AND 
GM Exec: Volt to Have Very Cool Eco-Graphic Interface
The following is a discussion I recently had about the Chevy Volt with Bob Kruse who was GM’s director of hybrids and EVs, just before his recent departure.
I would imagine driving style will affect the Volts’ electric range. Hyper-milers probably will try to get the car to go 100 miles without going into generator mode.
Yes. I can probably get it to do several hundred miles downhill with tailwind. To be honest with you there’s several driver interfaces that try to teach drivers. We’ve not talked too much about the man-machine interface, but it will have the necessary tools to allow drivers to modify their behavior for maximum electric range.
Will you have an interface like Ford or Honda that show these green leaves and things?
The Volt will have a very cool set of graphic interfaces for the drivers. We’ve got two different reconfigurable display areas, a primary right in front of the driver where the traditional cluster is and a secondary at the top of the center stack that will have content unique for a driver interfacing with an electric vehicle.
You haven’t shared what that’s going to look like yet.
No but it’s very well done. It’s very impressive.
Very similar to the charge sustaining story, ongoing refinement. While we have time were going to make it perfect. All the fundamental basic functions are already done, we’re making it perfect, cool, and sexy.
Some of these schedules that some of these companies make when they say they get hundreds of miles of electric range, the schedule that you’re on can help influence that. In the Volt if you do 35 mph flat terrain steady state there’s upside potential over the 40 mile range. One thing we’ve got to look out for is that the US consumer is not happy with the EPA mpg ratings in that they don’t necessarily represent real world driving conditions. We’re being very careful to not allow the perception to exceed the reality. You don’t want to overpromise and underdeliver
It seems to me you feel you are going to underpromise and overdeliver?
That’s fair. Were being somewhat conservative again because we want to be successful with the technology.
146 Responses to “GM Exec: Volt to Have Very Cool Eco-Graphic Interface”
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
October 5th, 2009 at 6:43 am
Thank you, Lyle. Nice article.
From the article:
One thing we’ve got to look out for is that the US consumer is not happy with the EPA mpg ratings in that they don’t necessarily represent real world driving conditions. We’re being very careful to not allow the perception to exceed the reality. You don’t want to overpromise and underdeliver.
Okay. So 230 mpg is what again? Real world? Fake world? Something a non-educated consumer will easily understand?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 6:55 am
You beat me to it Rashid I was going to post 230 WTF!
I wouldn’t expect to get more than 30 miles AER ever in the volt the way I drive. My wife drives our prius and gets 52 MPG for a tank of gas and when I drive it I get mid to high 30’s. I don’t expect to need more than 20 miles AER for my daily driving so I won’t need to “change my behavior” to drive electric every weekday which is what I’m looking for.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 6:58 am
That’s a good point. I mean really!?!? 230 mpg? What were they thinking. They can only underdeliver on that one.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:00 am
Good question Rashiid. The 230mpg rating is a sticky subject. If a Volt owner drives 10,000 miles the first year and uses just 1 gallon of gasoline (plus electric recharge) what is the mpg? The answer is, “10,000 miles, but Is this a realistic question?”. Is it possible to drive a Volt 10,000 miles on one gallon of gasoline? Yes, but not common to Volt owners.
The 230mpg rating is based on a perceived value for average use.
=D~
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:01 am
Rashid –
230 CITY MPG is shorthand for if you plug the durn thing in every night you won’t use as much gas.
Ned — Precisely. +1
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:01 am
I hope the 2 display clusters allow the user to change color themes. That would be very nice. For example, one could choose red, blue, green, white, or that terrible digital gray. I think consumers would really appreciate the ability to change the display for given conditions (day/night, bright/cloudy, etc).
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:05 am
I’m looking forward to seeing the very cool interior.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:07 am
The 230 mileage for EREV has got to take into consideration that the average driver (78% at LEAST) will plug it in every night while using the Volt less than 40 miles a day.
Granted that the excitement of any new vehicle will have Volt owners going more than that every day at first, so we must be fair to GM and that rating system because of that initial “burst” of extra daily miles which might average downward (even with hypermiling) from the composite EV range.
The “training” function described in the interview really impresses me. It would also validate on a moment by moment basis what the electrical demand (high or low), is doing to the range. As well, the “training” function may also serve as a training tool to inform the driver immediately regarding how much energy was used for “seriously needed” merging onto a highway from a ramp, or, what the cost was to do something somehow very disadvantageous.
It sounds very technically perfected. My confidence level in Volt was always far higher than for anything else out there by far, but now, by a light year.
It takes many many EE’s and other kinds of techs to be able to collaborate like this to make this sort of perfection. America is going to be exceptionally proud of GM as I already am and have been.
Have a successful day everyone!!
(off to work).
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:13 am
I cry eco-foul – you can’t call any GUI eco unless it’s grown organic. Eco status denied.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:33 am
Perhaps it’s OLED
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:33 am
Someone above wrote he only drives 20 miles a day. If you only drive 7,000 miles a year, please wait to buy an electric car and let folks who drive more buy them first.
We need folks that can drive at least 15,000 AER to buy the cars first so that we can cut back on importing OIL. Reducing our imported OIL and keeping American money in our economy creating jobs is job #1!!!
If you can charge at work and your round trip to work is over 40 miles then the volt is for you.
If you can’t charge at work then you should probably buy a 100 mile range BEV.
For the first couple years these cars are available we need to put them in the hands of folks that actually can drive 15,000+ AER.
If you are going to drive less than 15,000 AER please hold off your EREV/BEV purchase and let the folks that drive a lot of miles have them first.
