AND 
New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
On the same day the Today Show ran its piece on test driving the Chevy Volt integration prototype, Lindsay Brooke, a reporter from the New York Times published his.
Brooks was the only other journalist so far besides CNBC’s Phil Lebeau to test drive the Volt in generator or charge-sustaining mode and has written about it.
His brief article entitled Life After 40 tells us what we’ve been waiting to hear, but maybe not exactly what we wanted to.
Brooks writes:
Like other reporters, I had already driven Volt prototypes in the battery-powered mode, and they were predictably smooth and silent. But for eventual Volt owners, a crucial — and so far unanswered — question is how the car will perform when the battery’s charge is depleted and all electricity is provided by an onboard generator, driven by a gasoline engine, that has no mechanical connection to the wheels.
Then as he runs the car’s electric range meter dramatically down to the zero mark, the moment we’ve all been waiting for occurs:
With the dashboard icon signaling my final mile of range, I point the Volt toward a hill and wait for the sound and feel of the generator engine’s four pistons to chime in. But I completely miss it; the engine’s initial engagement is inaudible and seamless. I’m impressed.
Good so far. He finds that as he pushed the accelerator, the sound of the engine didn’t change.
But later as he’s accelerating around the test track he gets a little shock that he calls disconcerting.
A few hundred yards later, as we snake through the track’s infield section, the engine r.p.m. rises sharply. The accompanying mechanical roar reminds me of a missed shift in a manual-transmission car. For a moment the sound is disconcerting; without a tachometer, I guess that it peaked around 3,000 r.p.m.
He asks GM’s Tony Posawatz driving with him what just happened.
“The system sensed that it’s dipped below its state of charge and is trying to recover quickly,” apologizes Posawatz. “The charge-sustaining mode is clearly not where we want it to be yet.”
Huh?
He goes on to write:
Immediately the engine sound disappeared, although it was still spinning the generator. A few times later in our test, the generator behaved in similar fashion — too loud and too unruly for production — but there is time for the programmers to find solutions.
So there we have it, the first reporter in history to write about the Volt’s operation in generator mode, and its a bit of a mixed picture.
It seem to go on flawlessly but throughout driving apparently has spikes of on/off engine roars that he finds disconcerting and unruly.
Though not exactly a happy report, he concludes:
Throughout my test, the prototype behaves admirably. At its current state of development, the Volt is an extremely refined vehicle.
Looks like GM has a little more work to do. But then again the experience may be a bit subjecttive. We’ll wait to see what others have to say.
Source (New York Times)
160 Responses to “New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience”
Recent Posts
- Ford Unveils Transit Connect Electric Cargo Van, Will Enter Production This Year
- Chevrolet Chief on Volt Supply and Demand
- Jaguar Says Only ‘Self Charging’ Extended Range Electric Cars Make Sense
- Op-Ed: Prius Halo Damaged; Toyota Pressured to Announce Recall on 270,000 Units Already Sold, as CEO President Finally Breaks Cover
- GM Sends Dealers 2011 Model Year Ordering Guide: Includes Volt
- GM Partners with NASA to Build Next Generation Robots
- If Electronics are to Blame for Toyota’s Vehicle Failures, What Does this Mean for the Volt?
- The Chevy Volt Fuel Tank will be Sized to Deliver 300 Miles of Gas Range
- Video: How the Volt Works
- GM CEO: Volt Will Roll out Simultaneously in US, and a Billion Dollars Couldn’t Bring it Sooner
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Volt Test Drive by Vancouver EV Association February 8, 2010VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA -- General Motors issued a very special invitation to the Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association last week to drive the... […]WopOnTour
- gasoline cars are like smoking . . . . February 8, 2010interesting article, better presenting what I've had a hard time putting into words (which is why HE's a writer and I'M... […]prowler
- A common European strategy for electric vehicles February 8, 2010I coudn't resist to cut and paste the next excerpt : Link :... […]Jean-Charles Jacquemin
- Run flat option or standard? February 8, 2010I suspect that run flats might be standard because they get rid of the space and weight taken by a spare tire and may result in less fatal accidents... […]1nk
- Engine Thermal Management in a Series Hybrid February 8, 2010I've just recently discovered how different the environments under which a conventional (even parallel hybrid) ICE and series hybrid ICE are... […]XGC75
- electric car with wind generator February 7, 2010My design of ELECTRIC CAR WITH WIND GENERATOR: http://velkovelkov.blogspot.com/ I think this conception is original and realistic. The low position... […]Velko Velkov
- Please provide complete home solar systems. February 6, 2010Please provide both a volt charging solar system and a complete whole house solar system that takes the user completely off the grid and stays on... […]1nk
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2010 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
November 20th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Sounds a little rough still, hopefully the production model will get better.
