraordinarily long charge time.
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:11 am)The timestamps are worthless (imo). Takes too much time to read and interpret. If you’re sorting through 300+ posts it needs to be something much more graphic and simple. The only way the digits could be of use is if they were organized for a “command F” search in a more meaningful way (i.e. at least a 24 hour clock so the am’s and pm’s didn’t get mixed, with a triple consonant (or similar) mixed in to screen out all but the time stamps).
I digress. Surely somebody’s already got a system that’s much more simple already figured out.
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:19 am)Off topic:
The other day, I said I thought it was a mistake to make the “230″ announcement. Here is why:
It is causing FUD on a car that is not going to be in showrooms for another fifteen months. And that is not good. Here is an example:
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1042/questions-surround-chevy-volt-fuel-economy-claim/
If you read all of it, they also make the opinion that the MPG when the ICE is running will only be about 35 MPG.
Here is another link from that same article:
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Chevrolet_Volt/
If you scroll down to the “What Do People Think of the Volt’s Appearance?” section, you will see that GM-Volt.com gets some well deserved recognition!
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:21 am)“I think if it was your company, and your project…..”
_______________________
But now it IS “MY company”, “MY project”. . . . even if I don’t want it to be.
+2
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:24 am)The Leaf doesn’t have a “sport” button.
More seriously, if I want to drive 300 miles without stopping, I can do that in a Volt. Can’t do it in a Leaf.
I commute less than 20 miles a day, but occasionally go out of town for the weekend. Not having to rent a car for those weekends would be nice.
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:28 am)You have been putting in some long days here, bud….
Minor flaws, sure, a few will be tolerated. Software can probably be updated via OnStar. But if anything major slips thorugh to production, it would be hard to recover. That is why I think putting pre-production IVers into the hands of people like us would not be such a good idea. These are rehearsal cars, not the real deal…..
And I know what you mean. statik can do this to many of us!!!
HAHAHAHAHA!
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:31 am)OK, you got me on that one…..
But you knew where I was going with that comment!
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:32 am)Or he could just be pointing out the obvious
Day One – Day 5
Infinite MPG (No gas used)
Day 6
100 MPG (75 miles of errands)
Day 7 – No Driving
Over that 7 day period someone may get 230 MPG, but they never actually experience in one trip
-1
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:35 am)Jeepers, this HAS been an interesting and inordinately long day on the site for me, as in 17+ hours. That cinches it, I’m turning in (again) Had trouble getting to sleep an hour or so ago and need to give that another try. I have to be on my toes when the starting gun goes off in a few hours.
GOOD NIGHT! (LOL).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-3
Aug 16th, 2009 (1:52 am)the 230 mpg is gibberish…because it’s a statistical average that will only be true for a very narrow slice of the population
Almost everyone else will get a better or worse number so it’s meaningless to the average person.
Assuming some day that other EREVs are out there that you can compare this number to perhaps the number will make sense, but it is still crazy to base miles per gallon on stored electric energy and a statistical driving cycle.
-5
Aug 16th, 2009 (2:04 am)This article points out clearly that 230 mpg doesn’t mean anything.
Come on people, resist the Disney effect. America needs fuel cell
cars if carbon dioxide emissions from cars and trucks are to be reduced by 80%. When hydrogen comes from renewables and not from fossil fuel it will be the clean alternative to battery electric.
It’s more than just skepticism, if you live more than 20 miles from where you work or go to school and you have to drive the Volt will burn gas. If the goal is to reduce petroleum dependency, stop using petroleum. When we are ready to use hydrogen as an energy carrier, it is more energy dense than the best Lithium ION battery,
we will know how to mass produce it efficiently. The year to get excited is 2015, not 2010. That isn’t very far away.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (3:26 am)110% Agreement.
Edmunds, Consumer Reports, etc. will give those based on their tests. GM needs to give the EPA equivalents so people can make apples to apples comparisons. While I think the 230MPG is an excellent and justifiable marketing tool (if the methodology was applied correctly and doesn’t change), it is not enough to make an informed purchasing decision even if you add the similarly derived highway and combined #s.
Aug 16th, 2009 (3:38 am)A cookie could store your last visit to a post. All comments older than a specified period, say ~8hrs, and your last visit could be collapsed like those with more than -10 votes or color coded so the new comments are more easily distinguished.