Thanks!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:36 am
Me too. I’m hoping GM has some neat suprises in store with their interior. Ford Fusion Hybrid’s system is very clever and easy to use (from what I read). I’m hoping that they keep the Volt interface very simple. I have a feeling a lot of potential customers may already be overwhelmed with the technology of the car, then to make an interface that only a rocket scientist can understand, (no offense Nasaman–LOL!).
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:41 am
Rashid, Ned, I understand your point, but a lot of drivers are going to be getting a lot better than 230 mpg. I log all my miles for tax purposes, and I calculated what mileage I would have gotten if the Volt 35 miles AER and if it gets 50 mpg in CS mode.
I use my car for both business and private use, so I document every mile I drive every day. I average 12,600 miles a year over the past 14 years, which is pretty close to average for American drivers. Last year, I drove over 35 miles in a single day 44 times, for a total of 1,681 miles that would have been using the ICE. (I figure I will have 35 mile AER since I will be using AC or heat most days.) 12,600 miles total, 1681 on gas, 10,919 using electricity leaves me with a bill for 35 gallons of gasoline per year and around 2200 kWh, which is about $100 and $220 each, respectively, or $26.50 a month. My mileage would have been about 360 miles per gallon. Even if the Volt gets 40 mpg in charge sustaining mode, I will only need 5 additional gallons a year!
As it is, my RAV4 gets around 20 mpg, so I actually bought 640 gallons of gas last year, and it cost me $1664. So the Volt will save me around $1350 a year, as it will for most people that drive an average amount. If I can plug in when I go to lunch my gasoline useage will drop even more, and within a year of the Volt becoming the Green Car there will be businesses bending over backwards to get their Green Credibility. An hours worth of 110 volt won’t fill the battery but it will reduce the amount of gas used further. Plus, I can put a PV array on the roof of my home, or install a wind generator on the roof of my garage. I can’t drill my own oil well.
Until the government has a real set of mileage numbers, I think GM is being accurate in that most people that drive less than 15,000 miles a year will get in excess of 230 mpg.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:52 am
____________________________________________________
…lol…well done.
____________________________________________________
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:54 am
“Hyper-milers probably will try to get the car to go 100 miles without going into generator mode.”
That would be me.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:06 am
I wonder if GM will provide charging for all their employees at all GM offices?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:08 am
On those 44 days when you drove over 35 miles, did you have opportunities to charge during the day so you could stay closer to 100% AER?
Also could you have had your spouse put some more miles on your car to get more miles AER?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Fantastic – I love the level of detail. I too expect with my driving pattern and habits to get well over 230 MPG.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:13 am
My post above should have stated I only drive 20 miles a day 5 days a week. Most weekends I drive anywhere from 300 miles to 800 miles (3 day weekends) which is why I want the volt. I could get a second vehicle for commuting to work that is a straight BEV, butI don’t see the point when it’ll cost as much as the volt and only be usable for me during the week.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:21 am
I was sort of writing tongue in cheek asking people who don’t drive as much to not to buy the cars so they would be available for those that can take better advantage of the cars to maximize AER.
I certainly don’t want to discourage anyone from going electric. I guess you might be someone who can really benefit from the 500 MILE BATTERIES we may see in 5 years if we are lucky.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:21 am
Im glad to here Bob Kruse not deny the capability to go over 40 miles per charge. An earlier thread left the impression that once the Volt reached 40 miles, it wold automatically switch to charge sustaining mode to minimize the depth of discharge on the batteries to further extend their life. I.e Make it more likely that the batteries will exceed their warranty.
I would think alot of people would be frustrated at the maximum 40 mile range if this were true.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:34 am
This sort of driving pattern raises another question I have about the VOLT??
If you drive 100 miles a week AER, then on the weekend drive 800 miles. You are burning gas, but instead of the ICE turning the wheels it is pumping juice into the battery to run the electric engine.
Will this shorten the lifespan of the battery??? I mean in theory this means 5000 miles a year AER and 40,000 miles with gas. So is that like 45,000 miles of wear and tear on the battery, the electric motor and the ICE all at the same time???
I’m afraid this type of driving would be better off with 12.3 mile range of the plug-in Prius until batteries have much better range.
I still feel the Volt is the car for people whose driving pattern is over 40 miles round trip to work and can charge at work (not coincidentally, this includes Lyle).
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:52 am
Hi Tom, yes, I would have had chances to plug in, but only for an hour or so. What would that give me with a 110 plugin, 5 or 6 extra miles? Nothing to sneeze at but even at 220 it won’t give me drive all day increases. That having been said, I have a feeling that cafes will be having plugins installed and advertising that they are ER-EV and BEV friendly pretty soon. Even if they charge a 50% premium it will still be a substantial savings over gas.
My girlfriend doesn’t drive my RAV4 very often, but I have a feeling that she will be asking to drive my Volt a lot more frequently.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:52 am
Lyle,
Excellent article. I am glad GM is working hard at the user interface. It is important for the success of the Volt. It needs to be cool, sophisticated and refined (read: Volt = iPhone on wheels).
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:53 am
What I would like to hear people say when they drive the Volt is, “I’ve tried everything from flat out gunning the car on the highway passing people left and right to flying up hill after hill, and I STILL got MORE than a 40 mile range on this thing!!!”
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:55 am
I am curious about the actual look of the GUI’s. The original design seems to be reflected in the photo attached to this article but the Ivers had a different look to them. Can anyone help me out? Which one will be in the car when I get my test drive??
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am
With our weekly driving habits and plugging in each night we will see very close to that 230mpg number.
OF COURSE it won’t get that in a one day highway run.
It’s time to act like a grown up and look at it realistically, that number is achived by driving to and from work and plugging in for the night. (Which without the plug in is what most people do most days.NOW!)
