General Motors provided an online media update as to current progress on the Chevrolet Volt and battery development program, moderated by vehicle chief engineer Andrew Farah and Voltec battery system manager Bill Wallace. I and several actual journalists attended. We were given the current state of development and the roadmap of the next 12 months leading up to the retail launch.
Overview
To date GM has built 80 pre-production IVers and 300 packs. Those vehicles are in testing 24 hours/7 days per week. Production and process validation builds will be made at Hamtramck from March through August 2010. From August 2010 through November 2010 manufacturing validation builds will be made.
The current prototypes have been tested cumulatively over 1/4 million miles. So far they’ve gone through hot weather trials, mountain trials and 65% long distance calibration buy-off rides. In December they will undergo a 300,000 mile three-lifetime simulator test. “We’re very happy where we are right now,” says Farah.
Battery Update
In December 2008, GM built its first battery pack based on their own in-house design and so far over 250 of these 4th and final generation packs have been made. No further refinements will occur, others at GM are working on lighter next generation packs.
GM will bring it own battery pack assembly plant online in January and it is currently being built-out. The first pack to be made there will happen in February 2010, and the first saleable packs will be made in August 2010. The battery lab is working to develop and refine the processes by which mass production of large numbers of packs is flawless.
Over 50,000 cells have been tested on over 300,000 simulated miles in the lab and to date not a singe cell failure has occurred.
Stress Testing
Cells are exposed to crush, penetration, thermal stress and overcharging. Modules and packs have been exposed to crush, pressure, shirt circuit,corrosion, thermal stress, and seal integrity. All is well.
Vehicle Stress Testing
Cars have been exposed to the twist ditch, water exposure, potholes, and vibration. Crash test have shown battery remains safe at 30 MPH head on, as seen in the picture below.
Learnings
Farah admits NVH (noise vibration and harshness) has been “particularly tricky” especially in charge sustaining mode as the car was tweaked to be extremely quiet in electric mode. Through changes such as increased insulation, specially designed instead of off-the-shelf bushings and new side airflow vents a pleasing experience has been obtained.
Battery chemistry had to be tweaked slightly to achieve longest lifetime, which will be effectively 10 years, though it was noted in temperate climates much longer lifetimes are possible. Extreme cold and even more so extreme heat degrade the battery life expectancy.
“10 years is the target life, but depending on where you live, you could see significantly more than that,” said Farah. “In more benign conditions — if you do more city driving — and if you are in a more temperate area, the battery would last significantly longer.”
“But even if you live in Phoenix, as long as you charge at night, and you run during the day, your battery will remain happy,” said Wallace.
It has been found that the battery packs are well protected by the car’s structure and cells handle all abuse situations remarkably well.
Though I asked Farah, he still would not release the size of the gas tank claiming we won’t know until just before launch because its still being tweaked. The gas engine will likely be programmed to circulate once per month even if the driver never uses it.
Farah also wouldn’t disclose the Chevy Volt’s curb weight though states its was “heavier than I would like.” Efforts are being made to reduce weight of both the car and 400 pound battery pack.
GM has signed off on the final design freeze of the charging equipment, both 120V, 220V and the in-vehicle on-board charger.
Though not confirming dates, Farah implied he is looking forward to beginning work on the higher performance Cadillac Converj, which has unofficially been greenlighted for production.
Below is a video of the Chevy Volt battery pack undergoing serious crush testing:
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:00 am)Sweet Post #1
Looks Sweet
GO GM KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK I WILL GET ONE AS SOON AS THEY ARE AVAILIABLE TO PEOPLE IN MICHIGAN WHICH WILL HOPEFULLY BE QUICK!
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:03 am)Awesome! Keep up the good work GM! Now how about a small SUV? Ya know, people love those……….
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:05 am)A great list of information to digest. Thanks Lyle. The Volt is on it’s way.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:05 am)Lyle, as always, thanks for the update and I’m hoping the DC/No Virginia area is included in the announcement next month at the LA Auto Show as being in the first market.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:06 am)good news on the battery.. the heart of the Volt
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:13 am)Much good information. Thanks, Lyle.
Just a couple questions that perhaps others can answer.
The gas engine will likely be programmed to circulate once per month even if the driver never uses it. What does that mean? What problem are they trying to address?
Though I asked Farah, he still would not release the size of the gas tank claiming we won’t know until just before launch because its still being tweaked. What are the factors that would ultimately determine size of the gas tank?
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:14 am)Interesting news – Good work Lyle!!!
It will be even more interesting when we get the Volts into the hands of everyday drivers, and read their reports……
NPNS
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:21 am)You can clearly see the fuel tank in that under car shot, and it’s TINY! the engine bay looks pretty crammed, though. Also looks like no space for a full size wheel, so either a space saver or a repair kit, which is a shame.
+9
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:29 am)This extensive testing is how GM has always done things. Down through the 4 decades of working and teaching the designs of GM and others, all the other makes attempt to do the same quality testing, but GM does it all more thoroughly.
Design changes at GM at the beginning of each decade always reflect this careful engineering for safety and longevity.
This is another reason specifications for replacement parts is best matched with the original part numbers, so that subsequent problems resulting from inferior situations and procedures do not cause the owner devastating damages shortly after a non-GM quality part (or a very high grade professional quality part) or service procedure is used on someone’s vehicle.
I see financial devastation daily at least twice from discount parts and improper procedures. I visit 7 or 8 independent shops daily and always have the inside information regarding all these terrible “discount” auto parts. Someone somewhere wanted to “save money”. Then, something blows up. A computer program, a transmission, head gaskets, and on an on.
All the different colors in the image above of all the different parts identify for us that every single part, bolt, nut, washer, etc, is tested thoroughly at GM.
********************************************
* EARNED TRUST AND RESPECT *
********************************************
+8
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:31 am)Gasoline engines need to be run occassionally for a variety of reasons. If not, they should be setup for long term storage. Cycling the engine once per month will keep the engine fresh and ready to run when needed.
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:41 am)Ditto on the above praise for a VERY informative post. Lots of good details. BUT….
