AND 
Fisker Set to Announce $39,000 Plug-in Car
Fisker Automotive is busy bringing its luxury sports extended-range electric car called the Karma into production. Simultaneous global launch is planned for May 2010. The car will retail at $87,900 and offers 400 HP, 0 to 60 in less than 6 seconds, and a 50 mile all electric rage. A powerful GM built gas-powered range extender generates electrical energy for drives greater than 50 miles or continuously if the user chooses the high power demanding sports mode.
Of course this dream car is out of the range for most folks, especially considering how many even think the Volt’s $40,000 price tag is too steep.
However, just as Tesla has announced a more “affordable” $57,000 S sedan, Fisker too appears to be planning a lower cost model.
Reports indicate that Ray Lane from the Kleiner Perkins investment firm, that invests in Fisker, let slip a rumor that company is set to unveil a new $39,000 model. Indeed company founder and CEO Henrik Fisker has previously gone on record stating it was his plan to eventually develop and sell a $40,000 plug-in car.
Fisker is also known to have applied for DOE funding to help it refurbish a US assembly plant from which to manufacture low cost cars. No announcement has yet been made indicating they have been approved for funding, but Fisker has stated if it gets the loan it could being producing cars in as few as 26 months.
I attempted to find out directly from the source if this low cost rumor is true and whether it would be a plug in hybrid or pure electric.
Mr. Fisker responded to my questions with the following statement: “We will get back to you next week.”
Looks like some news is coming folks.
147 Responses to “Fisker Set to Announce $39,000 Plug-in Car”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]BigCityCat
- Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]omnimoeish
- First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]admin
- Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]Texas
- New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]srschrier
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
September 20th, 2009 at 6:29 am
I really doubt they will hit that price target.
Unless they plan to lease the battery.. sorry
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 6:43 am
Why not? The Volt is coming in at about $39,000, so it’s possible. Maybe Fisker picked that number to compete with the Volt
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 6:54 am
Fisker sure knows how to design a car! Fisker Karma is one of the best-looking cars i ever seen! I’m really excited about Fisker, Tesla, and Better Place.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 6:55 am
I’m sure that’s after the tax rebate.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 6:56 am
If it is indeed $39,000, you can be sure that is after the tax break. It will also probably be a pre-production pubicity stunt more than an actual production MSRP.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 6:59 am
Keep in mind they have applied for DOE funding. They need to give the public appearance that there is something to fund.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:03 am
The answer is mass production.. Fisker does not have that advantage.. Both Nissan/Renault and GM are working on it, to lower the cost of motors, inverters and myriad other EV unique components. Some people estimate GM is paying around $10k for EV components in the Volt now (not including batteries), hopefully that will drop to $1000-$2000 in the future.
The King in this department is Toyota and the Prius, they definitely have a cost advantage over everyone else since they are mass producing it as fast as the lines can crank them out. It is estimated the EV premium for the Prius is $4000, and that includes a $2000 battery.. and they still make a profit of $3000 on the car.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:11 am
Sorry to dump this today, nobody will see it in yesterday’s topic:
BREAKING NEWS
How did we all miss this?, battery life is 5 years from Nissan’s web site:
http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf-electric-car/#/car/index
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mon, 10 Aug 2009 – Asked by a site visitor
Q:Towards the end of the battery’s 5yr life, will the est. mileage decrease?
A:We expect the battery to have a lifespan of about 5 years. By 6 years, it will have decreased to about 80% capacity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So I really doubt the battery lease term will be longer than this.. Previous articles have mentioned 7/60 life for the battery so perhaps they are just being conservative.
Interesting couple of tidbits, the car will not have a hood.. there are no user serviceable parts underneath and the car will use drive-by-wire steering, there is no actual steering wheel shaft to impale you during an accident.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:23 am
Right! And the plan to build this new model in the US can’t hurt their chances of DOE funding.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:27 am
I love the drive by wire approach. That’s what GM’s “skateboard” design used and a few other companies have looked at it too. If it’s good enough for the Air Force it should be ok for cars.
Thanks Herm.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:29 am
By 2012 Volt COULD be on Gen II of the Volt. GM still has a big edge in the battery testing (I think).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:48 am
I agree GM has a big edge in battery testing! And in battery active (as well as passive) thermal control & monitoring, etc, which is aided by the presence of an ICE. But I still wonder if Fisker may have a entered a licensing arrangement with GM giving them access to battery design/testing/thermal control data as well as to the overall Voltec drivetrain design itself.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:50 am
What is clear is that the Car 2.0 era is just about here. Get in now or forget about it. The infrastructure, tools, engineers, designers, etc. get to start with a clean slate. The big boys should be very worried at this point, especially the ones trying to hold on to the familiar old ways. Many will be betting the farm on different technologies: Honda on hydrogen, GM on E-REV, Tesla on BEV, Fisker on E-REV, BP on swappable BEV, Nissan on swappable BEV, Toyota on regular and mild plug-in hybrids, BMW on hydrogen, etc. We should know in five years or so who went down the right path. Those that didn’t? It was nice knowing you.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:51 am
No doubt. They go hand-in-hand I’m sure.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 7:52 am
nasaman,
Would licensing all that tech be wise before the Volt’s not even released??? I know they are strapped for funds, but that would be “eating your seed corn”.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:01 am
Hmmm…very interesting. No hood saves a little $ and weight, as does drive by wire. No hood even aids aero a little. As far as the battery, 80% after 6 years could mean 75% after 7 years.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:04 am
Tag,
Good comment, yet I continue to wonder if Fisker’s joint venture partner (Quantum Technologies) didn’t actually “get the jump” on GM in developing EREV architecture for the military (we may never know). If so, it may have very well been to GM’s advantage to cross-license EREV with Fisker/QT (like Ford did with Toyota) to avoid endless court fights as well as to benefit from the ground-breaking work I think they very likely may have done using DOD funding.
Licensing contracts should always include tough non-disclosure terms with serious legal liabilities if violated. So the risk to both GM & Fisker/QT should be minimal, while both can proceed to “sew their seed”.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Regarding the Leaf’s “We expect the battery to have a lifespan of about 5 years. By 6 years, it will have decreased to about 80% capacity.”