I’m also OK,with a hyperlinked last 10 comments list at the top of each post just above the recent posts section.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (5:05 am)Hi Michael how are you, well I hope. I see you’re up late too. No matter how late you stay up to try to balance the equations, you won’t get more energy out of your energy carrier than you put in, regardless of how efficient your FC and conversions back to electricity and then to motion are.
Aug 16th, 2009 (6:35 am)“..the comment embeds (vs. the old-school comment style)…”
———
Might be better described as comment embeds vs sequential and numbered comments.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (6:36 am)Because they are like me and for ten percent of the time need to travel long distances. By long, I mean between 200 and 600 miles at a time.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (6:44 am)..ten percent of the time need to travel long distances…
————————
Yes, but the quote said we expect more than 80 percent never to need gasoline”, so you are in the other 20 percent. Now I grant you I find it hard to believe the statement quoted, but that’s what it said, so for those people the LEAF seems to be a better choice.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (6:50 am)Another alternative that I would like better is to show the comments sequentially and numbered, but continue to have the “reply” button, and have the system follow a post with a “jump to reply” button. That is, list the comments in the order received, but include forward links to replies and backward links to sources.
The loss of numbering all the comments is as much of a hassle as the loss of sequencing the comments..
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (6:51 am)If the Volt can maintain a mileage higher than the Prius after the first 40 miles of pure electric, that is excellent! If it does with a cycle that part ICE and part electric motor, I don’t care. The bottom line is, it gets good gas mileage.
-3
Aug 16th, 2009 (6:54 am)Statik sez :
- “The Volt is vaporware. It is just GM smoke and mirrors, and will never be built. ”
And it was TRUE. The concept Volt that Statik was talking about never got built.
” …ahem … I meant it will never be built “on time” . ”
Yet to be proved, or disproved. And Statik said he hoped he was wrong, but with all the work that needed to be done tooling up, he did not see how manufacturing could be started on time.
- “…..I’m not posting anymore. You people just won’t give my gripes enough consideration”
Not true.
- ……I’m not posting anymore, except now and then.
Lyle asked him to post now and then. NOBODY says no to Lyle.
/Well no one that hopes Lyle has some pull with GM via the want list.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (7:43 am)There is a big difference between don’t and can not. As soon as one knows that something can not be done we want to do it.
Aug 16th, 2009 (7:55 am)Sorry Lyle. Me 4 (or me 5 or 6 or …). (Hope you see this
)
I like Koz’s idea above. Probably a bit expensive to implement, but it sure would be helpful.
Aug 16th, 2009 (8:00 am)Jim.
I agree wth your thoughts.
-1
Aug 16th, 2009 (8:04 am)So, how does Nissan calculate 367mpg using this new EPA methodology?
Aug 16th, 2009 (8:04 am)Yep, Volt owner’s will pull up to the gas station with their “lawnmower gas cans” and pump a couple of gallons and then secretly pour it into their Volt when they get home. All the time trying to figure out how they can adjust their driving so that they don’t have to do it again.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (8:19 am)“About the 230 claim, I think GM needs to run away from that. With something that is as difficult as the Volt is to explain to people on the world outside the walls of this site, throwing a whopping huge number like that out there with a bunch of “yeah, but” and well, if…”’s along with college level Calculus theorems to produce that number…”
No way! It’s perfect. None of the EPA mileage-numbers represent just what people get in reality, anyway, yet one doesn’t see all kinds of letters to the editor of the local paper complaining. The average person is not that anal or detail oriented on stuff like that. They’re impressionistic and fuzzy, as I am (in my vision). “30 MPG” in the brocheur currently means “I’ll get good mileage if I buy this car.”
“230 MPG” means “If I buy a Volt I’ll rarely have to gas up.” It also means “This car must be really different then any one before it. It really deserves to have a lot of attention paid to it, just as much as the Tesla has.” It sends exactly the right message for GM.
The more more and more people quibble about the 230 MPG the better for GM. THEN the Volt will stand on it’s real merits.