I cannot understand the reticence to discuss gas tank size, and I wonder why and how the size of the tank is being “tweaked” when they’re this far along in development.
I don’t know enough about the car-building busiensses to flat-out declare that the tank size must be finalized by now, but it sure is curious.
What gives?
-17
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:46 am)(click to show comment)
+7
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:48 am)Starting the engine once a month is important to circulate motor oil into the bearings, cylinder walls, cam area, etc.
All designs for everything are a dimensional “give and take”. This “give and take” of component dimensions is done within the programs in all the various design departments, and, ultimately, compared and resolved as all the minor dimensions add up and subtract out.
This is important also for something called serviceability.
You see, the tech in the service bay has to have adequate working room to get into the various places with tools for when your Volt is 16 years old.
I joke frequently when attempting to work in very tight working areas on Honda’s, because my big American hands get all scratched up. Apparently, the spaces allowed for access to the commonly-needed service parts and areas are “made for little Japanese hands, not big American hands” as my hands get cut and shredded on occasion. (LOL).
The size of the gas tank is one of those really important things that are one of the very last things to finalize. The amount of gas you’ll ever use will be so tiny and fractional of what you use today, you could never in practice become concerned if the tank went all the way down to only a 5 gallon capacity.
Needing to buy only something like 5 or 7 gallons a month would be a good thing, would it not?
+4
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:02 am)GM has stated, “More than 300 miles on battery and fuel”. Taking the worst case: 30 miles battery and 35MPG thereafter.
310-30=280 miles after battery
280/35=8.0 gallons
GM has never stated, “Up to 400 miles”. This places the tank capacity at between 8 and 10 gallons.
=D~
+9
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:07 am)“10 years is the target life, but depending on where you live, you could see significantly more than that,” said Farah. “In more benign conditions — if you do more city driving — and if you are in a more temperate area, the battery would last significantly longer.”
It’s good to hear them say 10 years worst case. And to them, how exactly is dead defined? Having 30 miles AER instead of 40? I’d keep mine until it was below 20 AER. At least we know that the cost of a 40 mile battery in 10 years will be a fraction the cost of dollars in fuel saved over that time. Even if you never bought a new battery, your Volt would still run, it would just slowly morph into a prius (after about 15 years of living in Phoenix)
Hoorah, long live the volt.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:07 am)Lyle, as always, very good! I actually like best the first slide that shows the schedule. It will be really exciting when the next build starts, even if it is nowhere near mass production volumes.
+7
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:14 am)Probably marketing reasons, GM wants to retain some new info to release at the right time for publicity.. probably at the same time they will release the 60mpg in CS mode number.. you gotta generate publicity.
+4
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:14 am)I think the size of the tank will depend on the MPG of the engine and they will make it big enough to calm any fears about range anxiety.
My 05 Insight gets well over 500miles on a 10.6 gallon tank but that seems like overkill.
I wonder what the greatest distance between gas stations in this country is. I would think it couldn’t be much more then 100 or 200 miles even in sparsely populated areas.
+5
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:18 am)According to unreliable sources, the Volt has a 8 gallon gas tank and weighs in at a hefty 3200 lbs.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:24 am)Which one is the tank?.. the light blue rectangle with the red straps just behind the battery?.. that looks like it would hold about 10-15 gallons, if it is as tall as the battery case.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:24 am)Looking good for me then.
Country wide 230v power supply = check.
Auckland has a temperate climate = check.
No, no, no. GM could lube the bearings each day by using the first 10 ~ 15 seconds when the car is plugged in to spin the ICE. This would keep the ICE in perfect condition and use NO fuel at all.
Only the electric fuel pump needs fuel to work. Once a month if they must.
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:31 am)Great post Lyle…THANKS!
/waiting on the edge of my seat for your report on the CS mode test drive.
+7
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:33 am)______________________________________________________
Lyle said “…Myself and several actual journalists attended…”
——
Thanks Lyle for that excellent Volt update. You are the Man and an “actual journalist” like it or not…lol
Good job Volt Team on staying on schedule…it goes a long way in helping build public confidence that GM is serious about taking (and keeping) a leadership position in the electrification of the automobile.
______________________________________________________
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:35 am)I see in the current innovative design of the Volt the most ancient part is range extender. You have to use oil, maintain, run once per month. I expect range extender design being modified drastically and adopt new functions assigned to this unit by EREV approach itself.
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:38 am)Wow Lyle…You gave us all A LOT of infomation to digest here. Thanks to you and to GM for being willing to share all of this with us.
Very glad to hear tht the IV’ers and test packs are all working well through the testing. One question, was any mention made to the car’s ability to offer 40 miles of AER? I just think it extremely important that the 40 mile range is being achieved under all driving conditions. To do better than the stated 40 mile range would be even more wonderful.
Again, great article Lyle.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:40 am)Wow, this is great stuff. Now GM, will I be able to buy one here in Michigan before mid-2011?
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:43 am)These kinds of tests really drive home the fact that this is a mass production car from a major car maker.
I seriously doubt Fisker, Aptera, or Telsa have done as much stress testing. The same goes for the current Prius plug-in conversion kits.
In addition, the fact that the Volt comes from a major car maker means that it will be available near you, and you can have it serviced near you. This may not happen in 2010, but it will happen by summer 2011.
What we need is some competition for the Volt. Specifically, a vehicle that:
• runs on electricity and gasoline
• has at least 30 miles of all-electric range
• is built by a major car maker (and we can see what that means here)
• has an announced production date
Competition will help everyone, including GM. What we need now is more suppliers building parts for electric drive vehicles. This is what GM’s CEO is trying to say here:
http://gm-volt.com/2009/10/29/gm-ceo-says-help-needed-to-achieve-mass-adoption-of-electric-cars/
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:47 am)Nzdavid replied:
Dan Petit: Starting the engine once a month is important
to circulate motor oil into the bearings, cylinder walls, cam area, etc.
No, no, no. GM could lube the bearings each day by using the first 10 ~ 15 seconds when the car is plugged in to spin the ICE. This would keep the ICE in perfect condition and use NO fuel at all.
Only the electric fuel pump needs fuel to work. Once a month if they must.