If the above means that after 6 years and 75,000 miles optimum range drops from 100 to 80 miles, how much would it drop if you had driven 125,000 miles in those 6 years?
Would the assumption be for someone that bought a car like this in 2012, that by 2018 when the battery range is down, the owner would have the choice to buy a new battery (hopefully much cheaper), or that charging stations would be everywhere by then so that a range of 50 miles wouldn’t be a big deal for a commuter car?
The prices for these first generations will likely be subject to rapid change. In 2012 when the cars we are talking about start to be produced in any significant numbers, the prices will subject to rapid change based on several factors
- current gas prices
- current state of battery development. If in 2012 they know that battery development makes the Gen 1 batteries already obsolete, they will sell the cars much cheaper. They are pricing these cars now on component costs in 2011-2012, by 2012 when they can see where the component costs will be in 2013-2014, they will be dropping the prices fast. Remember when the IPhone came out. They dropped the price by a huge amount after 3 months which really angered the ‘early adopters’.
My plan it to buy whatever makes sense for me in the second half of 2012 so I can stop using Oil.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:09 am
nasaman,
Food for thought for sure. I had thought about cross licensing, but hadn’t thought about Fisker possibly being ahead in significant areas. They sure know how to build a PRETTY car, but I don’t know what their innards are like (a lot like people).
I guess it’s *still* “wait and see”! More options is always a good thing (well most times).(g)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:14 am
There are a lot of cars in the world, so I think there is room for multiple architectures.
Certainly for second cars and folks that don’t make long trips a BEV with 100 mile range is great as long as the range doesn’t fall too far (which may be why leasing a battery makes sense).
Then there are folks that need to frequently have a daily range over 100 miles and want to be able to drive their car from East Coast to West Coast. This could be the ERev nich, or perhaps natural gas cars might start to become popular (especially if Diesels start to be replaced by CNG and CNG filling stations proliferate).
The point is that there are 200 million ICE cars in this country and it is going to take a long time to replace them all. As the technologies improve there will be non-ICE options to replace all vehicles. But certainly for the first 40 or 50 million ICE cars that would be traded in for BEV or EREVs, there are cars that don’t need more than 100 mile daily AER.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:24 am
$39,000? Sounds to me like they’re trying to one-up the Volt with its not-well liked MSRP of $40,000 (before tax breaks of course).
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:31 am
Good point Koz!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Hope the link below works.
http://www.dominionpaper.ca/articles/2841
Good article on what we’ll be facing the next few years (in oppinion of a Canadian top Economist). He thinks $225 / barrel oil is just a year or two away. Everyone keeps posting recent finds, but ignoring 4 million barrels a day a more that is lost yearly now in these old giant fields.
But what is interesting is his points about high oil prices will also reduce the benefit of manufacturing overseas because container ships burn OIL to move goods. So making goods closer to their point of use will have greater value.
He also argues for more mass transportation, but I feel that is not neccessary. I think it will take 5 years to improve the EREV/BEV technologies enough to give people what they really want.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:38 am
In recent years I have tried real hard to limit my driving, make efficient use of trips etc. Few years ago my 2 famiy cars were over 50,000 miles a year, this year my 2 cars will be about 25,000 miles.
Of course no family vacation, but we’ve cut back on a lot of driving.
One thing I keep thinking about when I have an EREV/BEV in 3 years is how every day I’ll be doing the OPPOSITE. I’ll be thinking of extra trips I can take to use up my AER. I figure I’ll be able to charge at work and I’ll be able to drive a lot more than I do now.
My #1 goal will be to not burn OIL, but my #2 goal will be to go places and do things.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Tag, its not new stuff..
“nasaman,
Would licensing all that tech be wise before the Volt’s not even released??? I know they are strapped for funds, but that would be “eating your seed corn”.”
What would benefit both Fisker and GM is for Fisker to buy as many EV components from GM as possible.. and for GM not to be too greedy about it. GM would benefit by being able to reap mass manufacturing benefits sooner. Hopefully all these EV components will be made in the US.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:49 am
I love that skateboard concept GM came up with.. it is essentially what the Mercedes that was posted here a few days ago is about, all the components are below the floor of the car. The ICE or fuel cell is below the floor, the batteries and motor is also below the floor.. the only difference is that you cant just stick another passenger shell above the floor line, Mercedes integrated the whole thing into one package. Perhaps GM owns that idea.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:58 am
“If the above means that after 6 years and 75,000 miles optimum range drops from 100 to 80 miles, how much would it drop if you had driven 125,000 miles in those 6 years?”
Hard to estimate but that battery has been used hard and would probably be dead by then, maybe with a marginal range of 10 miles or worse.
125k miles in 6 years is 21k miles per year, 57 miles per day, assuming you are not a lead foot like Dr Lyle and you actually get the 100 mile range then that equates to 208 cycles per year.. in less than 5 years you would have racked up 1000 cycles.. which is probably the upper limit. If you drive aggressively then the battery is worked harder and you would probably not reach too much past 4 years.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:00 am
Yeesh why all the hating Volt fan boys?
Most everyone here wants to reduce their oil consumption for one reason or another. More competition is fantastic and I wish them well.
if they were coming out next year I would consider getting it. But since the Volt is first to market and with higher than usual transparency they seems to have put the most thought into their battery management so I am going with the Volt in 14 months.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:08 am
OEM’s, it seems to me, are getting just as excited as the people who post here in going E-REV (& BEV).
Strongest credit to Herm, above, for finding that comment about the Nissan battery longevity specs. Thanks Herm!!! That gives us ways to make the positive comparisons, AND, to give out ideas that actually may help BEV OEM’s (as I believe that demand will be about 3 to 7 times supply for electrification.)
The specs for the Nissan Battery will allow Nissan to EFFICIENTLY AND PROPERLY
***************************
customer repurpose
***************************
“end of first lease” of a BEV battery that has been properly/normally used and attentively plugged in (especially for low total miles), for the purpose of a second lessee. (Now that we know the specs.)
Side note for Nissan: See what great things happen when your specs are open for us to help the general public come to understand and share good ideas for (your) electrification as GM has been doing it?