Aug 16th, 2009 (8:30 am)The critics of GM’s mpg numbers seem to be missing the point. In my opinion, daily or even weekly mpg numbers are irrelevant. The annual average mpg is really what matters. That is; how much gas did I burn in a year? How much money did it cost me, and how much pollution did I spew into the atmosphere? I don’t calculate my mortgage or my heating bill on an instantaneous or day-by-day basis, so why would I calculate my mpg like that?
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (8:40 am)To reuse my illustration from earlier: If you live in the SF Bay Area, for example, and you drive a Volt, then, just as with most cars today, you can jump in your Volt and, according to a plan or on a whim, drive straight to the Canadian border, stopping only to rest, pee, gas-up and eat (or walk on an Oregon beach). In a Leaf, can you even drive across the Bay to tour the Napa Valley with assurance of an uneventful return?
Purely electric cars today are severely limited functionally by their range. The Volt won’t be. That’s the whole difference. If you can afford to own a car dedicated strictly to a few around town errands and commute, true, a Leaf sounds like a great car to buy.
-1
Aug 16th, 2009 (8:57 am)Hi Chris C
Welcome aboard. Around these parts Statik needs no further introduction. Interesting point though.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Aug 16th, 2009 (9:01 am)Jim I
Thanks for the links to the articles.
Re the timing, I’d come down somewhere in between NOW and a year from now. Obviously my bias is sooner rather than later, but I’m not an engineer, I’m just a charter member of the lunatic fringe.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (9:05 am)Nobody truly keeps track of their actual mileage. We kinda-sorta do a check if we are taking a trip, but, we don’t actually write down *all* gas and do true averaging using multiple tanks. Yeah, there are a couple of guys I know that do that, but, most people are just too busy or don’t care.
My attitude is that ‘it is what it is’. I can’t bother with keeping track of every little expense (did you count that air freshener from 7/11?). I do take a peek at the credit cards annually to see what I am spending on what, but, not every day or week.
Most people don’t even know how to check their mileage. Using a meter just gives you the instant mileage, not your average. Calculating your mileage on one or two tanks is just not accurate. In general, people use fuzzy-math, swag it, or just lie to make their mileage seem better.
Mileage just doesn’t matter to most people until they buy a car (and gas is double what it cost last year). At purchase time, it is the sticker that matters.
GM knows the psych. They’ve been selling cars for a hundred years. I think they pretty much have the customer figured out.
Aug 16th, 2009 (10:15 am)The ‘tow chain’ from Volt=>Leaf will be an electric cord.
Aug 16th, 2009 (10:23 am)I’ve looked. I can’t seem to find a baseball-type cap with 230 on it anywhere. Where is the marketing? We need GM gear.
Aug 16th, 2009 (10:43 am)Surprise, surprise.
Aug 16th, 2009 (11:04 am)35 MPG assumes that you completely empty the gas tank. Nobody sane does that.
Speculation is just that. Until GM tells us (or EPA has one in it’s hands to actually test) we won’t know anything. We are probably 6 months away from these tests. (See, even I can guesstimate or speculate.)
The car is still in development. Wait until it actually ships to see what is ‘real’.
Aug 16th, 2009 (11:17 am)I dont see how this is any different than the epa mileage. My civic gets 40mpg on the highway, but I dont even come close to that in the real world. Because I go 70mpg, have clubs in the trunk and have the ac on (its Texas for gods sake).
Yes, the AC takes energy, more passengers take more energy to move. We all know this, the same thing happens in your gas car.
Aug 16th, 2009 (12:03 pm)One other point about relating performance standards. We as buyers are hardly any kind of target the Big 3 directed their ads to in pre-MSRP c. 1954. Maybe GM can support their numbers and maybe they can’t. Just look at the confusion that reigns in these discussions – and the buyers on this site are considerably knowledgeable. The PR flaw here is GM failed to do needed prep work.
There are much much better approaches to explaining EREV advantages to the public – but that’s for another time.
Aug 16th, 2009 (1:31 pm)Look beyond the mileage….the point was to generate attention….
Grand Slam on that part for GM. From Bankrupt to spanking Toyota in efficiency.
Bottom line…even if you use 40 mile battery range and go lets say 10 miles over using generator ICE your in the 200 mpg range and home charging.
Dont know the stats for % atge of American drivers going 50 miles daily…but its got to in the 80% range….