More importantly though, what was the MPG in that mode????
November 20th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Still, at this point in the game I find the report very encouraging. I’m sure GM will find a way to feather the RPMs better.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Lyle, you also skipped a rather important quote:
“The system sensed that it’s dipped below its state of charge and is trying to recover quickly,” Mr. Posawatz said. “The charge-sustaining mode is clearly not where we want it to be yet.”
Yea, they have 9 months left, and yea, it’s “just software” – But they have been working on this specific facet of the car for at least 9 months… It’s been mentioned as a concerned, for over a year (once we learned there we’re multiple “preset” RPMs”).
I’m a little surprised this cropped up on a test track they own/control – I could see this happening on given “atypical” temperature/hills, etc – But I would have thought things might go a bit better on their 1st time out with “the public” on a track they control…
I’ve thought about some of the control algorithms in my head, (I do machine control/automation SW for a living) – And given the three/four varying inputs (SOC, demand, generator/ICE state) – I could see how this could more complicated than a single PID loop, so Im not pointing fingers – but I still would have expected things to go “better” the 1st time out on a public demo.. I would have expected problems to “occur” in more “demanding” scenarios..
Well, they have about 9 months left.. Hope we’re not getting monthly firmware updates from GM for the 1st year (sort of like another large SW company that does monthly patch firedrills)… I know some strong PhD types in controls theory, if they get really desparate…
We shall see.. Heads down GM.. At least we know why this hasn’t been demoed before this, and it sort of answers that mystery.. Now we just need CS MPG, a “final price”, and then it gets down to personal decision time…
Thanks for the timely article…
November 20th, 2009 at 11:51 am
And Lyle has not had his turn YET………………why not????
That’s just not right if he is not in the TOP 3 or 5……:) JMO
November 20th, 2009 at 11:54 am
This wasn’t the flattering report we wanted to hear, yet looking on the bright side, it seems like it is a technical hurdle that can be overcome with the right controls and design. Also, GM does have some time to iron this wrinkle out. I’d much rather here this now rather than later, that’s for sure.
Another bright spot is both Phil Lebeau and Brooke had an overall favorable impression of this vehicle. The CSM issue didn’t seem to taint their overall feeling, and that’s a good thing.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:55 am
My automatic transmission does this all the time when i accelerate, i dont see what the big deal is.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Sounds like they have a little more software tweaking to do. I would have thought that something this basic would have been worked out. This is only one opinion and we should wait for more before we all jump on them.
Software has to capture the current state of the vehicle and generate the RPMs to somewhat match the driving conditions. If the capture is done and then processed too late the RPM would not match the driver’s current conditions. That all has to happen very, very fast (in computing terms).
Alternatively, it could be the computer input creates a target RPM but some residual actually creates a higher RPM than desired. Think about when you may be in your car, warming it up on a cold morning. You press the gas a little, a point that you normally think would raise the RPMs just a little. But it becomes more than you want; you pull your foot off the gas and the RPMs continue to increase for a second or two. Then they decrease to normal. Its like a split second delay.
It really could be a lot of things. The good news is that with good computer code writing it can be adjusted easily and tested with different inputs. They will work it out.
It will be interesting to hear from the other engineers on the site.
GM, get Lyle a test drive and many others after him!