I say, ” ‘Rock on’ Nissan” with openness.
This will save tremendously in the financial formulations mix for economic feasibilities of BEV applications within a lease, since we know something now about the Nissan longevity specs. (Which I asked for yesterday, and, Herm found that for us.)
Texas, above, is also certainly “right on the money”, where if other OEM’s do not come aboard with truly dedicated projects for electrification, the entire World will begin to see that they have sadly and most unfortunately misjudged for their future viability, and, to their ultimate passing on into history.
I received something in my (old fashioned mailbox) from GM yesterday, that I intend to follow up on, and, if I am successful with what they sent me, I will ask for permission to share what new process I was able to help accomplish, here.
HINT: Ironically, I also received in my (old fashioned) mailbox yesterday, a Shell gasoline credit card, (lol).
You can really bet strongly that GM upper management is wasting no time in doing everything possible for potential Volt customers.
EXTREMELY EXCITING TIMES!! EXTREMELY HELPFUL SITE!! EXTREMELY HELPFUL POSTERS!!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:09 am
“Toyota on regular and mild plug-in hybrids”
Texas, you are implying that Toyota is wasting time on hybrids, this is not so!.. The Prius and the Volt are essentially the same car.
Both cars have an ICE, both have an electric AC, both cars have two motors, two inverters and some gears.
There are only two basic differences:
1. the battery of course
2. The Volt uses motor/generator that are 30% larger than what the Prius uses..
Thats it, the architecture has little impact on cost or manufacturing or reliability. The Prius could be easily modified to be Volt like, and so can the Volt be modified to be Prius like.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:15 am
I dont think it will get that high.. it will fluctuate around $150 a barrel as the economy expands and contracts to keep it there.. it will be real tough on businesses than depend on oil.. which I guess is all of them.
You will also see an explosion of alternatives.. dont be surprised to see nuclear cargo ships.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:19 am
“By 6 years, it will have decreased to about 80% capacity.”
_______________________
Good eye Herm. A very important piece of information.
(BTW, my 8/28/09 Leaf prediction: At the 5 to 7 year point, the battery is probably down to 70 or 80% of its original capacity.(woot!))
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:21 am
NEWS FLASH:Bloomberg News is just now interviewing Bob Lutz….
Lutz has already made 2 significant statements:
1) We want to bring the Cadillac Converj to the market, and
2) We have “50,000 people waiting for the Volt”*
Lyle, you’ve indirectly made the national media again!!!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:26 am
YAUZA!.. Lutz strikes back..you can always rely on a Marine not to turn the other cheek.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:31 am
Interesting that there will be not hood. Nothing user-serviceable in that area in a BEV. Possibly minor chassis (undercarriage inspection) and exterior (wiper blades) and cabin (filter) things to attend to, but nothing at all high-tech is user-accessible, it seems.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:38 am
Hey Herm,
That concept of nuclear cargo ships is really interesting. (With an escort past Somalia, (lol) ). But really, that is a really interesting angle. Cargo ships are something like the second or third largest emitter of GHG are they not?
Plus, when they dock, couldn’t they help with input into a strained grid where they are docked in, say, California? And, couldn’t that be like a “mobile clean power source to temporarily-displace CO2-dirty coal, etc., for the durations that they are docked?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:48 am
windshield wiper fluid?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:48 am
Go for it Bob!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Fisker has had drawings and renderings of a 2 door coupe (not the Sunset) for many months, if not years, intending it to be the follow on vehicle to the Karma, starting at a very low price.
I hope Fisker gets the money. The US needs both the vehicles and the jobs.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:53 am
Maybe we could have an escorted convoy, like in WWII.
I really like this concept, pretty neat for increasing oil production out of the Canadian tar sands:
http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:55 am
Tks for your kind words Dan.. look at what I just found, not that I like Clinton much but what the heck:
“When we’re ready to put electric cars on the market, we could do the equivalent of ‘cash for clunkers’ for the electric cars,” he said, referring to the government’s recent vehicle trade-in program. “I like ‘cash for clunkers’ just because it put the car people back in business.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a_DDyS8wJ22o
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Oh boy. If this is true, good night Volt.
Given approximately the same price, I know I would have a hard time turning down that gorgeous Fisker. I’m pretty sure the vast majority would do the same.
Its great to have all the American built alternatives. California is the new Detriot!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Almost every other major player will have a BEV or EREV coming out in 2012. It will be a great year for the consumer IF the economy has rebounded enough that people are ready to buy in large numbers.
For GM, it may be another tough year UNLESS the Performance, Fit and Finish, Comfort and Gizmos are all equal to or better than any EREV from Fisker, Tesla, Toyota, Lexus, etc., etc.
(Bang my drum. Bang my drum.)
I think they can do it. They have somewhat of a head start. If we are lucky, battery technology like EEStor could work out and bring the costs down on all ‘electrics’.
It will still be tough going into the Chevy Store in 2012 and watching the wife pick a VOLT over a Camaro Convertible, but I suppose someone in the family has to be practical.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:05 am
______________________________________________________
The Electric Car Revolution is here….It is getting interesting…the landscape of the automotive manufacturing/retailing business will change at a quicker clip than most automotive executives are calculating.
______________________________________________________
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:18 am
“give the public appearance that there is something to fund”?
Sort of like EEstor… ?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:38 am
The guy was right who said the saddest words are “it might have been.” I once stood in the corner of a used car lot, looking at a 1958 Corvette for $1195. The year was 1967. I ended up buying a new Olds Cutlass. How dumb was that?
I have always wanted to own a convertible, since I admired by Uncle’s 1953 Olds – black with red leather interior – but because the years may catch up to me, I might not be around for the first Voltec convertible. Guess I should go out and take a walk.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:41 am
http://www.bloomberg.com/?b=0&Intro=intro3
(US TV clips)
/Lutz verifies 250 miles range on gas.
//250 / 8 gal (source: detroit news) = 31.25 mpg
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:45 am
The Converj can be a money maker out of the gate. Do it right, make it happen!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Maybe they have a small hatch to open and fill it, somewhere near where the wipers park. Even the release of simple specifications about these little things is really good marketing, don’t you think? OEM’s have about a year to do all these little releases, which would go a very long way to convert the public over to all the various different ways of thinking that they will need to have in place beforehand. Technical education, even for the small things is a very very long process, and, it just can not all be done at time of delivery for electrified vehicles.