So at the end of the day they are getting 200 plus mpg. Thats all the dino juice they used.
Excellent publicity! Excellent job by GM. Now over deliver and make it even better so the 3.X people and A/C cranking with the audi at max watts still yields 40 miles. Just dig a little deeper into the battery.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (5:03 pm)Hey Statik, I would think a guest writer would pay at least a little attention to proof reading his work. There is more than one sentence in there that makes no sense at all. And the message is basically that the author is impatient to get a new car. Could have been said more succinctly.
Leave GM alone, they will be done when they are done. If they do as good a job on the electric range as Mini did with the E, the Volt will be fine.
By the way, the 40 mile range is not so much a matter of how deep you can dig into the battery. It seems obvious to me that 40 miles is what you can suck out of a 120 volt outlet at 12 amps during the roughly 15 hours that most people are home from work. I say that based on getting a consistent 25 miles added to my range on the Mini E for the 9 hours that I am plugged in at work at 110 volts.
You do the numbers…
+2
Aug 16th, 2009 (8:56 pm)I agree that this is an advantage of the Volt, but it’s not my question…
Suppose someone never uses gasoline. Then the generator is extra weight and expense. Why wouldn’t they opt for a smaller/cheaper car from a competing vendor?
If they never use more than 40 miles, then 100mpc should be more than enough to offset range-anxiety…
Aug 16th, 2009 (9:54 pm)I wasn’t refering in specific to your truck system…
I guess I was thinking more of types that my system already keeps track for me
“Instant” MPG – 10sec average
MPG from Engine Start
MPG over life of car
I think all cars should under the gas tank gauge either the Instant MPG or the MPG from Engine Start numbers. Heck I would settle for an Analog stick that just gave me a rough feeling of my fuel consumption.
I know I would never ever buy a car without those above functions.
Aug 16th, 2009 (10:21 pm)Besides, somebody is sure to drive a Volt on mainly ICE and say “actually got only 30 mpg” or some such.
————————————————————–
Of course someone would drive the Volt in charge depleted mode…it is in the top 10 of questions to be answered…if not #1.
+1
Aug 16th, 2009 (10:43 pm)What is the MPG on the Tesla? What sort of moron would use MPG on an electric vehicle? Shows what happens when you get the govt involved.
Aug 17th, 2009 (4:59 am)Statik,
Excellent article.
Thank you for posting it.
–Rashiid.
Aug 17th, 2009 (9:11 am)Well, it is Monday morning and I am trying to catch up with the rest of you guys. I will say this about this article. Great job, Lyle, for picking Statik to author it. And for you, Statik, welcome back on a grand scale. You haven’t lost anything during your self imposed exile from GM-VOLT.COM. I have been doing some of the same. But, I just had to post a response to your thoughts. I agree with most every word you wrote. It is about time, GM.
+1
Aug 17th, 2009 (10:07 am)Absolutely true, it’s all about averages when it takes you a week to burn that said gallon of gas.
+1
Aug 17th, 2009 (12:33 pm)Yes. It’s time to publish a simulator on the web that allows us to play with the UI and get realistic feedback. This shouldn’t be too difficult.
Aug 17th, 2009 (2:22 pm)First off, everybody knows all the government (city) fuel economy stats are way off the mark. You might as well half the stated city fuel economy. So whatever the Volt is listed as contains an enormous margin of error from the get-go.
If a car begins on electricity-only mode, you can get very, very, wide ranging fuel economies. The shorter your drive, the better your fuel economy. The opposite is usually the case. Short trips are killers on the traditional combustion engine’s fuel economy. It peaks out at long (preferably highway) distances.
From there on, it’s all a numbers game.
The majority of total miles driven are one person trips, primarily to and from work. For most, this is under 40 miles a day. Unless you are one of the minority that commute over 40 miles a day, one of the the tiny minority that drive with a car full of people, or you use your vehicle like most people use their garages (a place to store stuff) your average drive probably won’t trigger the gas engine for long. That said, not every trip is average.
However, if you drive as little as 43 miles a day, your numbers could be much poorer than somebody averaging 39 miles a day. Every minute with the gas motor on puts you FARTHER away from the under 40 stats.