At the LA car show announce a small SUV Voltec application!! Many are waiting for a chance to buy a Volt or Voltec application.
Get those wheels on the road!!
Thanks for the good info Lyle.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
No bad news here..Nothing wrong with this report, they are still tweaking this and they can still tweak it even after the Volt has been released.. note the transmission reprogramming they did to the Equinox after it was released.
The problem with an electric car is that you will hear EVERYTHING.. perhaps GM may have to use active sound cancellation using the stereo system.
If they had talked about hardware changes then I would start to worry.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Why do so many insist on applying the paradigms of traditional ICE driven vehicles to the Volt? The engine running at speeds independant of vehicle speed is NORMAL for this vehicle. Those who own one will quickly adapt their expectations. If they can do it without sacrificing performance then great but otherwise let it rev when it needs to. I don’t want to be stuck crawling up a hill because the software “spared me” of hearing the engine run earlier.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
It does not have to happen fast at all, the Volt has a huge battery buffer to smooth things out.. the calculations and measurements are done in milliseconds, the genset has minutes to respond.. several orders of magnitude.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Sounds like GM might have to live with a little more depletion of the battery charge under some circumstances or learn how to ramp the generator up slower and smoother.
On the other hand, it’s an all new car with an all new propulsion system. We drivers might just have to get used to a different driving experience.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
I don’t care what it sounds like… I drive a muscle car and a truck for crying out loud! If someone wants to pass on their car because it makes a noise, I’ll be in line
November 20th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Great news that the switch is impercetible. i supsect they can easily fix the jump between RPMs, it’s just going to be a case of changing (sounds like it went from the low 1,200 RPM to a higher 3,000 RPM in this case) the RPM slowly enough it’s not obvious, but also increasing the load smoothly as well. they can make it rev up imperceptibly, but if they jump the genset from 30% to 100% load instantly, you’ll definitely feel it. don’t forget we have no idea what track he was on, or how he was driving (we can guess heavy footed though), but it was unlikely to have replicated anyone’s standard driving pattern.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
“Immediately the engine sound disappeared, although it was still spinning the generator. A few times later in our test, the generator behaved in similar fashion — too loud and too unruly for production — but there is time for the programmers to find solutions.”
__________
Very limited info, but I’ll opine anyway:
The issue here may be that there is no programming solution. (you’d think this would have been worked through by now).
The problem sounds like they’re asking the genset to maintain too tight of a “buffer zone” — (i.e. they’re bouncing off the “high and low float switches” on the battery buffer zone). If that is the problem, then they’ll have to either reduce demand ( weight, drag, performance) or increase the buffer zone.
1. Reduce weight — not an option at this point
2. Reduce drag — not an option at this point
3. Reduce performance — not a good option, as the “sporty electric drive” has been the goal, and (to a greater degree) they have to limit any split personality issues to a minimum between CD and CS mode.
4. Increase the buffer zone — this would be at the expense of battery life, AER, and mpg.
/ At this point in the game, it doesn’t sound like a minor issue that needs to be “tweaked”. It sounds more like a fundamental design problem .
//Shouldn’t this have been worked on the test stand, or at least in the “mule” stage???
November 20th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Maybe give the Buick engineers responsible for Quiet Tuning a call?
November 20th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
This is a good point. Maybe there are driving conditions we currently are not accustomed to where small changes will be necessary to accept. I truly mean small – not the engine revving off the map.
I wonder if they were able to keep the very smart/experienced engineers, PhDs, etc through bankruptcy that might be needed to work these details out? Are the partnered with the U of Mich. for additional brain power?
GM use all your resources to get this right!
I really need/want a new car now – not sure I can wait for the Volt… but I am trying.
Good comments above.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
“..don’t forget we have no idea what track he was on, or how he was driving (we can guess heavy footed though), but it was unlikely to have replicated anyone’s standard driving pattern. ”
==================================================
Well heavy footed is probably more the norm then feathering the throttle.