How about a “Voltec new owner’s briefing” at the Chevy Store a few days ahead of the delivery day? (Since the excitement might impair the learning process significantly).
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:51 am
I wouldn’t go that far. Fisker doesn’t have physics blocking their path, but they do have to get the Karma on the road close to specs and in budget before their “next” car deserves much attention.
I have a one at a time vaporware allowance policy per manufacturer.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:52 am
What would sell like hot-cakes from any company would be a 10 mile eletric range EREV for $26,000 with a battery upgrade package for 40+ mile electirc range for an additional $14,000.
So you get the shell EREV coolness (silently, smugly drifting by the neighbors or Der Latte Huas)…even if you can’t afford the practical range. Remember, that’s what sold the Prius at first…just geek coolness.
Of Course, this idea has been raise x-million times on this site. Just seemed the right time to regurgitate it.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:55 am
Herm,
You are a constant blogger here at GM-Volt.com and your remark surprises me – “The Prius and the Volt are essentially the same car.”
Nothing could be further from the truth. The Volt traction comes from an electric motor while the Prius uses the Synergy drive combining ICE and electric motors. The internal workings are dynamically different. To change either car to the other would require replacement of most parts.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:59 am
There is hope now that they will increase production beyond 10,000 vehicles during the first production planning. Kudos to Lyle for all he has done.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:00 am
Add,
Once again, Bob talks of the Volt as a “perception” car, to verify that GM can lead in technology. Something to counter the “perception” of the Prius.
Lutz just does NOT get it.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:07 am
I think your $150 ceiling is about right for near term conditions but it can spike higher for short periods but business cannot sustain those levels for long. Going forward, adjustments will be made to raise the ceiling each time. The next run up in oil prices, if it occurs in the next couple of years, will start to run out of steam once prices pass $125/bar and would be seriously pressured at $150. The one after that could see $200 as the ceiling. Each time some long term measures are taken by consumers to reduce their oil burden. Smart individuals, businesses, and governments are already starting to take those longer term steps.
Purchasing a vehicle like the Volt will be a huge step in that direction.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:11 am
I would agree with you about GM being ahead on battery testing, Tag.
Nissan say on their website
http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf-electric-car/#/car/index
that a fast charge will take the battery to 80% SOC Nissan is utilizing the full SOC of their 5/7 year battery unlike GM where only the middle 50% is utilized. I would be concerned about how long this battery will last.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:21 am
Herm, I was not implying anything. I was stating what Toyota is doing. I also agree with them. They own the hybrid market and are smart to keep making money.
I also agree with you that the plug-in Prius is close to the Volt. However, it is rather mild because the motor is just 60 kW where the Volt’s is 110 kW. The Prius battery is around 5 kWh while the Volt’s is 16 kWh. Toyota knew this but decided for a more mild design because they feel their lower price is going to be more successful. History would agree with them. They still are not sure what’s going to happen with regard to consumer acceptance of plug-in hybrids, that’s why they are putting the plug-in model out (with fleets) before the Volt to see how it performs. If the Volt falls on it’s face Toyota will just keep selling the model to fleets and organizations that want that extra green image (Google anyone?). If the Volt is a hit, Toyota will be ready. They have the upper hand to let GM take the reputation risk. GM is betting the farm on this because they have to! I just so happen to think GM is betting on the right horse, even if it’s a long shot.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Hey Herm,
Thanks for another great link.
That link also really convinced me that Bloomberg news seems to be objective because they showed the entire story. Bill Clinton’s “cash for clunkers” idea for electrified vehicles ought to be made so that you need not have a “clunker” to somehow get help to buy a Voltec vehicle.
Somehow making $4500 (the “clunker equivalent”) available toward the Volt (or qualifying EV) purchase price in lieu of the $7500 tax credit (esp. for those of us business people whom must run profit margins to the razor’s edge, essentially being a “non-profit” to ensure competitiveness, a direct and instant rebate to GM or the Chevy Store at time of MSRP sale, as help for early-adopters who are paying the higher price for Gen1’s,
(as tax credits would not help lots of us at all). Somehow instead of the $7500 tax credit, how about only just (”clunker equivalent” of) $4500 off of MSRP? That would be what would work for many of us small business people. And, the Chevy Store might have more options with the usage of that to it’s own bottom line as a $7500 tax credit for the Chevy Store where it could be more viably-applied instead. This can be made to happen just as a policy change, it seems to me.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:41 am
The Prius could be easily modified to be Volt like, and so can the Volt be modified to be Prius like.
This is really not accurate. One difference is that the ICE on the Prius is mechanically connected to the wheels. A second difference, related to this, is that the gearing is completely different. The fact that one isn’t easily turned into the other is reflected in the fact that efforts to make the Prius more Volt-like by adding a larger battery hasn’t produced anything like a Volt.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:44 am
When I say that, imagine I said a Ford f250 diesel pickup is essentially like a Camaro.. I dont mean exactly the same down to all the details.. and obviously not for all drivers. Basically both get you where you want to go in about the same time.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:53 am
the Prius has a motor about half the size of the Volt’s motor.. that can be changed (Toyota has done so in the past). Note that the Volt is a much higher performance car than the Prius, and also heavier so it needs that bigger motor.
The battery size is a given, the Prius is not designed to go electric for a very long distance. That can also be changed easily. It is a flexible design.
We really dont disagree on this, just a matter of how you look at it.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Speculation,
If the Volt’s battery capacity declines at the same rate Nissan is predicting, then the 40 mi. AER will likely be unobtainable right around the year 8 point. (just when the warranty is running out).
Volt is using 50% of battery for AER. Take out 20% for bottom and top ends (15% on the bottom, 5% on the top), that leaves a 30% reserve. Using Nissan’s predictions, it’s reasonable to assume that the volt’s total battery capacity will have degraded to below 70% by year 8 (i.e. the 30% pad will be gone). The Volt’s AER would then start to decline.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
As long as it doesn’t look like the Leaf. Man it’s hard to even type the word “Leaf” so homoish
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
26 months is so far away they can say whatever they want now.