————————
I thought this was a solution to the problem of stale gasoline. Using a little bit each month, after 8-10 months the operator would buy more gasolilne.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:54 am)Great Post Lyle
Except with every milestone reached it gets harder to wait for my turn to pick mine up
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:55 am)I totally agree with all of the above. Lyle is a journalist who works pro bono (a lot of professions’ definitions include being paid to do it).
I’m wondering about the battery production line taking so many months to test the production process. That seems like an awful lot of months to get the line down pat and working perfectly. I guess perfect takes time….
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+7
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:58 am)My 2 cents.. the gas tank size is pretty much finalized. They may be tweaking the shape, but the capacity is probably known. The crux of the gas tank size is marketing. With a full charge and a full tank, GM will be able to announce the total range of the car. This number is significant for marketing/competition. If its considerably less than a normal ICE car or Hybrids like the Focus or Prius, that will be a soft spot.
Also, some early range numbers (if you want to use those) were stated by GM, which would allow people with calculators to reverse engineer the MPG in RE mode, which is information GM isnt ready to release right now.
+4
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:01 am)…or the Volt is equipped with run flat tires. To me, run flats make sense on two fronts: 1. Saves weight by eliminating the need for a spare. 2. Stiff sidewalls of run flats mean lower rolling resistance. Of course the tradeoffs are the higher replacement expensive and harsher ride. Also, it appears that the blue colored object is the fuel tank and the bulge adjacent to the muffler could be the spare tire well.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:10 am)The projected status of 10 year battery life as WORSE CASE scenario is definitely heartening and *should* mean that the cost of a replacement battery doesn’t need to be included in the purchase price (something that had been speculated earlier). Maybe the 40K price would actually include some profit? Just a thought.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-12
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:15 am)(click to show comment)
+15
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:22 am)He has a wife, kids, is a neurosurgeon, runs marathons and runs a daily blog for us. I think we can forgive a misspelling.
JMO,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:22 am)No it’s not, that tank is fairly large probably about 10~12 gallons.
+4
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:25 am)If you are a customer who is not even going to use the ICE once a month – I think you are better off having a BEV. Or am I wrong? For those VERY rare long trips, rent a ICE car for example. Or is the range anxiety that scary?
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:33 am)Lyle thanks, It will be great if you have posted the all the slides ( like some other and mark what means the crash test pic means etc )
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:44 am)Great post Lyle! Very informative.
Your work is very much appreciated.
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:53 am)Assumptions:
1. The blue thingy is the gas tank
2. Tire size is 225/45r18
3. Tire tread contact is 8 ”
4. Tire diameter is 24″
5. Tank depth is 8″ (my wag, totally a guess)
Then using the tire as a measuring stick, and 1 cubic foot = 7.5 gallons, then my tank volume guess is right around 9 gallons.
/this is consistent with the reported 8.5 gallons from detroit news a while back
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:58 am)Very nice report, Lyle. Keep up the good work. I am continually amazed at the quality of your reports while apparently still living a somewhat “normal” life. How do you find the time? Maybe Statik is doing a lot of work for you behind the scenes? Just don’t let him have access to your scalpel. LOL.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (10:00 am)Running the engine at least once a month ensures that any condensation in the oil is ‘cooked’ out and that the lubricated parts in the engine are supplied with oil.
This car is still in the prototype stage.
The final size and shape of the fuel tank will be dependant on number of factors including space available, weight distribution, safety and simply fitting around other components in the car.
Hence they really don’t know the final size of the tank because it is likely the easiest component to modify in size/capacity.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (10:01 am)I think it’s more that GM doesn’t really know what the MPG in RE mode will be right now.
The software that controls the ICE and induction motor plays a big role here, and that’s still being tweaked. They’ve basically said they’re trying to figure out a way to make the ICE on/off experience a subtle change, and to maximize efficiency at the same time. If they can’t manage a way to do both of these, they will pick one or the other.
And they will probably be tweaking this software until May or June, so don’t expect to see MPG in RE mode figures until then.
Nov 18th, 2009 (10:27 am)Great news! I hope to be the first owner on Hilton Head Island – a green community. Two power related points:
1 – We have had problems with the Prius as a community security vehicle because of lack of access to a heavy duty 12 V supply for the radios, lights, etc. The Volt would be a natural in this market.
2 – With all that battery and engine recharge capacity, I’d like to think another use of the Volt could be as a 110/220 V source for hurricane emergencies, etc. It would be nice to have 110/220 V windings on the generator, or an option for a couple of KW invertor to transform the Volt’s native power to 110/220 V.
Steve
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:04 am)The largest distance between closest gas stations in the U.S. is 2,506 miles.
But since that is between Hilo, Hawaii, and San Diego, California, it shouldn’t be a problem for the Volt
In continental USA, a 300 mile range for the Volt works for me.
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:06 am)Congrats to Lyle for pressing the questions about the size of the gas tank. Not a critical issue but of some interest to many here. Thanks Lyle.
It’s also great to have much more detailed time lines.
If this is true then why for quite a while did GM produce vehicles not of the same quality as those produced by Toyota or Honda? Are you overstating the case here? Does testing not matter as much as design? (IOW testing to find problems may be great but designing so that there are no problems is even better).
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:22 am)I like your estimation approach, Carcus1 —and agree the tank is ~8″ deep. However, I would guess the tank width to be ~28″, and remembering that it could extend somewhat in height (i.e., up under the rear seat), I believe GM could make the tank height at least ~14″. Then….
8″ x 28″ x 14″ = 3,136 cu inches, or 1.81 cu ft x 7.5 gals = 13.5 gals
In any case, its important they remember Motor Trend’s Car of the Year, Ford’s 2010 Fusion Hybrid, is heavily promoting a >700 mile range!
+7
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:29 am)I am suprised that no one has really mentioned the most interesting part of the update. 300,000 miles on the battery pack!!!!
I brought this up before a while back, when people were complaining about having to replace a ~$8000 battery every 100,000 or so miles. It is CLEAR now that the batteries, although they may degrade some with mileage, should be good for the LIFE of the car, in general, just like a gas engine, if you can live with the slightly lower AER. That is a cost justification calculation that will likely show is it better to live with slightly reduced AER than shell out money for a new battery. Slightly lower AER is likely NOT to impact most people at all.