I suspect that GM is trying to avoid dipping into the battery while the generator is running, so they try to let the generator run alone unless it meets specific power requirements. I have wondered how they would load share with the battery and generator running, even though all you really need to do is OR your 2 unique DC busses, kinda. But, of course it is a lot more complex than this. Hmmm…I know today sharing a common bus is standard practice with nearly any ac drive control, but now you have 2 different DC sources, just thinking as I am typing….think I need to get pencil & paper and sketch this out.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
I’m fine with this. It’s a new technology and there will be drawbacks. Hopefully, they can iron it out before production, but if they can’t it’s not a deal breaker for me at least.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
I’m a software engineer and I expect there are several GM engineers who feel confident they can fix the problem easily by replacing the current engine control algorithm with a different one.
I’m guessing the head of the software group is holding off on implementing the new algorithm so that they can finish work on other critical sections first. Sometimes the “better is the enemy of the good”.
I expect part of the group is setting up one or more of the other cars with an alternate code set(s) so they can debug it and switch in seamlessly to the production code later on. (IMHO)
November 20th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Thanks to all, this is a bright report for the Volt, I agree with all the positive comments and recommendations above.
Great to know that the system works, I suspect GM let some “bugs” in the system for the test. Otherwise there would be a revolt of the Volt waiters who will not understand why it would take yet a whole year to get the Volt in the showrooms.
BTW, (more or less out of topic) I passed two trucks on the highway two hours ago full of new Opel Astras … . Very nice cars … I think I could replace my five years old one with one of those … if they had been E-Astras.
Regards,
JC NPNS
November 20th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
This is the major coverup that our resident naysayers have been whining about for months ?? Sounds like GM is way ahead of schedule to me ! I smell a huge success coming for GM in the coming year, right on the heels of the Malibu, then Enclave, then Lacrosse, the Equinox and Terrain. Oh – forgot the Camaro !
I’m hearing great stuff on the Cruze, as well !
All done under the supervision of Maximum Bob Lutz, by the way !
Many are quick to point out the missteps, but few bother to point out the amazing progress! GO GM, GO VOLT !
November 20th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
I wonder if they could make the engine respond more closely to foot pedal input in CS mode and let the battery buffer vary somewhat…up to some limit of course. Seems to me this would make the Volt sound and feel more like what we are used to, but also maintain the battery within limits under normal driving conditions. If programmed properly, high ICE rpms that seem out of sync with driver input would be limited to harsh driving conditions.
LJGTVWOTR
November 20th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Clarification:
Agreed. But was I was trying to say was capturing the state then adjusting the rev of the RPMs to match the state should happen fast (miliseconds) if they are trying to match the state. If they are not trying to mach the state it would be a different issue of feathering the RPMs or some other issue.
IMHO. This is from a software eng standpoint. I do not know how the interface would react with the engine. Thanks for helping me clarify that.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Solutions to the high-rpm-noise non-problem had better not come at the expense of good mpg in CS mode. You’re on notice, Tony P.!
Come on people, let’s keep things in perspective. We are discussing a basically excellent review with one report of an “oddity;” it’s not as though the car stopped dead or lost a wheel!
November 20th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Probably GM didn’t realize how seriously people would be taking the fact that they can’t drive it in CS mode and felt pressure and caved. I think the first gen ones might have some design quirks (that owners will quickly adapt to), because GM just had to go with whatever engine they had. I think the CS software algorithms are proving to be more complicated than they anticipated but really, I don’t think it’s going to be that much of an issue. First of all, most of the time you’re just in CD mode anyway, and when you’re in CS mode, you’re probably not going to be driving it as hard and unpredictably as this guy. If you’re in the city, you’ll be stopping a lot which will give the engine time to replenish the buffer, not to mention brake regen. On the highway, the computer will probably quickly figure out what rpm rate it needs to be set at without having to jump around a lot. Likely this guy was really stomping on it and then slowing down and stomping on it.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Well, this may fly in the face of what everyone wants/believes, but I have to wonder if maybe GM is trying to hard to make the Volt sound and behave like a normal ICE.