Afterall wasn’t GM promising much cheaper Volt earlier ?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
If this rumor is true and they undercut the Volt price then Chevy is in deep doo doo. Fisker is showing everybody how to do EV right. GM could learn a thing or two from these engineering masters.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Your custom LEAF will be ready for pickup next year have no fear. It will look good on you trust me.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Fisker is interesting not so much for the cars but the way in which it is putting the cars together. Using industry contacts, but unlike what automakers currently do, Fisker has essentially outsourced everything but the design. The drive train comes from Quantum and GM, and the parts will be assembled by Valmont, which currently builds the Boxster and Caymen for Porshe.
In a tangible way, Fisker is implementing Peter Drucker’s vision for a modern corporation — concentrating on the value added and outsourcing everything else. We’ll see if this approach in cars works out as well it did in consumer electronics with products like the IPod.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Yeah, this does not look good for GM. I don’t know why these guys even use GM components since they are way smarter than those lazy GM engineers. They should have contracted it out to the euros or asia for superior results.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
To reach your #1 goal strongly suggest you consider the Nissan LEAF, it is an amazing car really. Zero Emissions and absolutely NO OIL. The Volt is NOT zero emissions and WILL burn OIL. Spend half the money and upgrade to the LEAF. We will have your custom Nissan LEAF ready for pick-up next year. See you then and have a nice day my friend.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Fisker +1
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
“that a fast charge will take the battery to 80% SOC Nissan is utilizing the full SOC of their 5/7 year battery unlike GM where only the middle 50% is utilized. ”
You misunderstood what they are saying.. Nissan is using an industry standard SOC of 70%, GM is using 50%.. but since the general public drives less than 40 miles a day then the average owner is not going to use much of that Nissan battery pack.. and it will last longer.
The fast 80% charge is another typical thing with lithium batteries, you can charge them fast, but you have to slow down as the battery reaches full charge.
Lets do a guess on what Nissan is doing.. note it is only a guess. They are using a 70% SOC.. this means they only charge the battery until it is 85% full and only allow a discharge to 15%.. the total range is 70% of battery capacity.. most likely they allow a 20% to 90% but who knows what the battery engineers selected.
Lets say you discharged your battery down to 20%, the computer stops the car to protect the battery from damage, so you plug in the 20 minute fast charger.. but it will only charge the pack to 80% .. then it switches to normal mode and slowly finishes charging the pack to 90% and stops.. that final 10% may take an hour or two.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
The Prius has a mode that the wheels are turning under power and yet the engine is dead cold and still (up to 62mph in the plug in Prius).. how can that be when the “engine is mechanically connected to the wheels”?
That is the wonder of that system, that they can effectively disconnect the engine from the wheels without using a clutch, and yet can instantly reconnect it when needed to get the maximum mileage on the highway or under heavy acceleration.
So in this regard the Volt and the Prius are similar, they can both move with the ICE off.
If you want the Prius to have more electric range then increase the battery size, if you want it to go faster on just the electric motor then make the motor bigger.. it all adjustable to what Toyota deems the market wants.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
When prodded about GM being willing to take a loss on the Volt he reluctantly said “not thousands”.. thus GM is willing to take up to a $1999 loss on the Volt, but only if forced to.
The impression I get out of this is that GM will not lose money on the Volt even at $40k when it comes out.. very interesting.
I think it is probably ok to trust Bob when he says stuff like this, but I am careful when he says other stuff, he tends to oversimplify things… like when he said the Volt would have a “transmission”
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
They could pump power into the local grid when docked.. but I suspect these ships dont spend too much time docked… but it would be another source of revenue.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Don’t be so sure. That price is very doable without leasing. But leasing should be an option as many people here would consider leasing the battery due to its many benefits.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
You are correct the Toyota Prius is much more flexible than the Volt. Those in the know at Toyota research call this Superior Engineering. You should think of it as their Trump Card.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Funding this should be a Top Priority at DOE. It’s time to put some pressure on them to get this done. Let’s do this already.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Fisker is only using GM to get to market quicker. They already have superior engineering expertise they just don’t have the manufacturing base yet. Pickup your Doofus Award. It’s been ready.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
You are very misinformed as the Volt will NOT be the first to market. Sorry to break your bubble.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
It was great for Toyota and Honda. We need more programs like this that let the PEOPLE choose the best quality cars. The government can hand out money but let us decide who makes the best cars. GM is competing better these days but they still have a long long way to go.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Right On. Just wish it didn’t have so many GM parts in the darn thing. GM parts are not known to be very durable, maybe this time they will get it right. Hopefully, Fisker engineers have verified and tested the GM stuff for suitable reliability. As far as GM Quality…best not to go there.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Wait till the next price hike hits. Oh yeah its coming. Can you say Volt Markup
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
No need to wait and “see”. This has already been proven time and time again. It’s a Slam Dunk.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Agreed. Looks like Fisker is going to serve up a nice facial on the Chevy Volt.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
No so sure the Volt will be getting EEStor energy packs anytime soon. More likely to be in the Prius or LEAF well before the Volt.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Just a reality experience note here. In the last three weeks I have twice forgotten to plug in my BEV two wheeler. No joy and no go. Fortunately I have multiple bikes, and rode another. But I can’t afford two BEV cars. A BEV MUST have a backup. At some point, you will get distracted. Whether it be a family tragedy or a family celebration or a hot date, we will all eventually forget to plug that puppy in. An EREV is its own backup. Forget to plug it in and it will just run on the ICE. A minor embarrassment, but no changing of plans and no time delay. Thus I think that EREVs will be the dominant vehicle and the BEVs will be a niche vehicle. I don’t see multiple niches with no dominant architecture.
Note to all manufacturers, especially Chevy: GPS enable your vehicles (most are now) and allow the user to designate certain locations as charging points. If the driver parks at one of those points without plugging the vehicle in, use some kind of polite “nag” to suggest that plugging in might be a good idea. It could save a lot of drivers from morning letdown.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
GM can easily beat Fisker in this game. There is no way Fisker will be building 10,000 units the first year. More like 500 or less.