The Volt just does it on a lot less gas.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:00 am
On the Fusion Hybrid… you can change the display both on the left side of the speedometer and the right…more detail… less detail… it is up to the driver. I dropped the growing leaf display within a couple of hours. I too like details about what the car is doing while you are driving… There is a button to change the ambiant lightiing in the car interior… you have 6 colors to choose from including OFF.
While parked you can do a complete systems check with some nice graphics…. checks all the major systems and lets you know the status. You can also do it while driving but you will only get a text status of each function. I have had the car about 2 months so far… still averaging around 52 MPG Canadian and am loving this car..
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:05 am
The original concept car had a futurama display that somewhat resembled a 1955 Chevy instrument dashboard. Round and not square. It was rather creative and a nice homage to the Chevy heritage.
The multitude of coming electrics seem to take a more artistic flair than GM is banking on with it’s white wonderbread and light jelly approach. That this site has talked a great deal about the design continuously says something of some deep seated doubt.
Off to make a Panini Toscana.
Regards! Higgins & The lads, Zeus & Apollo
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:22 am
The 230 marketing campaign will have been long forgotten by the public by the time the VOLT gets here. It will have been replaced by a new campaign with a new number that will be slightly higher than all of the competitors that are scheduled to come out in 2011.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Tom, the ICE generates electricity to turn the wheels but does not pump any of the juice into the battery. Thus, the lifespan of the battery is not shortened when using the ICE.
Someone please correct me if I’m wrong on this.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Greg Ciesel posted awhile ago on the GM site that over 40miles AER was possible.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:27 am
We can only hope.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:31 am
Great post Lyle – if the mantra of ‘underpromise and overdeliver’ pervades the entire VOLT team, then GM is guaranteed a winner. Despite Bob Kruse’s departure, it seems there is a deep and talented team working to put the finishing touches on VOLT v1…
Go VOLT. Go GM. Bring it on…
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Thanks Ray. I have heard good things from others about this car as well. One question, you said “around 52 MPG Canadian”…did you mean actual miles per gallon or kilometers per litre? if it’s actually 52 miles per gallon, that’s outstanding.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:34 am
Sheltonjr, my understanding is a little different. Instead of switching to CS mode after 40 miles, it will swich when the battery is depleted to preset limits of discharge.
CS mode will kick in +/- 40 miles, depending upon how you drive.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:38 am
The engine tries to match the average demand. In highway driving this will probably have the battery switching between charging or discharging very slowly, which the battery can take a lot of.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:41 am
From what I understand your wrong. Even though ICE will be on, it will be for recharging the battery. That’s why they put a lot of effort into making sure the ICE doesn’t bother passengers. Because it isn’t always directly connected to the peddle.
________________________________________________
God, Country, Family, Everything else is somewhere below.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:42 am
Canada used the Imperial (British) gallon which is larger than a US gallon.
We Canadians tend to convert back to MPG for clearer communication with our US friends.
By the way, the metric ’standard’ measurement is litres per 100 km.
It’s actually much more accurate because of the larger sample.
A lower number is better, much like Golf!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Close.
In steady state running with the battery at depletion you are right on.
However the genset can and will bring the battery back up to the minimum charge point if it were to drop below that point.
This could happen with a hard pass manuver or a steep hill climb.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:02 am
From what I understand, the electric motor will only be about 50% efficient from the genset (53kWh is like 71HP or something) and therefore you need to run extra juice to the battery for when you need the power for acceleration to pass cars, or from a stop, or to climb a hill. That’s another reason why GM had to leave a significant amount of energy in the battery. So while most of the level driving only needs 71HP or less, there will be some power slowly recharging the battery for when the battery is discharged again during heavy load.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Doof, it is true that GM has put a lot of effort into making sure the ICE doesn’t bother passengers so much as it turns on/off. We all applaud GM for doing that. But, doesn’t that fact further suggest what I previously said is correct?
It is my understanding that the lifespan of the Volt battery is affected by many factors, including 1) over charging, 2) over discharging and 3) number of charge/discharge cycles. If what you and Tom said is true, then every time the Volt enters CS Mode, it will cause a charge/discharge cycle and shorten the lifespan of the battery just a little each time.
If things are as I understand them to be, the ICE is engaged to generate sufficient charge to turn the wheels without putting any charge into the battery. Thus, it avoids all the repetitive charge/discharge cycles when the ICE kicks in.
Sure would like to hear from others on this.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:13 am
Heh heh… I chuckled Tom!
Nice try!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:15 am
Careful Schmeltz…
People might start thinking you are TAG-like!
A very positive vision!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:22 am
The console in the picture appears to be an older one. The IVRs had a more built-in center screen.
I hope most of this stuff can be turned off or minimized. It would be very distracting to have the consoles giving a lot of information when I am trying to avoid SUVs on my commute!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:26 am
While I’m as anxious as others to see the final Volt graphic displays, perhaps GM needs to keep us and their competition guessing. Sean Connery said something to the effect in the movie Finding Forester — it doesn’t hurt to hold back a little.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:26 am
Just wishful thinking on my behalf more than anything. It would be truly wonderful if GM over-delivered on the Volt, and it is certainly an awesome opportunity for them to do so.
BTW, where is Tag anyway? You out there man?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:29 am
I hope they change that console. It still looks like a Fisher Price toy to me. The white shiny plastic looks cheap and out of place, especially on a $40k plus car.
I would like to see a “full glass” (as we pilots say) console. A la the Tesla S http://www.automotiveaddicts.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/tesla-model-s-interior-screen.jpg
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:41 am
I agree on that white shiny plastic look. The same goes with that light grey center console.
Most cars coming out of GM these days all have a dashboard and steering wheel in various shades of grey. It is getting a little boring.