The problem, I see related to unexpected noise/sensation is safety. The one thing you do not want are lawsuits filed, because the vehicle acted in some “strange” manor right during a crucial moment, say passing an 18 wheeler, up a slight hill. The driver, presses the accelerator to the floor to pass, and right in the middle of the passing maneuver, the generator makes a loud noise, which the driver has never experienced before. This causes the startled driver to react and release the accelerator and she is unable to pass, and gets into a head on.
So, the real issue, as I see it is that the driver needs to experience the noise of the generator as a normal part of driving. Then they become use to the sensation, and will be able to recognize how the car behaves. By squelching the generator, for the majority of driving, they are actually making the situation worse.
So, I guess what I am saying, is that the GM engineers are trying to make the Volt behave to nicely, and want desperately for the Volt to always behave like any other ICE.
Back to the drawing board? No. But, maybe a little shift in thinking is in order.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
I see it as a fundamental expectation problem…In a “refined car” the engine noise follows the arc of the drivers toe on the accelerator. However, in an EREV the noise pattern is different and reporters find it surprising.
Much the same way someone transitioning from horse drawn to horseless would find it disconcerting that when pulling back on the steering wheel of a contemporary car, the engine did not slow down the way a horse would when pulling back the reins.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
No concern. No one reads or believes the NY Times anyway. Lets pass judgment after Lyle takes a drive.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
You are likely right that a hardware fix is not possible, but it also likely isn’t required.
I expect that the software will be tweaked to put a little more charge above the 30% level to allow smoother operation.
say 35% battery capacity, this would allow the car to avoid a good amount of cycling of the charge system
At the same time there will be as others have mentioned a smoothing of the throttling of the genset. (also a software tweak)
I’m not worried.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
First of all, kudos to the NY Times and Lindsay Brooke for giving us the information we’ve been waiting for.
I agree with Carcus1 that there may be no obvious solution to the issue — else it would already have been implemented — but I suspect that when they really start focusing on the problem we’ll have some acceptable solution, even if it does shave a couple of miles off the AER. Nothing here strikes me as a show stopper.
FWIW I’d take the car now, even with this flaw. On a 1-10 scale having the engine come on loudly from time to time strikes me as a 1 or a 2. For comparison purposes, keep in mind that the Tesla Roadster and Mini-E suffer from, among other things, battery packs that overheat during hot weather, rendering the car inoperable. We’re talking more about how refined the drive will be, not whether it will drive. Critical difference in my mind.
IOW this strikes me as no big deal. Seems like the engineers at GM are continuing to do a fantastic job. Congratulations to them.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I remember reading a story about trains that tilted in order to take curves more quickly. The first work was done by the British who optimized the tilt so that at all times the acceleration vector was perpendicular to the floor of the cab. This enabled the trains to take curves quickly, but something unexpected happened. The passengers became nauseous with something akin to motion sickness.
Later, the Swedes figured out that the nausea was caused by a disconnect between the riders’ expectations due what they perceived by looking window during a curve, and what they felt. What the Swedish engineers ended up doing is not totally compensating for the curve – leaving about 10% of the centripetal force due to the curve to be experienced by the riders. This solved the problem – it provided enough feedback to correspond to the rider’s expectations.
I think a similar approach should be taken here, namely some small perceptible feedback between the drivers input on the acceleration pedal and the RPM. If the tilting train example is anything to go by, the feedback needn’t be much to correspond to the driver’s expectation, and would create a much more pleasant driving experience.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Funny remark, and in truth there is some of this at work. However, Brooke did quickly adapt to — and seemingly liked — the high regen and one foot driving. So I think he showed admirable flexibility and we should give him the benefit of the doubt, accepting the behavior was unpredictable and therefore undesirable. Posawatz did say the behavior wasn’t up to their mark so its not really an argument over whether we have a bug or a feature.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
If I am traveling across country, let me flip a switch to make the VOLT run it’s engine at 20 miles of travel to allow quieter operation.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Something to consider, If any of us were one of the very few reporters to drive the Volt in CS mode we would have all our senses on high alert and would hear every sound as tho amplified.