Even if I could afford one, I would never buy a Fisker or Tesla. There is no track record and no service infrastructure. I’d sooner buy a butt-ugly Prius.
Fisker should make a deal with GM to have their dealers distribute and service Fisker cars.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
OMG, that blue car is gorgeous. Want.
Why didn’t the Volt turn out more like this ? Bigga Mistake.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Go back under your bridge Troll. The Tesla Roadster has an outstanding track record. One that the Volt only wishes it could achieve. Now run along little troll boy.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Very nice catch on the 250 mile range for the genset! That was really nice. Of course we still don’t know if the tank holds 6 or 8 gallons. If it holds 6 gallons then it’s more like 40+ MPG.
Did you also note the comments about Gettlefinger being “not what we had thought at first” and that there is now no difference between the wage rates of transplant and domestic auto makers?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
NEWS FLASH:Bloomberg News is just now interviewing Bob Lutz….
Super interesting interview. Thanks for sharing the cite.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
That will never happen. Mister Tee is set in stone. You will not even be allowed a fast charging option (EVER) on the Volt. GM is just not very flexible on the battery. Perhaps you should consider a Fisker (aka What the Volt could have been).
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Good point. I’m wondering if the warranty went 10–>8 because the testing indicated that aging alone knocked down the capacity more than expected. The Nissan cells use a similar chemistry to the cells GM is using for the Volt, and obviously Nissan thinks that time alone will do some damage.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
The one big disappointment is that he still isn’t thinking out of the box on efficiency. Rather than looking at mass and aerodynamics, he’s still obsessed with the engine and drive train. So his view is that “we’ll see surprising choices in engines”. C’mon Bob. Expand your horizons and be a little more creative. Start with the issue — which is mass and aerodynamics — and stop confusing the symptom with the problem.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
The Prius has a mode that the wheels are turning under power and yet the engine is dead cold and still (up to 62mph in the plug in Prius).. how can that be when the “engine is mechanically connected to the wheels”?
Because MG2, the second motor, can also drive the car under some circumstances.
The split drive system is designed to have the motor and battery powered motor work together, with the engine being the primary propulsion system. If you make the battery and motor large enough to power the car without the ICE, then the design makes no sense.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Hey, Fake Statik!
Before you go home, can you draw a picture where the 16KWh battery will fit? Can you show the specs for a 110KW motor connection to the Prius HSD? Can you cook hamburgers on the Prius power electronics when accelerating agressively using 110KW to the traction motor?
Actually, never mind I’m not really interested in hearing a loser imposter troll’s response but I would be interested in Herm’s.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
There isn’t a whole lot that I trust in Lutz’s comments, certainly not specifics. He is a marketer, a salesman. We can look for the details from the engineers and announcements.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
For all those who keeps slaming the Leaf, It is the one car of the four Volt, Fiskar, Leaf and Prius that will get you off of Oil. The leaf will guarantee you won’t need to fill up for gas.
The three will guarantee you have to use gas.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
This Blue car gives me a hardon.
The Volt leaves me limp.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
You’re correct. There should be “Tiered” trim models for electric range.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Also of interest, Fisker claims to have turned down investments from / partnerships with major international automakers. Tesla Motors accepted investment from Daimler, which helped Tesla Motors get their loans. Fisker may NEED such a partner to get their loans.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
It looks like after just one year of the Volt’s release, it’s screwed.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
The leaf will also guarantee that you never drive more than 40 miles from your house unless you feel like stopping for 4 hours every 80 miles. The Volt and Fisker are the best engineering solution for the current state of lithium bateries. Just enough battery to get most people through their day fully electric %100 of the time.
Cutting out oil for most people at this point isn’t possible without lots of money or sacrifice.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
That’s only assuming your an idiot retard owner/driver that tries to go beyond the cars range. A BEV has a “Purpose”, using beyond that is just plain stupid. Would you try and go 600 miles on a full tank in a Volt?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Herm,
Yes, well said.
The Prius started production in 1997, so it has a 13 year head start on the Volt. That’s a mixed blessing. On the one hand, as you say, mass production has already kicked in, so that the Prius is both cost competitive and profitable. But the Prius is still using relatively old technology – NiMH batteries and magnet-based motors.
What we need is to get the newer technologies into mass production – Li/Ion batteries, induction electric motors, electric HVAC components, etc.. Government tax credits will help with this, but someone has to take the lead here, and it doesn’t seem to be Toyota.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Probably true. I’m hoping it does make it into the Chevy ‘Spark’.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
lol, yeah, these Voltards seem to like to compare Apples & Oranges. They’ll compare an EV’s range to a mixed mode range. Just doesn’t make sense. Then they all say to reduce oil consumption but they always boast about how the Volt’s range is much better and longer. Between those lines it means that once you burn the 40 mile ev range you are now a pathetically inefficient fossil burning polluting ICE car. And they think this is “Great”?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Yeah, BYD is but they’ll all try and come up with some small detail about why it isn’t and why the Volt is, eventhough there hasn’t been one sold to any Govt or Utility or fleet at all. BYD has sold to Govt, Utility and fleets. So they (BYD) are “First”. GM will just never be first at anything.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
I totally agree. BEVs will not be dominant until you can pull into a gas (electric) station and charge a battery in 5 minutes.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Preciously, please people stop trying to compare the Prius to the Volt as if they’re the same concept. They are drastically different, the Volt being a superior and more advanced vehicle. Which one sells is another story, but in 10 years I am almost certain the Volt will be the new Prius of today.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Completely agree, BEV’s will always be a niche vehicle, a range extender is an absolute must to be a mainstream vehicle. This is exactly what the Volt is.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Can you quite posting your absurd lies please. GM quality and reliability is near equivalent to Toyota and Honda.
Your living in the 80’s and early 90’s.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
For 100th time, Ideally with the Volt you can charge at work and drive home without using gas. The ER part saves your butt when there is a power failure at work.
But I’d still consider the BEV based on utility, price etc.
And I really want to buy American. But to save America I don’t want to burn oil.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
I didn’t hear Lutz say anything about the range. What time in the interview did that occur?