I would like to see the dash and steering wheel color coordinated with rest of the interior.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:43 am
“Some of these schedules that some of these companies make when they say they get hundreds of miles of electric range, the schedule that you’re on can help influence that. In the Volt if you do 35 mph flat terrain steady state there’s upside potential over the 40 mile range.”
————————————-
It’s a challenge to puzzle out what this statement means. Is it saying something good or bad? For that matter what exactly is a “schedule “?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:51 am
RB:
“As clear as mud.” as my Dad used to say, LOL.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:53 am
I have no doubt that the interface of the VOLT will be as cool as my iPhone… but for those of us who are looking for a ‘less expensive’ EREV for the family, could someone tell the engineers to stick to a couple of nice guages like a ’state of charge’ or ‘rate of discharge’ meter.
I think I’m smart enough to know that when the ICE kicks in… gee, I must be out of battery charge. Let’s keep the costs down on the EREV Cruze and Orlando. Those are the models I’m looking at now.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:05 am
So if “52 MPG Canadian” is equal to “52 MP larger-than-a-US-Gallon” that would mean less MPG in the US, yes?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:07 am
Haha, +1 Paul!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:10 am
IBM = International Battery Manufacturer?
Time will tell…
http://www.mobilemag.com/2009/10/02/ibm-lithium-air-oxygen-battery-to-take-evs-to-the-next-level/
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:11 am
Please make the next generation Volt interior look more like the Chevy Caprice Interior
http://cache-04.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/12/2009/10/500x_Chevy-Caprice-Interior_TOP.jpg
…um can we have the Shotgun as an add-on feature?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:13 am
Good report, Lyle. I like under promising and over delivering. As long as it is not too under promised as to make it unattractive. Keep up the good work, Lyle.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:13 am
My understanding is that charge-sustaining mode minimizes all battery use (including charging). The Volt team has stated in the past that charge sustaining is designed to drive the motor directly, without intervention of the battery.
However, they’ve also stated that some extra juice from the battery may be used when needed for acceleration etc. Furthermore, they stated that in situations where the ICE energy is not being used, it may be put back into the battery rather than wasted.
In this manner, the battery SOC may hover from, say, 30% to 35%, but most of the energy will not go through the battery, and will instead go directly to the electric motor.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Too much stuff.
Too busy on the display/console.
Too many buttons.
I just wanna drive and drive gas free. Is that too much to ask?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:31 am
It should prove to be an interesting number in any case. Let’s hope for a good, realistic number people can “believe” in. I expect to use extremely little gasoline in an average year with a Volt. I will be satisfied whatever the number turns out to be because of the AEV miles I will be driving.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:33 am
I like your suggestion. I would think a good green color would be good. I would expect the display to be brighter during the day when the headlights are off and lighter when the lights are on at night. That is the way most vehicles are now.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Assuming Ray is refering to an Imperial gallon then yes.
As a kid we were VERY happy to use the imperial gallon… ice cream buckets are bigger that way!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Wee bit serious this morning Jason?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:45 am
I agree. GM seems to be doing an outstanding job, so far. When I drive lately, I have been watching my accelerations and trying to “justify” the reason or reasons for stepping on the gas for a few seconds or so. Sometimes I do a mental shrug of the shoulders and just say to myself that it was worth the extra gas usage just to surge ahead of the traffic for a while. I am trying to be much more observant of my driving style since I am trying to increase my miles per gallon number for each tank of gasoline. It helps to have a MPG indicator for trip A and trip B counters. I reset trip A with each tank fill-up, but leave trip B alone. That gives me two MPG numbers to work with. A current MPG for the current tank and an overall MPG for all miles driven since I purchased the car. I am constantly trying to increase the overall number with each tank of fuel. But it is very hard. Most of my driving is strictly commuting to work and home. Very little highway miles to date. Although I am taking it on the road this coming week for a round trip of about 1400 miles.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:46 am
RB:
Thanks for saying that. When I read that, I was like, “Huh?”. Reading it 3 more times didn’t help clear it up either. Oh well.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Just like real estate, in EV’s its range, range, range. I applaud IBM (rather a pleasant surprise) for its announced commitment to longer range Li-ion power. In my little group in Alameda (Cal.), not one driver wants to plug in every night. No doubt, a poll would show plugging in say once a week would be much more acceptable. It isn’t so much being conservative or being understated as opposed to being overstated – its that the VOLT is indeed leading edge – both in engineering concept and marketing. And being so, the average driver really doesn’t know how to gauge GM’s promises. Will it do 35 EV miles? Will it do 300 ER miles? I read this column regularly and still don’t have a clue. GM: What you need to do is start the marketing all over again. Start with a concept ER VOLT (at any cost) with 500-700 range. You can do that with present tools. Now the PR’s have something to crow about. BTW: the dual LCD display (above pix) is fairly impressive. I prefer analog on the main instrument panel – less distracting.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:52 am
Tom,
You are taking it upon yourself to try to dictate what kind of car a person should be driving and asking low mileage people especially not to purchase a Volt. You are asking too, too much. While I understand your reasoning, it is not “right” to try to dictate or suggest to someone what kind of vehicle they should purchase. I drive about 20 miles per day round trip to and from work. I fall into the category of people you say should hold off purchasing a Volt. But let me tell you that me not purchasing gasoline is just as important as someone driving 60 miles per day. I just do not agree with your thinking here. Good try, though.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Sheltonjr,
I agree. If GM forces the ICE on after 40 miles AEV, it would be a total disaster for them. People should be given the opportunity to make as much miles per charge as they can accomplish. Nothing short of this goal would be acceptable by most drivers. GM, you better listen up to this one thing for your own good.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Something like the new Buick Lacrosse’s interior would be very acceptable to me.
http://www.gm.ca/gm/english/vehicles/buick/lacrosse/gallery-photos-interior01
GM CAN do interiors right. (without the fisheye lens though)
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Ditto in spades.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
I doubt you will “find” out any time soon. Maybe in about 6 months when the 500 or so production intent models hit the streets for testing. But good luck.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
I agree, but the Volt is certainly not a Tesla model S. I don’t like the CHEAP shiny plastic console either. GM can do much better.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Amen!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Amen.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
If we are going to ask for crazy things I want a Volt that can travel underwater. ..not too deep, 100ft at most.. I think that would be a very desirable car.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
You gotta justify that $40k price tag.. this car is not aimed at econobox buyers.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Sorry, I was trying to talk tongue in cheek. I think everyone should buy whatever the heck they want.