I find it very unlikely that anyone would seriously have to replace a battery in 10-13 solid years of operation. Unless there is a catastrophic failure of course. Just like the engines in cars today……
To me, this is the single biggest nugget from this update, by far. It should silence some critics that fear the battery will quit working at 100,001 miles.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:30 am)As important as this vehicle is, even more important is the talent GM is creating through this aggressive design effort. Weber, Farah and countless others will lead another generation of engineers on even greater projects at GM or where-ever they decide to go.
The world is in need of this type of parallel development effort in countless other areas.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:33 am)PS: Regarding my post #47 above, if GM used a 13.5 gal tank and the Volt gets 50 mpg in CS mode, the range would be 40 + 675 = 715 miles
+7
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:34 am)The Volt has a 40 mile battery; a BEV like the LEAF has a 100 mile battery. If the battery is the big expense in these cars, where does a BEV find any cost savings over an EREV such as the Volt?
Which leads to this – if a BEV hasn’t much if any cost advantage over an EREV, and given that a BEV has the range anxiety issue to deal with while an EREV does not – how can a BEV be a better choice than an EREV?
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:39 am)Agree that marketing plays into the equation – but there are several other factors:
-a larger gas tank means that you are carrying around more weight when in electric only mode. They are likely still experimenting with ratios to see what effect a smaller / larger tank has.
-the size of the fuel tank can affect vehicle safety. Crash testing is required to ensure compliance with all safety regulations.
-although minor, the VOLT will likely be driven far more miles with a ‘full tank’ of gas than any other vehicle – since many drivers will be operating in electric only mode on many days. The size of the tank affects vehicle weight distribution and ultimately ride quality.
Lyle, this was a particularly informative post — great job, as always!
Go GM. Go VOLT. Bring it on!!!
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:42 am)The 2010 Prius has a 120amp inverter to keep the 12v battery topped off, the inverter runs off the main battery, if the key is on the engine will start automatically if the main battery is depleted.. 120amps is not enough to supply your security equipment?
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:55 am)My ’00 Insight required a new battery at 150,000 miles. The warranty completely covered it and I’m still getting 55-60 mpg.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:55 am)its time to start the Volt 60/60 club.. for those discerning drivers that can achieve 60 miles of all electric range and 60 mpg in the CS mode.. hypermilers has been taken up by Prius owners, what should Volt owners use?
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (11:59 am)Good grief. Or… you could just run the engine for 15 seconds once a month. Lets not get carried away.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:14 pm)In his own way, Statik does wield a scalpel. He’s pretty darn precise.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:16 pm)LOL, only with E85.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:22 pm)Let’s see the ICE try to “circulate once per month” – with NO gas in the tank. GM may control the Volt’s programming, but they don’t put gas in the tank. I do that – or not. Probably not.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:33 pm)umm…I can type BEV faster than EREV?
lol
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:34 pm)Hi Dave,
In today’s announcement from Opel they write that the Ampera will do more than 500km that is 500/1,609 = 310,75 miles. They also write that it consumes 1,6l/100km then it has 1,6l*5 = 8l at least or 8/3,785411784 = 2,12 US Gal.
Source :
http://www.opelmagazine.be/fr/green-future/get-going/flaunt_that_green.html#
Regards,
JC NPNS
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:42 pm)may I be ever forgiven, I forgot to thank Lyle for this post.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH LYLE
JC NPNS
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:46 pm)I have one quick question.
Should GM give the option of lease the battery pack? I think that should at least be an option, would allow you take, what $8k off the sticker price and just add an additional $200 to monthly payments. I think it’s worth looking into.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:51 pm)GM’s marketing people should put together a series of videos about the Volt including all these durability, quality and safety tests. The Chevy dealerships could could them to people if they have questions about certain things. Some people are just reluctant about new technology until some expert or “authority” like on cable TV news says that it’s a good product, etc.
They should also put together some really GOOD TV commercials that shows all the great pains that GM went through in the development of the Volt to make sure it’s going to be a safe, durable, high quality vehicle for as long as you own it, etc. I think it ought to be a bit like those Honda TV commercials where they show their research and development center with all their testing equipment, etc.
The main thing you want to do is make people feel confident and smart about buying a Volt, etc. Every salesman knows you gotta appeal to people’s feelings about stuff as well as their intellect. The sizzle AND the steak.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:55 pm)Here are some factors.
1) The gas tank is one of the few components that can be made in many different shapes and sizes. This is a small vehicle where space counts. Accordingly, it is better to put it in last, after the shape and size of everything else is fixed.
2) After moving this and the trade-off for a larger gas tank size is going to be a smaller cargo volume. After all, gas is big. Would the customer really prefer 2 more gallons in the tank, or space for 2 more gallons of milk at the grocery store?
3) Gas is not only big, it is heavy. That means more gallons is bad for mpg and perhaps handling. Presumably the greater weight is not a major factor, but the vehicle becomes overweight in small increments.
4) Conversely, more gallons is good for range, and up to 300 miles or so essential for marketing.
GM probably has a list of 20 items. Something has to be decided last, and gas tank size can be near or at the end, so why not take advantage of that flexibility?
Nov 18th, 2009 (12:56 pm)#17
To steal a phrase from Tagamet, “From your lips to God’s ears”.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (1:22 pm)Crash tests have shown battery remains safe at 30 MPH head on, as seen in the picture …
Tthe report as a whole is very positive. Just trying to looking at every sentence both pro and con, I am wondering about whether there is anything negative implied for crashes greater than 30 MPH. Is 30 MPH simply the speed chosen for a particular test, or is it the speed at which bad things start to happen? The question comes up because, as we all know, many crashes involve higher speeds.
Nov 18th, 2009 (1:23 pm)GREAT post, Lyle! There’s nothing like actual Volt information, and this article has it in spades!
Especially good news about the battery pack. May the next-gen battery be even better (I doubt very much that I’ll be in line for a “first” Volt).