On the otherhand, Mr. Clueless did talk about the Volt as a perception changer. Carcus1 is right; Lutz just doesn’t get it.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Koz, I’m going to have to disagree with you on this. It seems like you are saying the Toyota Synergy Drive is not capable of being scaled up. However, we already know the Highlander Hybrid mates a huge 3L V6 up to it and it moves a much heavier mass. Yes, the motor is 50 kW but the first Prius was only around 32 kW and Gen III is now 60 kW.
So, if we can assume the Prius would only need about a 80 – 90 kW motor to give Volt like performance (Prius drivers will be far less aggressive) or around a 35 percent improvement, which does not seem impossible due to the Highlander experience.
Now, you mention the electronics. Surely Toyota can handle that. They do after all have access to all those high-energy hybrid Lexus engineers, right? They have some huge electric drive motors on their hybrids. Well over 110 kW. So, that is obviously not going to be a limitation.
So, all that leaves is finding room for the batteries. You are basing the failure of Toyota to be able to keep up with GM on a company that comes from Japan?! A country where space is everything and finding space is deeply engrained in their culture? Really? You think this is impossible? Oh, doesn’t the Prius haves seating for five? There is some room, if you want them to match the Volt.
Anyway, they are probably deep into a project that will match or exceed the Volt with a brand new platform. It’s not like they didn’t have the heads-up or the money to do so. I’m really surprised at your belief that Toyota is not up to the challenge.
I expect Toyota’s engineers pulling their hair out as we speak being driven by demanding top executives that are hell bent on owning whatever is coming next, be it plug-in, BEV, hydrogen, CNG, etc. I just don’t seem them sitting back and relaxing. lol. In fact, the thought of that is almost comical.
To sum it up, Toyota will be there and ready for battle. If you dismiss them you do so at your own risk.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Cheaper price might not win. Case in point: the new Honda Insight.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Come on guys, don’t be trolls. You are giving bad names to us BEV fans. Both cars are plug-ins and they both serve important segments of the market. The Leaf serves people who travel under ~100 miles and has other options to travel further. The Volt serves people who usually travel ~40 miles a day and occasionally (for example weekend trips) needs to go a lot further (maybe more than 100 miles). Both have their uses, depending on which kind of customer you are.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Hopefully Fisker releases their Karma soon. I don’t have much confidence in them given they haven’t released their first car yet. It seems a bit too early to announce the third car (the second is the convertible Karma) when the first hasn’t really gotten off the ground yet.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2009 at 11:52 pm
A compliment from a Gaylord.
Thanks Falker!
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 2:30 am
Disagree on your “forgot to plug in” premise.
1. The leaf would have called or emailed you (unless you forgot to plug your phone in, too).
2. Many people will be able to do 2 or even 3 day’s worth of driving on a single charge with the Leaf.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 2:50 am
And yet the CARB insists that PHEVs and EREVs have batteries waranteed to last 150,000 miles which for the averge driver is 15 years! GM officals have admitted that they are inlcuding the cost of two batteries in every one of their Volts to reach this artificial warranty.
It is estimated that it drives up the price of a Volt by about $10,000. So a Volt could be priced at $30,000 or $22,500 after rebate, if this stupid CARB rule didn’t exist or was equal for BEVs like the Leaf.
For that matter what ICE powered car warranties its engine for 150,000. miles? Aside from commercial diesels in trucks?
I thought CARB was trying to get new non fossils cars to market. Here they are impeding that precise thing.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 3:48 am
This car is simply beautiful.
It looks nicer than the Tesla.
But there isn’t any accounting for taste.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 5:12 am
September 21st, 2009 at 8:39 am
Frisker probably doesnt have all of the overhead and union issues that GM has though.. so it can turn a proffit much easier.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 9:39 am
“No name” is here early; I wonder what Toyoda-san did over the weekend to put the fear of Yen into him?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 10:05 am
My mistake. Let me clarify. First to the U.S. consumer market (BYD announced 2011 http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/2009/01/2009-detroit-auto-show-chinese-automaker-byd-to-enter-us-market-in-2011.html ).
And one that I can afford.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 11:00 am
Fisker can sell all of the high valued Karmas it can make up to around 5,000 per year world-wide. Maybe a little over that. To continue production and grow the company, they need a lower cost vehicle. A much lower cost vehicle. Whether a $40,000 vehicle is the ticket for them or not is questionable. If they can actually produce one for that figure, or less, and keep the fantastic design of the Karma, they could be really great competition for the Volt. Might I even say it would out-sell the Volt because of its looks alone, assuming they were priced about the same. GM could have some really stiff competition here if things work out well for Fisker. We will have to wait and see – as always. IMO.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 11:34 am
10 mile range doesn’t save you $14k. It might not save anything at all. If you cut the battery size 75% you now have a pack which needs four times the specific power and 2-3 times the cycle life. That battery does not exist today.
EREV batteries must be powerful enough to accelerate the vehicle (100 kW or so). You can save money with a HyMotion-like approach in which batteries supply 20-30 kW and the gas engine runs when accelerating or up hills. But even that pushes the state of the art in battery technology and does not save $14k.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 12:02 pm
koz:
Amen. Understatement of the year, IMHO.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 12:04 pm
“They already have superior engineering expertise…”? Fisker? LOL. -1
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Hey Carlos, how’s it going with the FIA today?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Fisker? LOL.
The photo at the top of the thread puts me in the mind of the old Nixon poster that said “Would you buy a used car from this man?” NOT!!
Also the old Rod Stewart anthem, “Every picture tells a story don’t it?”
LJGTVWOTR!!
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 12:50 pm
“Hard to estimate but that battery has been used hard and would probably be dead by then, maybe with a marginal range of 10 miles or worse.”
Thats really rough and overly pessimistic.
Provided the battery is kept at normal operating temperatures, normal power draws and normal charge levels, there is no reason to be believe it won’t lose around 2-3% a year (regardless of cycles) and ~10% for every 1000 cycles.
I would think that if two people who live in the same climate and drive the same way
If one has 80% left after 6y/75,000 miles the second will at 6y/125,000 miles have around 70% capacity.