My only point on this website is always to remind people that job#1 is to stop importing oil.
So I was joking people that dont drive as much should let the people who drive more get the first cars.
Initially only people that drive over 15,000 miles yearly AER will save money, and on the Volt that requires a charge during the day.
Eventually everyone will save money with electric cars when they have 200 mile range etc., and it is my hope that this revolution will save our economy.
The 80’s 90’s were driven by communication and information technology revolution.
Electric Mobility and alternatively energy is probably our only hope to save our economy and standard of living. That is why this is important to me.
In the current global economy we have lost and will continue to lose so many jobs to other countries, that it is imperative we develop new domestic industries. Time is ticking before our economy collapses. We have a government that is spending like crazy but still loses jobs. If it doesn’t turn around quick, my kids won’t have a very bright future.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
I doubt the average driver will have to plug in everyday, especially in smaller towns where a longer drive would be 5 or 6 miles. But to start marketing again with a larger ER range would delay the Volts arrival.
It would be costly an not worth the effort. anf could effect the price. It’s important for the Volt to get to market as soon as possible unless you want to see the market for EV’s ceded to foreign car makers.
What is needed now is some experience with the Volt in the hands of the public to see if it truly flies.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Green is a very bad color for many of us who are color blind. Blue is the best choice. Reds and greens are a big problem for many men.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Good break down on cost. I figured similar savings with my wife driving 36 miles R/T to work and she can plug in while she works. (I drive 7 miles R/T so not a big deal for me.) The problem is that even if you save $1350 a year it will take you about 10 years to recoup your cost on the $13,000 premium that you will pay for a Volt over a similar sized car (say a Cruze) and that is using conservative numbers. Then after 10 years you are going to have to drop another $6k in for a new battery.
Don’t get me wrong …. I love the Volt and the idea of driving electric but GM is going to have to get the cost down to within $5k of a similar sized car for this to take off on a 150,000+ sales volume per year.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Sometimes “out of the box” marketing, just…doesn’t…work…
http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/943220/US-lawsuit-alleges-Toyota-campaign-terrified-consumer/
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
To clarify, I suggested a ‘concept’ vehicle only to spur VOLT awareness. I didn’t suggest it be put into production or engage in a bigger VOLT. As I noted, the VOLT is leading edge to both engineering concept and marketing. Thus, my point being GM can do a better marketing job. As to the sales schedule, it is what it is. Note that in the past few weeks particularly the Frankfort Auto Show every major has variants of a VOLT competitor. My suggestions relate wholly to meeting competition on-going and equally important ensuring when the VOLT is finally sold, its still relevant. For that poster wanting the VOLT to dive 30 meters, are you talking fresh water or salt water?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
I had not thought of color blind people even though I am a little bit myself. Not so much that distinct colors cause me any difficulty, but enough that shades of colors are hard for me to see properly. I don’t have any problems with deep shades of green.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Is it saying something good or bad?
I took it as saying if you want to base the EV range on a driving cycle used by drivers in LA fifty years ago you can put up some big numbers. For example, the iMiev on the Japanese cycle or the Leaf on the US04 cycle will have a much greater range than if you measured the range of those cars using the current EPA schedule, not to mention something like US06.
Or, as he says, if you drive 50 MPH on a downhill with a stiff tailwind you might get really big numbers.
Nice way of saying that some of the range numbers being thrown out there aren’t realistic.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
lol…
Yeah, the more LBL’s the more expensive it looks.
(L)itle
(B)linking
(L)ights
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
I agree job # 1 is to stop importing oil. The sooner we do that the better for all of us.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
actually 2,000 feet down is probably more desireable so we can help search for deep sea Oil
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Agreed!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Until the government has a real set of mileage numbers, I think GM is being accurate in that most people that drive less than 15,000 miles a year will get in excess of 230 mpg.
I think the government has real numbers, and their numbers are consistent with yours. But it is absolutely wonderful that you can give such specific numbers — it makes things much more personal. Nice.
The real issue is that people don’t understand how much energy it takes to drive on different cycles. My guess is that most people still don’t know that driving uphill at 80 MPH in howling winds in subzero temperatures will substantially reduce their MPG. In fact I doubt that most people understand that they’ll use a lot more gas going 80 MPH than 55 MPH. Now we’re asking them to understand “EV Mode” and “Charge Sustaining Mode”. Yikes!
Since people are under the mis-impression that they’ll get stated Highway MPG when they’re on the freeway going 80 MPG, it’s unsurprising that they are completely befuddled by the 230 MPG number, leading them to ask questions like “So I can drive 500 miles on just over two gallons of gas?”.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I believe you are correct. I thought the latest version looked like this:
http://motorcitytimes.com/mct/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/chevy-volt-interior-revised.jpg
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Ed M;
For folks with a garage, plugging it in at night is like plugging in your self phone, it isn’t a big deal. For folks that don’t have a garage plugging in daily or weekly, either way it’s a problem.