I’m sure this must have been addressed by the Volt’s engineers, but just to be sure — Will the Volt’s computer only run the engine for it’s monthly lube-up while the car is moving, vs when it is sitting parked? Just an obvious safety issue for a car that is intended to be parked overnight in a garage. Or, perhaps it would be sufficient to disable the engine while the car is plugged in.
Nov 18th, 2009 (1:28 pm)Thanks to all who responded to my #6 posting.
Back in my flying days (a long time ago) we used to calculate weight and balance using 6 lbs. per gallon fuel and 7.5 lbs per gallon oil. I just checked Answers.com and see unleaded gasoline is approx. 6.216 lbs. per gallon.
Assuming the Volt gas tank is 13 gallons, the weight is 80.808 lbs. If the gas tank were increased to to 16 gallons, the weight would be 99.456 lbs., an increase of of 18.576 lbs. From this, I would conclude the gas tank volume might be a bigger issue than weight. But, it is like RB said – the vehicle becomes overweight in small increments.
Nov 18th, 2009 (1:40 pm)Lyle already i see some tweets on extended range drives ( example : http://twitter.com/ropete ) , wondering you are also part and getting a new report before NBC.
Nov 18th, 2009 (1:40 pm)Right. An EREV-40 is more expensive than a BEV-40, but an EREV-40 is cheaper than a comparable BEV-100.
Note that I say comparable BEV-100. That would mean a car roughly the same size as the Volt, and with a 100-mile battery that would last 10 years or more. So the Leaf is not a comparable car.
Or to put it another way, the Volt’s battery costs GM around $8000, and the ICE/radiator/exhaust system costs GM around $2000. A battery that would give a BEV Volt 100 miles range and that lasts 10 years would probably cost GM around $15,000.
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:04 pm)Great job Lyle! A journalist these days is not necessarily associated with AP or Reuters. Most good ones are not.
I wouldn’t expect GM to release the RE (CS) mode MPG at all. There is no reason to do this as the 40 AER needs to be accounted. I expect they will keep saying things like ‘combined EPA-cycle gas mileage will be greater than 100 mpg’. The EPA sticker is what (most) people use for decision making. Actual mpg may vary and people are used to it being vague.
Why would GM shoot themselves in the foot on mpg unnecessarily? The car magazines will let us know if the actual mileage is way off from the EPA sticker. In the case of Prius, they were getting better mileage than the sticker. Nothing to worry about here.
As far as gas tank size, I will probably keep a gallon or so in there for emergencies, but, expect to use zero gas for normal commutes. The smaller the better as long as I can go 300mi or so for trips.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:05 pm)We have discussed this here on the site at various times. Most of us want the ability to use the battery or genset for emergency power, but the consensus is that GM doesn’t want to expose the pack and/or genset to the additional unknowns (and possible abuses) of such operation.
GM is on record as saying that there will be no user access to the native 300VDC of the Li/Ion system.
The controller used to turn the 300VDC into pulses for the drive motor could be programmed to operate like an inverter, needing perhaps only a transformer to be useful for powering household appliances. The traction motor would be disabled, but you don’t need it when using the car as an emergency generator. Additional costs for this system might be another plug/wiring set, software, some development, and maybe the transformer.
Oh well, maybe someday.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:05 pm)I would love to see the battery degradation curve up to 300,000 miles. I bet for most people it makes no financial sense to replace a battery until well after 200,000 miles, based on the AER drop off.
I think that this may wind up being an underpromise/overdeliver senario. Just because the battery is warranted to 100K miles, doesn’t mean it has to be replaced. I think some people forget this in their eagerness to criticize the Volt.
It is much easier to live with AER drop off with an EREV. A BEV is a different story……
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:05 pm)That was a pretty quick impact. I looked at the video and figured about 50ms for the actual impact event.
) then that’s 1/50e-3 = 20 ft/sec. Which is 13.6 mph. If the impact was over a distance of six inches, then that’s 27.2 mph.
If I assume the impact distance was about a foot (which I’m not at all sure, really, but have to start the math somewhere
I would totally believe it if somebody told me it was a 30mph impact simulation, which seems a popular speed for smooshing things in the car industry.
Looking at one other thought, just to illustrate the huge magnitude of the task of testing for “flawnessness”: If only 50,000 cells have been tested, and cell 50,001 fails on average, then that could still be about a 20 ppm (parts per million) failure rate, which would not be awesome, considering there’s 220 cells per pack. That makes the cell in pack failure (which granted isn’t a full pack failure) possibly 4400 ppm, or nearly half a percent of packs built could have a bad cell or a cell that goes bad soon.
Of course, I’m absolutely not saying that is or will be the case, I’m just trying to point out the size of the job they have testing enough cells in this time frame to really guarantee the flawlessness that they (and we, and everyone else) want it to have. They just need to keep testing those cells! Sounds like things are going well, so far (hey, no failures is still no failures, can’t do better than that with what has been tested so far.
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:09 pm)In regards to projecting battery longevity, there are 2 primary assessments:
1. Cycle Life
2. Calender Life
We have traditionally thought of a car’s life in terms of miles on the odometer. It’s going to be more complicated with plug in hybrids.
/ I interpret the battery news from this article as that they aren’t having any problems with cycle life in accelerated testing (many cycles over a short time period). This IS good news, but it is NOT the whole story on Volt battery life.
//How to prolong lithium-based batteries
http://www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:15 pm)Farah implied he is looking forward to beginning work on the higher performance Cadillac Converj,
Have we been told before that the Converj is “higher performance” ?
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:20 pm)I strongly believe that a new paradigm be adopted; an hour-meter for the genset, the answer to some arcane mathematical formula (for cycles/calendar) for the battery, and the odo for things like drive motors and wheel axles. Tomorrow’s equivalent of “a little old lady drove it to church on Sunday” may become “owned by someone who rarely plugged it in.” Without all 3 metrics, it would be hard to tell the truth of a used EREV’s history.
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:30 pm)#32
I’m not that fond of run flats, but they make a lot of sense in this application. A spare tire and wheel, even a “space saver” is a lot of extra weight to lug around, never mind the packaging issue.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:31 pm)Jackson @ 78,
I would expect some sort of capacitance check of the battery will be a standard procedure when doing a pre buy inspection on a pre-owned plug in car.