Consider when you have bought a used car, you listened to the engine noise trying to hear anything that might indicate that something was wrong.
And no I don’t think it is showroom ready yet but this report is more good news than bad to me.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
The generator sound is much more pleasing then a 4 cyl with an automatic transmission down shifting going up hill and the RPM of the engine screaming. Even a Cars AC kicking in makes random noises not to mention the whir of the tires on a paved road.
I drive a 120 miles a day highway, city on paved and gravel roads and sometimes you have to set your radio to increase volume when you increase your speed…
I think in the end some noise is good even a slight simulated engine noise.
Much like some people have to have the TV on at home when they are alone or have a fan blowing to help them sleep. Thats something the customer can choose to turn on or off.
You do not want a totally quite car since its important to hear some outside noises. I for one open the car window slightly during light rainy days to hear the car’s tires coming up when I am trying to pass in the evening.
Everybody is different. But the goal here is to be less dependent on oil which has been around almost 100 years?
I think its more upsetting that the Government turns a blind eye to gas prices. If we had a true open system after 100 years of competition oil companies prices would NOT be 1 cent apart! per gallon of gas………
November 20th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
GM’s been claiming the reluctance to give test drives in CS mode was due to NVH issues for what — at least 6 months now?? We’ve heard Webber talk about it. I don’t think there’s much doubt that it’s an issue that has to be worked.
If this were just simple tweaking of how to ramp the ICE up and down — it would surely not be that complicated — and GM would have a solution by now.
So I’m theorizing that it must be a pretty involved problem (other issues involved).
/either that, or conspiracy guy says GM is using the NVH thing as a stall tactic.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
From the article,
There is minimal body lean in the tight corners. The low-rolling-resistance Goodyear tires created specifically for the Volt provide excellent grip.
I’m a little confused by this one. How do low-rolling-resistance tires
provide excellent grip? I thought the grip came from friction. If there is a lot of friction, how are the tires low resistance?
November 20th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
sounds like it just needs a little software adjustment to accelerate the engine smoothly, rather than abruptly.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
What if the accelerator offered some literal feedback, in the form of additional stiffness, when harder driving will cause the generator to run loudly? Causing a conventional car to downshift for extra power, with accompanying increase in engine sound, is an expected behavior in such a situation. Having to press the gas pedal past this artificial ’stiffness point’ would allow the generator to come on suddenly, not pressing further would keep the Volt at the current power factor.
This would require a small hardware change to provide force-feedback to the accelerator linkage, as well as software; but hopefully it could be a single-part replacement.
Will a “hold” button or function be provided? We’ve discussed it here often, mainly in connection to road performance. The button would force the Volt into CS mode before the 40 mile AER is depleted, and seems like a good idea for those times that you know that you’re going to be on a long, challenging road trip away from recharging opportunities.
I think it’s now time for the Volt team to answer this question, Lyle.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
It is interesting to note how the driver display seems to have multiple visual warning indications when switching to charge sustaining mode. Perhaps with additional visual cues, spikes in combustion engine output could be made less disconcerting as the driver would expect them.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
To me the issue seems to be more with perception of what the car is doing using typical ICE car experiences. IE the motor revs at high rpm in ICE-land means YOU are asking for lots of power. In Volt land it means the CAR needs more power to charge the battery.
I would suggest that the best strategy is to manage THE CHANGE in the genset rpms so it does not trigger “ICE memory”. For example as the car decides it needs to generate more power have the RPM increase SLOWY (say 10 seconds) to the desired RPM and when its done have it SLOWY wind down and shut off.
Humans are highly-sensitive to change (hearing things, sensing movement) so make it gradual and unique and people won’t get confused by expecting something else…
November 20th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Just a guess here, but I’m thinking that high resistance to sideways forces needn’t come at the expense of increased resistance to forward motion — if the tire is designed properly.
We haven’t heard a lot about the tires, but based on the article there must have been a lot of improvement in this area. When I first heard that the Volt was going to have low-resistance tires, I pictured skittish, marginal handling in high-stress situations. It’s good to hear a positive report on the tires’ performance.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
From another article by the same journalist:
“When you go from driving all-electric to running the gas-assist engine, the transition is disconcerting.