Now, I should mention that systematically discharging to really low levels will significant hinder the battery life, and a “realistic” driving situation for someone driving 21k miles a year is more like a median daily drive of ~70 miles… significant battery damage may start occuring around year 3/4 with inability of a softly driven Leaf to reach 70 mile per charge before year 5 is complete.
Thankfully the numbers Nissan is throwing around are really not that much better than Telsa’s 75% at 5 year mark. Hopefully we will have some preliminary real world data on whether Telsa owners are hitting that mark.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 12:51 pm
True that you can connect bigger engines to the HSD such as in the highlander, but the benefits of doing so are pretty small. The hybrid highlander doesn’t get very compelling mileage, especially compared to what the regular highlander gets. Not quite sure what the real issue there is but there really may be some limits to how broadly HSD can be practically applied and/or scaled.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Bruce:
The Fisker is going to be built in Finland.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Maybe CARB stands for:
Curtail
All
Realistic
BEV’s
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:10 am
GM doesn’t have those problems anymore, they’ve passed on their union pension obligations to the federal government (a.k.a. taxpayers and China). The new lean mean GM will only have the pesky problem of trying to sell cars in a slumping economy that it wasn’t competitive in before. That, and the backlash from taxpayers not stupid enough to forgive and forget. Other than that they are home free.
What they should have done is shut down GM NA and moved everything to the PRC where people actually buy their products and they can afford to manufacture cars. But, since we’ll subsidize their failure they have no motivation to do anything drastic.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:30 am
Totally,
I just wish they would reshape the Volt to look more Prius like, I mean it looks more like a honda insight with a bowtie than a Prius.
This turd probably will weigh in close to 4,000 lbs, has most of the drivetrain losses of a comparable gasoline powered car, plus any losses, minor though they may be, in transferring power from the gas engine to the battery/electric motor. My guess is the 31.25mpg is on the highway, in favorable conditions at 60mph with a slight tailwind.
The C6 has 436hp and will likely best the volt in highway fuel efficiency, and retails for only a few thousand over the Volt.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:32 am
GM has taken billions in loans (that aren’t going to be repaid), what do they need to do?
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:36 am
When they fail we can give them a few billion to try the same thing again, that’s how we roll.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:57 am
How is a $40,000 compact car with 150hp practical? This is an image car, for GM and those who will buy it. If you think it’s practical because you’re going to save money on gas, look at what you spend on gas now, and figure out how many years it will take to pay the premium on the car.
Is anyone actually going to do a cost analysis that involves math before they buy this car? At least those who think the price of the car is somehow offset in fuel savings?
If you want a practical car that will save you money on fuel, buy a civic or a corolla, but if you want to be practical, the lowest cost of ownership is likely whatever car you are driving now. Buy a new set of tires, change the oil and keep it another 5 years, the money you save over the Volt will pay for many vacations.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:01 am
Yeah, this concept has totally rocked in aerospace, look at the 787 and a350. Huge successes, on time and under budget. Having 3,480 cooks in kitchen works great.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:08 am
I hate GM, but you BEV people are hilarious. Yeah, if you want to drive more than 40 miles one way, you are clearly some sort of dipshit. That is not what cars are for. Oh, wait, that is exactly what cars are for, because otherwise I could probably just walk or ride my bicycle.
So, I need a BEV to fill the gap between too far for cycling, but not quite far enough that I need a legitimate car. This is worth $20,000 to me? Maybe Nissan can get the scooter store to sell these things and have them subsidized by medicare as mobility devices and I can get one free.
Edit – Just thought of something, all the people who live in highly developed urban areas with no access to charging could really use these things, except it isn’t practical to own personal transportation in places like NY, you don’t have a way to charge it, and you’d likely only want to use it when driving far outside the city since it’s easy to get around inside town without a car. Otherwise, this is the perfect device for city dwellers.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 5:55 pm
I think the biggest arguement against BEVs is that overall BEVs are a poor use of resources.
In a BEV situation, a battery needs to be sized to cover 95% of daily driving distances for someone to consider owning a BEV. The data out of the PHEV testing suggests this number is north of 60 miles for an average US driver and I think Nissan has a good pegging at around 100 miles on LA04. This leads to having ~18-20 kWh of usable battery.
In comparison, a successful PHEV can only cover 50-75% of driving miles. GM has gone high with 40 miles ~78% and Toyota seems to be aiming at the low end (not sure they are even hitting 50%). They have usage batterys of 8kWh-10kWh for the 75% number and probably 3-4 kWh for the 50% number.
The first 4 kWh you put in a car, it saves approx 50 gallons/year per kWh over a 50 MPG car. The next 4 kWh you put in a car, each additional kWh only saves approx 25 gallons/year per kWh over a 50 MPG car. The last 10 kWh you put in to make it a full BEV only saves approx 8 gallons/year per kWh!
Overall, its better for society to build PHEV 10/20/40s than to make full BEV. Better use of reasoures, and at least PHEV 10/20 should be significantly cheaper than full BEV leading to faster adoption.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Ummmm… wait, not totally true
The concept has been in work in Aviation for dozens of years.
Almost all Airbus planes have been produced in a similar fashion (not truely outsourced, but two offices speaking different languages, working with disticnt different parts and goals might as well be different companies). Even Boeing has traditionally shipping large subassemblies of 737/747/777 across countires and oceans.
The issue with the 787 (and to a lessor extent the A380) is not fundamental concept, but the level it was taken to… as long as Fisker is in charge of the engineering design and integration, things should be okay. If they outsource too much of the engineering design, then they will have similar issues as the aviation companies.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 6:24 pm
I can’t argue with the fundamental conclusion that if a car is less than 15 years old, maintaining it is almost always the cheapest option.
However, I think you sell people short. Some will be buying the Volt for image, but more than you might imagine will be doing the actual cost analysis (if the target of 60,000 or so a year is reached anyway). Simply because its a 40,000 dollar compact car. Majority of people who can afford it, didn’t get to the point to afford it by being stupid.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Yeah, it’s better to buy from a government sponsored entity that already failed once. For the good of the many Kommerade. Remember to support your local vibrant housing industry by snapping up some condos with the newly extended $8,000 first time home buyer tax credit.
(Quote)