I agree that a hobbs meter on the genset makes sense and would be a little surprised if the volt doesn’t have one (or something similar — probably all logged into the car’s memory).
/add, the volt may be able to do it’s own capacitance check, and have a read out on the “state of health” of the battery.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:32 pm)Great bottom shot. I’ve never seen that view before.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:37 pm)#12
I’m usually right there to say “It’s the blogosphere, live with it.”, when anybody grizzles about typos or grammar. But gee whiz guys, he’s actually right. -20? Isn’t that a bit of an overreaction?
Dr. Dennis:
IMHO, you’re more of an “actual journalist” journalist than a lot of those hacks. I personally would be a lot happier if you weren’t quite so !@#$% self-effacing, LOL.
I would suggest, “I attended with several other journalists.” Or, better yet, “I attened with several fellow journalists.” Or maybe “I attended with several less expert journalists.”, which would be a true statement, IMHO.
+2
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:40 pm)#22
Amen. The photos and the whole graphic layout are VERY professional. This is the best source of Volt news anywhere. Unbiased GM news as well, come to that. Well done.
Nov 18th, 2009 (2:54 pm)I agree with the comments about additional metering of genset use, however, today’s typical cars have the same issues. A used car is still a crap shoot; very hard to determine how and if the engine was maintained properly, oil changed, etc.
I would imagine the genset metering would give us even more info about a used Volt than we ever typically get on any other used car. Never mind those ‘JiffyLube stickers’ on the windshield.
There is still no substitute for the actual passing of calender time on this battery issue, but for those of us who expect to charge twice a day, and get ~80 miles of electric driving a day, this 300,000 mile battery data is very encouraging.
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (3:06 pm)No, GM hasn’t given me a CS test drive. I tried, but wasn’t invited to go today. As I’ve said before, every dog has his day.
Nov 18th, 2009 (3:12 pm)That is a good point, parts of it can be addressed with proper design.. by paralleling as many cells as possible (probably the pack is assembled of two cell parallel units) and by having some ability to bypass series modules. GM has stated that they can do some of this in the past. I dont know what the numbers are, but I guess 1/2% battery warranty issues would be REALLY bad for GM.
The new panasonic packs using standard laptop cells take this to an extreme.. they parallel 20 cells and then put 12 of these sub-modules in series.. the resulting module is reliable as a result.
Nov 18th, 2009 (3:22 pm)I think you would want the complete historical printout of the data in the computer.. certified by a proper GM dealership.. god forbid if a tuner starts messing around with the computers.
Nov 18th, 2009 (3:29 pm)You play dumb but know too much.
Nov 18th, 2009 (3:58 pm)52 LeoK says
-a larger gas tank means that you are carrying around more weight when in electric only mode. They are likely still experimenting with ratios to see what effect a smaller / larger tank has.
———————
I don’t think the weight is that big of a deal. Say they are toying with a tank that is between 5gal and 10gal (and this would be an extreme range). The tank itself is probably plastic (very light). The weight of the fuel is between 40lbs and 80lbs. A difference of 40lbs on a 3000+lb vehicle doesnt seem like much of a concern, at least much less in comparison to the extra range each one of those 8lb gallons gets you.
You could be right on vehicle safety.
Regarding ride quality / weight distribution, i still think 40lbs isnt much of a difference (especially compared to a 400lb battery), but maybe they are counting every oz.
Nov 18th, 2009 (4:07 pm)Yes, GM said they would increase/tweak the performance of the Chevy Voltec powertrain. I may be able to find a link. We all speculated if they were going to increase battery size to do this, or just reduce the AER.
Nov 18th, 2009 (4:08 pm)It will be interesting when going to KBB.com
Nov 18th, 2009 (4:25 pm)Maybe, because of quiet ride you can hear the gas sloshing around and they want to minimize it? That would be kind of nit-picking though.
Nov 18th, 2009 (4:37 pm)Besides viral enthusiast sites like this, GM may well find the BEST marketing for the VOLT may be achieved with a 30 minute info-mercial. There is only so much detail you can get into a 30 second TV spot or a one page magazine ad. Besides, they likely will sell-out the first couple of years on word-of-mouth alone.
Nov 18th, 2009 (5:02 pm)I don’t see what the hangup on the size of the tank is. Given its intended use (commuting), the Volt should have a 6 gallon tank. Maybe they would have an optional larger tank, but I can’t imagine any early adopters paying for that option. Maybe they could add the larger tank to the options list, but then just not build any with that option while demand for the volt exceeds production.
Nov 18th, 2009 (5:12 pm)Everyone here would DVR/TiVO the thing for sure!
Nov 18th, 2009 (5:34 pm)The body of the car should be red. NOT the exhaust pipe.
(Sigh…)
+3
Nov 18th, 2009 (5:46 pm)Absolutely not. Motor oil must be run up to temperature to purge moisture, trace fuel, and, the bearings and cylinders must be brought up to temperature at least once a month.
The oil rings must be run at higher speeds and at temperature to clear out sludge, and, the slinging of the motor oil at the higher rpms (than just cranking over at 200 rpms), assures that the oil gets everywhere up into the cylinder skirts.
There are at least a dozen other reasons that the engine has to be run up to temperature periodically (to circulate the coolant at its hot operating temperature), and on and on.
I’ve found that gasoline itself is remarkably stable and does not go stale within a month (I use only Shell 87). It may actually take about 9 to 11 months in a well sealed fuel system before noticeable differences occur, so getting rid of stale gas isn’t as crucial. This may be one of the deciding factors regarding how to size the tank, and, how can you size the tank until the very last minute after you’ve determined everything else?
-2
Nov 18th, 2009 (6:22 pm)LG already has much more advanced batteries in their Korean Labs. These make the Volt cells look lame. woot. Nano technology rocks.
-1
Nov 18th, 2009 (6:54 pm)A little off topic, but from AP “SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Power-hungry TVs will be banned from store shelves in California after state regulators Wednesday adopted a first-in-the-nation mandate to reduce electricity demand.”