I agree 100% regarding time to market. If GM doesn’t do more than PR and commit to large runs and lower prices they will fall behind the Leaf and plug in prius and all the other models coming to market. GM needs to announce their GEN 2 in 2012/2013 with a minimum of 200,000 units just to keep pace with Nissan.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
I have no doubt that the interface of the VOLT will be as cool as my iPhone
That makes one of us. I just don’t think car makers are there. But it’s important that they spend time trying — as time goes on the electronic gadgets are becoming much more important, especially to younger drivers.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
What Chevy Caprice is that? New concept? I used to own a 1981 Chevrolet Caprice. It was a great highway car. Man, that thing rode great on the highway. Mechanically, it was great. But the interior lining started coming down after about 10 years and the paint job was pretty well shot also. I must admit I did not take as good of care of the exterior paint as I should have. But it was a great car to drive.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Actually I think it would be a coup for GM if this in fact was their strategy. If Gen-1 is limited runs for 2010-2011, and they are ready with Gen-2 for 2012-2013 with large volumes, they could have a huge PR advantage. GM could say they are a whole generation ahead of the competition.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Simpler the better for most of us. I don’t mind multiple displays, but I hope we can select a basic display that gives the necessary information and leaves all the details hidden. Again, just make it simple. Beautiful and simple.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
The white on charcoal “enhances” the busy look. Personally I’d go for a more monotone look. But, like you say, the look of the display is not critical at this juncture.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
You want LBLs?.. looky here:
http://www.monkeylectric.com/m132s_gallery.htm
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
A little off topic:
Another All-Electric Lambo wanna-be was recently announced:
http://dvice.com/archives/2009/10/eco-macho-germa.php
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Here’s what I think the console should be able to do. It does have onstar right?
http://207.231.94.134/GMVolt/ChevyVolt_files/CenterConsole.jpg
What? Whaaaat? I’m Trailer Park…..
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Dude, that looks like “Speed Racers” Mach5, sorta kindof…
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
NICE!!!
Thanks for the link. I think i’ll buy my sone one of those for xmas.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
He’s saying if your trips are in the city, slow and steady, like NEV speeds, then your mileage will not only be better as we have been shown before ( http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/ see chart #4 range v speed) , but perhaps your AER will be noticeably higher… which would be great news.
He seems to term it “upside potential” instead of “better AER” so that it cannot be interpreted as a commitment to more than 40 miles of AER.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
That is a really tough task. To find something that looks good to most with out making many disgusted is a difficult task with millions of different potential buyers. One commenter today said he hopes the interface will be really neat. Earlier one commenter said he hopes the Volt final set up will be sick. Each is expressing the same hope, but I imagine they have very different tastes that GM will somehow have to reconcile enough to move cars out of showrooms.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
WOW!
I wonder how much that will cost.
How are they getting the 30 minute fully re-charge time?
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
EC, I am with you on the fact that at a strict dollars and cents analysis, the first years production of the Volt won’t make sense. As the price of the Volt comes down and the cost of gas goes up it will come closer. But the tax credit will phase out in 4 or 5 years so the cost improvements will have to be sizeable and fairly quick to appear. I think that your comparison to the Cruze is a good one, since Chevy was forced to use the less impressive production Volt rather than the very cool prototype Volt, the cachet is not quite as strong as it would have been.
One thing you left out is resale, I think an electric car will have much better resale than an equivalent ICE vehicle, but until we can get ER-EV’s for under $28,000 approximately, Chevy will only be able to sell 40 or 50,000 a year. We need to have every car company building ER-EV’s within a few years, then we can depend on electricity produced by domestically sourced production, be it solar, hydro, wind, nuclear, heck even coal generated electricity is cleaner than burning gasoline and we wouldn’t be sending $700,000,000,000 overseas every year for our energy needs.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Wow, you insist on driving like a cocky teenage boy forever, even when you know that it costs you dearly in efficiency (and thus fuel $$)? Instead of increasing your mpg by driving reasonably, you increase it by buying an expensive ecocar. A very funny combination of irrational macho “don’t give a damn” attitude with an environmentalist fetish. Try to make them fit as best you can! That’s your precious lifestyle choice!!!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Neal:
That’s a picture of the dash of the new 2011 Chevrolet Caprice Police Car, (I think). If I’m correct, the Caprice will only be offered as a Police car, and not to the general public. Autoblog has a story on it if you are interested.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
A cocky teenage boy? I drive 75-80 on the highway (kills my mileage compared to my wifes), and have a %90 highway commute. I’ll admit I drive fast on the highway but I try to coast to red lights and never worry about racing anyone. If you want to try and eek out 60mpg by feathering the gas pedal and holding up everyone behind you because it makes you feel good that’s your life choice but it pisses the rest of us off that have to slow down when you try and merge on the highway at 45 and then need to rapidly accelerate so we can get in the left lane without getting run down by a truck so we can pass you.
Yes, I want technology to get me off oil and I’m willing to pay for it as opposed to driving like I’m on a moped. I don’t need to drive fast to feel macho. I drive fast because I want to get where I’m going quickly. When I get there I can shoot my guns, shotgun some beer, or fart real loud to make me feel macho
. If you want to get run over on the highway because you drive like a pussy that’s your precious lifestyle choice!!!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
I thought you were comparing apples to apples, i.e. you and your wife driving the same path, while you get mid 30s and she gets 52. Now that would suggest over-aggressive driving. But if you’re saying you commute on fast freeways and she goes to the grocery store, that’s different.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
It depends on what the EPA sticker says on actual production Volts. People will not forget 230 if it still says 230 on the sticker.
People also know that EPA stickers are not a good indicator of their actual mileage. Heck, most people don’t even know how to calculate gas mileage. It just takes too long to use three to five tanks of gas and write it down. Any friends that are that anal; I put extra gas in their tank to mess with them.