It needs to be smoothed out, and GM engineers know it.
When you’re driving on the gas assist engine, there’s no fall off in power, handling, etc. and perhaps I found it jarring because I went from the silent electric drive to hearing the engine. Whatever the reason, it needs to be improved. ”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/34062113
November 20th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Don’t fix it with software. Fix it with information. Let the driver know -why- the engine revs up and within 2-3 weeks a normal driver won’t even notice the difference or care.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
If the Volt is a rolling computer, ways need to be found for it to intuitively communicate with the driver. If the Volt team is looking for the computer to figure things out regardless of what the driver does, I respectfully suggest that this is the wrong approach.
The challenge is to find ways to hold a “conversation” with the driver, in such a way as to be mostly unconscious to the driver (this is why I like the force-feedback idea). More “if you do this, expect that” and less “what the #$%^ is it doing, now?”
EDIT:
Simulpost with steel; who said essentially the same thing with fewer words (kudos to steel).
November 20th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
How important is having a nearly silent ride in the Volt?
What if the Volt were capable of adding driver programmable “digital engine sound effects” to create some familiar background sounds within the passenger compartment, instead of near silence, to help make the CSM engine rev ups less noticeable?
Looking forward to news about the Volt’s highway MPG in CSM.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
#45
Have you seem the Fisker Karma’s gauges? It looks to me like the “Electric Fuel” Gauge is split into two levels, one labels “Stealth”. To my mind this is a near perfect implementation.
#46
Wait… you want more noise so the noise you hear sometimes is less disruptive? Errr… I’d perfer least amount of noise overall. If I want to cover up engine noise, I will play the radio or a CD
November 20th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
eh, too political, never mind
November 20th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
They already answered it, no was the answer.. apparently the reason was to make CARB and the EPA happy.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
This are two different things, low rolling resistance tires are stiff tires that do not flex while rolling as much.. high grip tires use a sticky compound or a “grippy compound” such as silica.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
.
*mumbles*
…I’ve got a year and a half’s worth of “I told you so”s since Easter 2008 to hand out
*mumbles*
November 20th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
The best thing GM should do at this point is make sure somebody on the team is reading the comments and reactions on this web site. In the comments today alone I have seen a lot of excellent suggestions and strategies for refinement.
Decades ago (circa 1982) GM introduced a platform that caused them embarrassment because the engine would continually “hunt” up and down in RPM when the vehicle was stopped and idling. I had one of those, the Pontiac J2000. It wasn’t really a problem, in that the vehicle operated well and got great gas mileage. But it subjected GM to endless ridicule, which their competitors relished. So now, despite the fact that the Volt is a radical departure from conventional vehicle technology, GM is probably sensitized to how much marketing damage a technical non-issue such as this can cause.
A number of bright folks on this site have suggested they just make the ICE RPM more closely follow the driver’s foot position on the accelerator when in CS mode, and rely on the buffer service of the battery to average it all out over time. I think this is a great suggestion and a great way for GM to introduce the Volt. Later, if they determine this approach is sacrificing some fuel efficiency, they can reprogram the car in stages to become more independent of the accelerator position and more dependent on efficiency optimization (as people gradually acclimate to this new type of vehicle operation). That’s the great thing about software control, it can be modified ad-infinitum.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
I have seen nothing in these reports to suggest that CS mode is not working. The driver can still drive the car as if it is in EV mode, and has no performance, handling, or other issues.
This is a major success.
Obviously, the writers complained about the noise, but other than that, I saw no complaints. No excessive vibration, wheel shake, performance loss, etc. Maybe the Volt is paying a penalty for being too quiet.
As mentioned by Ron64 at #9, this is not a conventional ICE driven vehicle, and the driver will need to adjust to the operation of the Volt. GM probably does need to do as others have suggested, feather the rpm change so that it is not so alarming.