This CANNOT bode well. Maybe THIS is what GM is talking about re. infrastructure improvements. If they ban TV’s because of energy use, then what about CARS? Oh, wait – this is so the grid will have capacity for plug in cars, right? Mixed messages?
Nov 18th, 2009 (6:56 pm)This is a very interesting article. Great cite! The only problem with the range estimates is that when Weber says 100 km on less than 1.6l you have to factor in the EV range and you never know what that is. Obviously it won’t get that kind of mpg and the tank will hold more than a few gallons. If you assume that the first 65 km are in EV mode and the last 35 are in charge sustaining mode, then the mpg in charge sustaining mode would be about 52. Very roughly.
What struck me was the 370 Nm. Are you kidding? That’s a ton of torque. A perky V6 might have 280 Nm or something. Yeah, I believe this car will be able to chirp the tires, even if it’s a tad porky.
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:20 pm)#94
Gas tank size is important because the -best- case for a Volt owner is a 50 mile a day person. I fully expect in a “4 seasons” climate, AER to vary between 30-50 miles. In such a situation, where Winter is the 30 miles, and the Volt’s getting around 30 MPG (Winter mileage takes a fairly large hit in most of the country), a 5 gallon tank would provide only an additional 150 miles or in my case, 2 weeks of daily back-up. A 10 gallon tank gives allows for 300 miles, and 4 weeks of daily driving. But important thing in my mind, In winter I try to never drive with less than 3-4 gallons of gas ever. I’ve been stuck on HWYs or even local roads for hours at a time… often with no warning. With a smallish gas tank, people would still need to go to the gas station weekly (or more frequently), which is undesirable. The ER function of the EV is not like a motorbike’s emegency tank… its a fundamental part of the experience (in my mind at least as 20% of driving takes place beyond the Volt’s EV range)
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:36 pm)Do you think GM should spec a stainless steel exhaust system for the Volt?.. you may get some condensation issues if the ICE is only ran once a month.
It would be neat if they specified a synthetic motor oil that was good for 2 years or so many hours of ICE run time.. that would cut down on a lot of maintenance.
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (7:55 pm)True, if there aint any cost advantage for a BEV -> no discussion but I think we haven´t seen retail prices for volt and leaf yet. Competition is good for customers.
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:00 pm)My guess is they will make the tank as small as possible to cut back on the weight. They already said the car is heavier than they would like and gas weighs 6.2 pounds per gallon.
That ‘circulate’ quote is a little odd. I’m guessing they will start the engine once a month to keep the fuel pump from gumming up from lack of use. Gas does go stale, esp. unleaded gas. Gasoline stabilizer, used in vehicles that are parked for long periods, (Like boats and motorcycles over the winter). One may want to consider a can or 2 if you don’t drive on gas alot.
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:04 pm)It calculates via conversion to 146.9 miles per gallon.
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:18 pm)Thanks!
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:28 pm)In other news it seems we shouldn’t be expecting to see the Aptera on the road any time soon.
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20091118/CARNEWS/911189992
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:31 pm)Happens , thanks for the update
Nov 18th, 2009 (8:56 pm)One small step for GM…
Nov 18th, 2009 (9:32 pm)Lots of great information, thanks!
It’s curious that they’ve locked down the battery design, but are currently looking for ways to reduce its weight.
Oh well, loved all the info and pictures!
Nov 18th, 2009 (10:00 pm)There has been mention of GM going for a balanced driving feel with the Volt. Perhaps our “name the signature color” test drive winner can offer feedback on this.
Driving a balanced car is a beautiful thing to experience.
=D~
Nov 18th, 2009 (10:05 pm)Great stuff. Thanks Lyle. There may be a future after-all?
+1
Nov 18th, 2009 (10:10 pm)I thought almost every new car sold has a stainless steel exhaust. That’s why Midas does alot more than just mufflers now.
Peter m
Nov 19th, 2009 (1:40 am)That’s a great idea! I wonder if they are going to do that?
Nov 19th, 2009 (1:52 am)You beat me to the response.
And if 120A isn’t enough, you can buy off the shelf 350V to 12V DC-DC converter and up it to 100′s of amps more and not overload the ability of the Prius to keep the main battery charged up.
Nov 19th, 2009 (2:03 am)Toyota never intended people to do that with the Prius, but some did anyway:
http://www.priups.com/riddle/answer-1.htm
GM could get really creative and either use physical or firmware means to defeat this – at least for a while. But with determination, I’m certain someone will do it.
+1
Nov 19th, 2009 (2:19 am)Dave G #71,
Your point is well taken however, that an EREV is cheaper than a equivalent BEV of 100 mile range. Let us use some good old fashioned Engineering SWAG to guess a the difference. A typical 100 mile BEV would need at least two and a half if not three or more times the battery capacity, call it a minimum of 40 KWh. Actually I have seen few BEVs with battery packs quoted as that small. More typical are battery packs of 48-64 KWh.
At 48 KWh the batteries would weigh 1320 lbs; and require the other components of the vehicle to be up sized to carry that weight. By comparison the VOLT carries a 440 # battery and a small 1.4 l ICE. I don’ t know the weight of the mg set, but it is likely under 325# max. As for the price of that engine I doubt that GM spends as much as $1000 dollars for the the entire mg set, less the batteries and power electronics.
So the weight of the EREV is probably 440 + 325 or 765 # versus a minimum of 1320 #, or more likely 1540# (54 KWh), for a BEV, not counting the beefed up other chassis requirements, or a difference of 555-775 lbs, probably closer to 775 lbs than not.
GM is probably buying its battery in quantity at 500 dollars per usable KWh, so it costs GM $4000 for the VOLT battery, $500 for the electronics and $1000 for the mg-set, for a grand total of $5500 for the drivetrain. A BEV by contrast would cost $14,000 for the 100 mile BEV batteries and $400 for the simpler electronics for a total cost of $14,400.
I think it is entirely feasible that a BEV the size of a midsize Volt would have to cost $8900 dollars more; and weigh 1/3 of a ton more.