Me? I barely do 40 miles in an entire work week. If I drove a Volt, I’d probably use 2-3 tanks of gas a year. I may get 999999.99 MPG! I’d essentially own a 100% electric car, except for vacation trips.
So the huge asterisk is certainly justified as nobody is going to get the same numbers. Perhaps “fleet average” is the best way to judge.
Aug 17th, 2009 (5:18 pm)The real problem with the 230 number is that there is a new piece of critical data that is missing.
I mean, the EPA has based their MPG measurements on actual trip data with a few assumptions thrown in that isn’t covered by the data. That’s been OK, those assumptions have been relatively minor compared to the average trip data (eg, a/c on, windows up or down, whatever).
But NOW they are trying to make assumptions about a very, very large component of the MPG measurement for an EREV; namely, how much charge does the vehicle have before the trip?
Is there anything in the trip database that could conceivably answer this question? There is nothing that I’m aware of that is in the data set that effectively answers that. So, they are making assumptions about it rather than trying to generate a new data set that would include the NON-trip behavior (eg, charging) between trips. Without that data, we’re (and that includes the EPA and GM
all just making guesses about what average mileage will be.
Basically, the average trip data can’t reasonably be used in this MPG context without average non-trip data to go with it.
But who’s going to collect that without EREV vehicles to actually test for charging time? I just don’t see any way around wildly guesstimistic MPG numbers for EREV cars until they’ve been out for a few years and there is a new complete set of trip and non-trip data for them.
+1
Aug 17th, 2009 (5:47 pm)Just run a spreadsheet for yourself. I did. I took into account commuting, errands, trips, vacations, charging opportunities, and city versus highway driving for a typical year. I was surprised to find that I got 234 MPG with my imaginary Volt.
Aug 17th, 2009 (6:44 pm)How about Cerberus, LOL. That sure worked out great.
Aug 17th, 2009 (6:48 pm)“Just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in.”
Michael Corleone/Silvio on “The Sopranos”
Aug 17th, 2009 (6:53 pm)Energy efficiency doesn’t matter much if you can go hundreds of miles at 70 mph and emit only water vapor.
Prototype Sequels are down to $50k if they are mass produced. That is much lower than $250k for a a hand built prototype.
Fuel cell cars are not as inefficient as people want to believe. If blue green algae is used to produce hydrogen and it scales up,
the hydrogen produced is a clean source of electricity.
If carbonized chicken feathers are as absorbent of hydrogen as hoped, building hydrogen tanks will probably get a lot easier and cheaper.
If mass producing hydrogen cars today they would cost $50k a piece, imagine what they will cost 6 years from now? Toyota is saying that people will be shocked by the low price of fuel cell cars in 2015.
I am sick and tired of the energy efficiency crap that critics throw at hydrogen fuel cell cars. Liquid fuel is inefficient period. To produce gasoline, you have to treat crude OIL using hydrogen to get rid of the sulfur. Switching from gasoline to hydrogen would be a tremendous improvement in energy efficiency. Solar to hydrogen, solar panel driven electrolysis, and wind driven electrolysis alone can produce all the hydrogen that is needed for fuel cell cars and these aren’t the only clean options. If you want to pack hundreds of miles worth of energy into a car without sacrificing cargo or passenger space, you have to use a liquid or gaseous fuel. The latter is a scientific law right now. Nobody can produce a 500lb or less battery that will propel an electric vehicle for 300 miles consistently recharge after recharge regardless of driving style without absorbing either most of the trunk space or most of the passenger space. Nobody can produce such a battery for a reasonable price. Even the Tesla roadster with a 900+ lb battery has limited range and limited trunk and passenger space. A 244 mile range is not a 300 mile range and 8+ hours is not a reasonable amount of time to recharge/refill a vehicle. Batteries are good for short bursts of power and that’s what they should be used for in cars.
Battery electric cars:
1) Will vary too much in their performance as people have different driving habits and therefor differing energy needs. The 230 mpg figure is meaningless.
2) Will take too long to recharge for at least a few more decades.
3) Will be an environmental disaster when the batteries have to be disposed of/recycled and there are no facilities for that.
4) Will need a fuel cell and hydrogen for range extension as people will not be tolerant of waiting 8+ hours for a recharge and crude OIL will sooner than later hit $200/barrel.