Anything over 50 (or whatever 2011 Prius is) combined city/hwy and the Volt will not lose sales because of mundane things like gas mileage. GM just needs the bragging rights by having the EPA sticker post a higher mileage than any other full range car on the planet.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Make it look like an IBM 5150 terminal (circa 1980). 80 columns and 25 rows of block characters. Green-on-green. Can they make it shake like 60Hz as well? And make the vertical hold go out when going over railroad tracks.
The mind boggles.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
You hit the nail on the head ziv.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
A little point to think about, the monitor which will probably be LCD based must have a very strong contrast Ratio, and use leds for the backlights. Driving by night with two “distinguishable” monitors can be very tiring.
Test it on your own, simply keep your lcd monitor with a blank dark screen in a totally dark room.
Cheers
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
I’d click, but I have a feeling it might be NSFW.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
I should move to Canada. Child or not, I sure love my ice cream!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
230 MPG average is real world for people with common driving patterns. In fact, I believe GM and the EPA are being a bit conservative with this number. My calculations show over 300 MPG average with a typical driving pattern. This is what Lyle is getting at by saying underpromise and overdeliver.
And it will all become pretty obvious when you only have to go to the gas station once every 3 months.
But hey, if your daily commute is 101 miles round trip, and you can’t find a way to plug-in at work, then your particular average MPG will be much less than most other people.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
it’s safe. No skinz.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Give me the core requirement first…reliable transportation…everything else is just window dressing. Years from now…I want to hear owners say the Volt warranty was just piece of mind.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Yes,
Where is TAG??!!
His unconditional TLC needs to come back here right away!!
TAG, come back!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
That’s exactly what we need in California, more 5150’s.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Lies, damned lies and statistics…
Although the 230 mpg is perfectly accurate statistic it is an out-and-out lie. The 230 number is a rate of expected consumption number while the EPA has always given us an efficiency number. The fact that both numbers have the same units-of-measure doesn’t mean they are they are measuring the same thing.
In the beginning the EPA was attempting to measure the efficiency of the engine alone; if a manufacture used the same engine in three different cars they only needed to do one test and all three would bare the same MPG number. Later this was shifted to testing the efficiency the entire vehicle. Common sense says that pluggable hybrids require two numbers; one to indicate efficiency when the battery is supplying most of the power and a separate one to indicate efficiency when the engine is supplying it.
Common sense also dictates the EPA will have some “expected usage” study to tell them how to blend the two numbers into one overall-efficiency number for the entire vehicle. What GM is doing is using this same “expected usage” study to answer a different question: how long will it take to consume one gallon of gas? It is closely related to the “How often will I need to go to the gas station” question. This is a rate of consumption number. It is a perfectly valid number and one any potential Volt buyer will want an answer to…
But it is not an efficiency number! It is not a type of number the EPA has ever given before. It is not a type of number the EPA is ever likely to give us for the Volt or any PHEV. It is not an efficiency number because it ignores the electricity consumed. So it can not be the efficiency of the whole car and it is not the efficiency of the engine alone.
This is why the 230 number is such an insidious lie even though it is a useful number. We hear EPA and MPG and assume it is an efficiency number and it is even bigger than the numbers the EPA gives on pure BEVs. So WOW the Volt must be really efficient!
(except it isn’t an efficiency number)
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Agreed! It does look nice.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Yes it’s a difficult task. Mini has done a nice job with the UI. Their reward is to get dinged on initial quality from JD Powers because, as a superior but different interface, people take a bit to understand the setup and the learning process is categorized as a defect. Go figure.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Ummm
230 MPG
AND AND AND AND
25 kWh/100 miles
Its in the GM press release. Its part of the suggested methodology. Its mostly mainstream media that has ingored it.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
I have NO patience for the hypermilers out there clogging our freeways. If you cross my path beware as I will not go easy on you brother. I will impose my laws on you severely for impeding traffic. Have a nice day and stay out of my way (you know who you are)
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
It;s open season on the HyperMiler in Tennessee. Lock and load.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Show me a hypermiler and i will show you a dangerous driver. Someone much worse than your average driver that is texting or jawing on the cell.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Too much today. Maybe tomorrow like 30 years from now. Keep waiting.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
$250 billion per year at current pricing. At $4 per gallon, 1/2 trillion. Yes it’s time to get off the middle east oil teet!
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
Yeah, there is a huge incentive to add infrastructure and free charging at every place imaginable when talking of a potential audience of tens of thousands of cars in the country in the next 5 years.
I constantly see these mathematically whimsical arguments on this site about how much money you’ll save with a volt, that assume there is no initial premium in price, electricity is free, you never go more than 20 miles away from your plug, it somehow gets 50mpg when running on gas (amazing), it doesn’t need any more maintenance than a gas powered car (despite having both a gas and electric motor + battery) and you never need to replace the battery. This volt really sounds like a hell of a car, I don’t think anyone here will be disappointed with their purchase, but other people who maybe aren’t as wealthy, ignorant or blindly optimistic may have doubts. I’m going to call these doubting Dorothys “the market”. “The market” will have to stop and weigh the merits of saving $1,300/year (using your numbers, which are very fare) against the additional outlay of a payment on a civic + $500/month and try to figure out if it makes sense. The key here is, would you spend more than $500/month on gas for your civic, and if so then you need to figure out how many of those miles you could drive if your car had a 40 mile electric range. You can assume electricity is free, and that your car will plug itself in anytime it isn’t moving, even when you are just at a stoplight momentarily and that the battery lasts forever, also because it has much greater complexity than a regular gas (car 1.0) drivetrain, it’s bulletproof and never requires maintenance. Using these assumptions I think there is a a real market for the volt, it’s going to be a close call though.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Driving ‘fast’ as in faster than the posted limit where I live gets you a ticket, usually in excess of $140 almost every time no matter if it is in town or on the highway. My state has $2 billion in budget shortfall, and that is after we put government employees on furlough and did some other accounting magic, because not long ago it was $5 billion. If you want to steal cars and sell crack, you can, but if you go even 5 over or enter a crosswalk with a pedestrian (undercover) even eyeballing that crosswalk, you’re getting a ticket. I suspect that this will become the norm across the country if it isn’t already, so you may want to consider ‘fast’ as the posted limit.