I am surprised all these people want to make an issue over large gas tanks. At 6.2 Lbs per gallon, the difference between a 6 and 12 gallon tank is 37#. 37 pounds in a car weighting 3400 #s is 1.1% Reducing the AER range from 40 miles by 1.1% would be .438 miles call it .44 miles. These same people would complain to high heaven if the VOLT AER was only 39.56 miles and complain of GM perfidy.
Nov 19th, 2009 (7:02 am)When calculating the cost and weight of the gas engine generator, don’t forget to include a stainless steel exhaust system, radiator, and engine coolant. There’s probably some other stuff you don’t need if you lose the ICE as well.
But I agree with the main point. An EREV-40 would cost and weigh less than a comparable BEV-100. And by comparable, I don’t mean the Leaf, since this is a significantly smaller car and does not have the battery margins to insure 10 years of life.
Nov 19th, 2009 (7:52 am)Anybody know if the three finalists visit this site? Maybe Lyle will interview them?
+1
Nov 19th, 2009 (8:31 am)Hey DonC,
It all depends on the EXACT PURPOSES of what you are producing for what customers’ needs, and, what the JOB PURPOSE demands.
If you are building Prius, you are not building contractor’s pick up trucks that need to haul building materials into your home.
Quality is also purposive. If you want to buy a GM vehicle, it is built in such a way so that you can feasibly and efficiently repair it in 16 years, 20 years, and even 30 years. Being able to have some say in when to “throw in the towel” on a vehicle you’ve decided to purchase is part of the feasibility factor, because you are not wasting all that production of the original vehicle for it to be passed on down to your sons and daughters for them to go to college. (And, it is a far lower cost if there is a mishap with an old, well kept, GM vehicle).
Not always so with what I have been currently seeing with Japanese hybrids. These owners tend to feel that the decision to “bail out” is **forced upon them far too soon** when that “two block traction battery” fails at the bottom line cost of about $4,000. estimate **if** no other hybrid electric transaxle problems (or other problems for that matter) exist, which also concurrently worries, if not panics them extensively.
The decision to re-invest in a Japanese hybrid is a very worrisome consideration for when all these owners have a worn out traction battery in just 6 years. That is far too soon, and, I would not call a $4000 expense in 6 years an acceptable definition of quality whatsoever.
Quality is measured by some magazines as “Initial Quality”.
Please pardon me for expressing this this way, but
“Initial Quality” is a completely biased way to understand the overall value of whatever you decide to purchase.
That could mean that “nothing falls apart and the workmanship appears very good for the first 90 days”.
But when 6 years hits, and, you have to fork out $4000 for a traction battery, and, for the dc-to-dc converter (if you keep driving it that way) it also becomes toast for another additional big hit of cash, then, “initial quality” doesn’t seem any better than the next statement those same marketers will say:
“Who knew?” ["Who cares". "Wanna buy another?" "I'll give ya $1,500 for it on trade for a new one"].
Nov 19th, 2009 (8:47 am)Since Volt drivers would be conserving both electrical energy and gas, we could call them hypermisers.
Nov 19th, 2009 (9:10 am)A question I have—–will the Volt still get the range of 40 MPG carrying a 13.5 gal tank? If the answer is yes, I’m all for it.
+1
Nov 19th, 2009 (9:25 am)Details Details Details
http://www.detnews.com/article/20091119/AUTO01/911190374/1148/rss25/Engineers-sweat-Chevy-Volt-details
Nov 19th, 2009 (9:29 am)Post says: I and several actual journalists attended.
Maybe this sentence means “Several professional journalists and I attended.”
Lyle is as much an actual journalist as professionals, even by the dictionary definition of journalist as “one who keeps a journal”. Indeed we see the journal here, every day, which probably is more than most of the others who attended can show.
Recognizing that Lyle is a journalist is not to disparage anyone else, but simply to recognize the truth of the present situation.
Nov 19th, 2009 (9:46 am)300-350 miles is pretty much the industry standard for vehicle range, so I expect the gas tank will be less than 7 gallons. The only reason to have a larger tank would be for marketing purposes…or god forbid to save money by commonizing it with the Cruze. 40 lbs IS significant when it comes to vehicle weight reduction. GM reps have already stated that the vehicle is a little overweight and I can assure you that using a smaller gas tank is the easiest way to achieve a portion of that weight reduction. Removing mass from other parts or changing materials is a much more involved and expensive process.
Remember, it’s not “just” 40 lbs of extra fuel. More fuel means a larger tank, a larger tank weighs more and thus requires more fasteners, etc. Eventually, you need bigger brakes, a more powerful engine…you see my point. Cut weight where you can and the benefits add up, get lazy and keep weight in components (like large gas tanks) and the detriments add up.
Using a smaller gas tank will also ensure that engine cycling is kept to a minimum. For those that run primarily in EV mode, it will be necessary to ensure that the gasoline in the tank is “turned over” at least once per year. Not an issue for most people, but it could be for some and could lead to warranty issues. As other have stated, engine oil needs to come up to full operating temperature in order to “burn off” accumulated water. This can take up to 20 minutes. Fuel injectors, engine bearings, fuel pumps, etc. all need to be cycled periodically to ensure proper operation.
GM’s oil life monitoring system is well developed and should provide guidance to oil change intervals. I expect that oil changes could be performed VERY infrequently.
Nov 19th, 2009 (10:21 am)progress looks very promising !!!!
Nov 19th, 2009 (11:50 am)for #106 RB
Read this post from a few days ago. There have been other places where the Converj’s performance have been talked about, but this pretty much sums it up.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/11/09/lutz-says-volt-ss-a-possibility-cadillac-converj-greenlighted-for-production/
Nov 19th, 2009 (12:50 pm)kdawg — I had read that post before, but after you cited it I went back with “new eyes,” as people say, and saw the part about higher performance. Thanks.
Nov 21st, 2009 (4:47 am)your site is very nice and beautyful
Nov 21st, 2009 (4:55 am)Your blogs is very smooth condition
Nov 22nd, 2009 (11:56 am)I understand we might have some new “vanadium” batteries coming out in the near future which will increase battery life and power by several hundred percent. Can anyone comment?