Hydrogen is mandatory to clean up cars as even ethanol creates toxic pollution when burned that effects public health.
Biofuels can be petroleum free, though that would mean you don’t transport them on trucks burning petroleum based fuel, but they aren’t. Hydrogen is the only alternative fuel there is that won’t negatively impact public health when it is used. Chemical fuel is superior to batteries and will be for some time.
GM needs to do another project driveway with 100 modern prototypes that are cheaper to build in order to demonstrate that fuel cell cars are becoming a realistic option today. Right now,
this very moment, fuel cell cars would cost twice as much as what people would pay if they were presently mass produced. In 6 years, that is bound to get even better.
A point that needs to be made about electrification of the automobile is that you have to produce more electricity to support it. Most of Americas electricity, over 50%, comes from burning coal which is the dirtiest fossil fuel that there is. Even nuclear waste is easier to deal with than the plume of heavy metals including Mercury that comes out of coal plants. In the short term, we need to increase distribution of natural gas and choose a means of distributing hydrogen. We need to build more nuclear plants and every state that has suitable land for disposal of nuclear waste needs to establish a waste repository. We need to commercialize solar to hydrogen direct technology, algae to hydrogen technology, and we need to improve electrolysis. Steam reformation of natural gas needs to continue while a conversion to renewables occurs. We should be improving electrical production now as cleanly as possible and at the same time we should be transferring as much power production as possible to clean renewables as quickly as possible.
For electrification of the automobile to be a positive thing, there has to be more electricity distributed nation wide. Hydrogen is easier to distribute than electricity using the technologies that are developing.
Hydrogen can be distributed:
1) In a mixture with natural gas called hythane through existing
natural gas lines.
2) In an organic carrier like hydranol that is comparable to
our current liquid fuels.
3) In a tank filled with carbonized chicken feathers.
4) In a solid metal hydride.
5) In a pipeline that is designed for hydrogen gas running
underground. These pipelines cost $500k a mile compared
to the above ground high voltage power lines that cost over
a million a mile.
6) In a hydride slurry.
And that list of options is not exhaustive.
In short, energy efficiency is quite poor right now where batteries may be very efficient at delivering the energy they store, but they can’t store enough energy fast enough to be used as a primary energy source. Hydrogen can be used more efficiently than gasoline can and with modern fuel cells and reasonbly sized high pressure H2 gas tanks, the range is reasonable. Hydrogen cars can be built using far less precious metal than battery electric vehicles making them far cheaper in the long run.
Aug 17th, 2009 (11:56 pm)Excellent piece. Thanks.
Aug 18th, 2009 (5:00 pm)Whoo!! Glad to see the guest author back on the site!!
Aug 18th, 2009 (10:59 pm)Finally a post that is ponted. What a breath of fresh air.
Thanks Statik, and Lyle – hope you are having a great time vacationing and no hurry.
Aug 20th, 2009 (10:09 pm)Just who are these ‘typical’ Volt drivers?
GM should have a series of TV commercials and ads featuring regular families telling their stories of how they use the Volt and how it has changed their lives, reduced their carbon footprint, saved them a ton of money buying gas, etc.
Scene: Sunny day in the suburbs.
“Hi, my name is Dave and this is my wife Marcy and our kids. We drove our Volt over 200 miles this week but haven’t used a single gallon of gas!”
Aug 21st, 2009 (12:18 am)You really think this is the way to go Bligh?
The Volt buyer will earn over $50k a year. The Volt owner will be someone who isn’t interested in owning a boring “average” car. The initial Volt owners will care less about being green and care more about being seen. The Volt will interest drivers ranging in age from 20 to 80. Ladies will have a special interest in the Volt as they won’t need to deal with oily gas pumps at all hours of the day and night. Men will like the Volt for two main reasons. The first being the electric torque. The second being the satisfaction factor derived from the middle digitization of the oil cartels.
If the Volt sells at $29k after credit and offers then NGMCO will need to run production 6 days a week. At $35k the Volt will be in the center of a huge menu of competition. And will be looked at by most as “nice, but maybe it’s better to wait for next year”.
Will be very interesting to see how NGMCO rolls out this futuristic “green” car.
=D~