At least you said ‘I’m willing to pay’ for the technology, rather than making some lame argument that the volt pays for itself.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
I don’t understand the negative response here, other than the Volt fanboys are upset that you insinuated the Volt rating is not comparable to other vehicle ratings. Blasphemer.
TTCURMTVIAVA
FTGOTMK
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Gsned57, have you considered getting a Tesla Roadster?.. I understand they are quite fast and get long range to boot.. and they use ZERO oil.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Even at $32,500 after tax credits, the cost of owning a Volt isn’t that much higher than other cars. Remember that most cars last around 10 years. You may not own it that long, but someone else will buy it used after you trade in. And if the Volt continues to save people $1350 a year in fuel costs, that’s definitely worth more for the trade-in. Plus the fact that you only go to the gas station every 3 months – a huge convenience factor. A used Volt won’t be cheap, so resale value should be good.
So figure the cost of fuel savings over 10 years. That’s $13,500. Take that off the price of the Volt ($32,500 after tax credits), and the Volt would be cost comparable with a $19,000 compact sedan.
Obviously, this is a rough calculation. The real break even may be $20K or 21K when you do a detailed comparison with the trade-in, but you can start to see that the Volt’s price isn’t that bad over the long haul.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
Plugging into a California wall outlet at a top tier of 31.5 cents per kilowatt hour is something I wouldn’t want to do daily either. Power companies must provide reasonable priced power for EVs, or the gasoline industry will have a powerful ad campaign on the high price to recharge.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Those people probably won’t be buying the first round Volts.
When those people happens to randomly buy a Prius, they report that the MPG display teaches them to drive very differently.
(Quote)
October 5th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
It’s been fascinating to read the comments (in addition to the post) and the topic is pretty raw for me (though I need to get up to speed). I’d like a serious opinion or two as to how far we are (as a society) when our ‘typical’ electric car can have a range of 300 miles and be readily available? 4 years? 6 years? Am I too optimistic?
Thanks
Tim
(Quote)
October 6th, 2009 at 5:31 am
Now, that is a beautiful car.
(Quote)
October 6th, 2009 at 6:40 am
I’m willing to pay to be an early adopter but I couldn’t afford a tesla. It’s range would work for me most of the time though (200 miles?).
(Quote)
October 6th, 2009 at 8:17 am
Not sure what the 5150 was but I did have a IBM 5280 at the office in the 80s The cost on that system was over 30K and it did very little.
(Quote)
October 6th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Power rates in California are a giant mess. The biggest power users are farms to move water- these rates are extremely low – less than 3-4 cents per kW.
Industrial pays not a lot more. Alameda residential Tier 3 is 18.3 cents per. Many other cities like Mark’s (above poster) really get slammed in Tier 3. If the infrastructure rates were equal to the lowest farm rates – now EV’s and ER VOLT look like a really good deal. You immediately see utilities run roughshod over PUC commissions. Residential takes it right in the pants – in the green-fiction of multi-tiered rating. The problem is power being deregulated. No way in L does PG&E (or Southern Edison) have competition.
(Quote)
October 6th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
The VOLT 230 mpge is real World. Except that it is probably too low and most average drivers will exceed it easily and many will double it.
(Quote)
October 6th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Dave G is correct. However there is also another benefit. ICE’s are more prone to have problems. Because of the fact that they have so many moving parts. A lot of people aren’t stating this fact as much as they could. The reliablilty factor of the electric motor vs the ICE. Not everyone in america buys cars this way, but when the things start getting old and they still function really well, then people will be really thankfull for the volt.
(Quote)
October 6th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
I don’t want to see some stupid leaf animation.
I want to see a crying oil sheik. The more efficient you are, the more he cries.
(Quote)
October 7th, 2009 at 5:14 am
The enviro crazies in California are the ones responsible for the high priced electricity. They only want electric power plants that produce no electricity to be built. Now think what the consequences will be for California and the adoption electric cars when or If the Clueless One gets his Cap & Tax which quadruples the price of California electricity from $.31 per KWh to $1.25 per KWh.
Meanwhile Clueless One will boast about how he will encourage everyone to buy electric cars?
Unfortunately for the country, The Clueless One is incompetent, and his counselors Holdren & Chu are brain dead believers who have written of their plans and love for the Noble Savage; and want to deindustrialize and depopulate the country and bring him back. I never really thought that fellows who write and publish of the need to kill off 280 or 300 million Americans, would ever be appointed to the post of street cleaner, never-mind DOE Secretary and Environmental Czar respectively.
Clueless Junior in California is another poor example of Chief Executive. He buys into the most stupid of the insatiable environmental demands, and seems happy to be actively driving industry out of California. Proving you can find losers in either political Party.
(Quote)
October 13th, 2009 at 7:47 am
I wonder if someone from Apple helped in the UI design. Looks very Apple-esq. Not sure how that will work when driving. I know that I personally prefer to have large obvious buttons and segregation between components.
I have a Mazda6 now, and the heater controls and radio controls are combined into one flowing panel, but that requires a bit more attention from me while driving to change any settings. Not something good in a world where we are continually getting more distracted from driving.
(Quote)