Considering most drivers will only use CS mode 20% of the time, and that noise seems to be the only issue, I don’t envision major problems going forward,
November 20th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Funny (in a strange way), that I have been pretty vocal about the CS mode, and why GM is not demonstrating the one aspect of the EREV, which defines it. Otherwise your just driving a BEV with extra weight.
Then in the last article, I put out some optimism when the first reporter made no note regarding the CS mode. It appeared that the reporter either did not know about it, or that they could not detect it. Which, either way, would mean that GM accomplished what they set out to, which is to make the experience seamless and very “ordinary”.
Now, we get this report, which you need to be careful with, since we only got a small sample from one driver of his experience. But, this cannot be a good thing, but GM needs to figure this out soon (seems like they had more reason, than the excuse that “GM does not want to let the cat out of the bag”, to not let someone drive in CS mode earlier on).
So, when will someone REALLY get to test out the “fixed” CS mode? I am gonna bet, they wait until Nov 9th at 12:00 midnight.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
The Fundamental Way a S. Hybrid saves fuel is to disconnect the ICE Engine from the Power Requirements of the Car.
If GM is wants implementing S. Hybrid designs to an entire lineup of cars, the sooner the public understands that the ICE Engine is part of the Fuel system rather than part of the Propulsion System the better.
In the End, the most important concept for the Volt will be the least amount of fuel used. Its entirely possible for there to be a 10 mpg swing in CS fuel economy going from the most efficient use of the generator to a “follow the pedal” experience.
Consider the Prius. It’s pretty fugly. Its certainly not a fun driving experience. Its also not a “traditional” driving experience with its CVT transmission. Yet people buy it in droves because of the Fuel Economy…. (and Green Cred)
November 20th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
JEC @ 54,
Lebeau as well as Brooke were both critical of the transition to ICE.
“When you go from driving all-electric to running the gas-assist engine, the transition is disconcerting.
It needs to be smoothed out, and GM engineers know it.”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/34062113
November 20th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
If this is correct, will GM now consider changing their minds?
Controlling when CS mode starts (with respect to onboard battery state) doesn’t seem likely to affect generator emissions overall, unless you consider 40 miles AER a vital legal requirement for the EPA’s official MPG number (which is relevant only to their own methodology, as things stand now).
If the latter is true, only allow the “hold” feature to hold back an extra 10 miles’ worth. Or 5 miles. Or whatever tickles the government’s fancy that day.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Maybe it does need to be smoothed out, I haven’t heard it. On the other hand it could be that it’s like the Refridgerator coming on, you do notice it, but it doesn’t upset you.
We all are used to listening to the ICE and judging the cars performance by that sound. If I’m driving and the motor revs, I’m going to be aware and even concerned about it because it’s the first sign, other than silence, that’s different than my normal driving experience. I could be that it’s just a different sound that we would get used to without any change.
If the sound is loud, really jarring, and not just something that’s out of the normal and initially disconcerting, then it certainly needs to be fixed. If it’s just like the fridge and it’s something you notice, but doesn’t affect anything then it’s just going to take time to change from a sound orientation to a feel orientation for trouble.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
carcus1
Your right. I read Lyles original article about the CNBC test drive, when it first posted. I could swear that the comment from Lebeau was not there originally.
That was why I gave my optimistic view.
I am thinking that Lyle added this information after the original post, but cannot prove it.
So, now we have two different sources, both saying the same thing. This, in my mind is now more worrisome. The possibility, that maybe the one driver just something out of norm, is now an unlikely scenario.
So, I guess I need to re-install my “cone of pessimism”.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Doesn’t it seem like revving up the engine slower and more gradual to its 3000 RPM peak would calm the problem?
A tiny engine running at 3000 RPM may be detectable, but isn’t really loud by any means. Since its audio may not have any relevance to how fast you’re going, thats why it may sound like missing a gear in a manual car. Or even just….revving the engine above 3000 in a manual car.
I think the overall problem with this is one of the driver wanting the luxury of never hearing anything, and GM being worried about people not being able to handle RPM spikes….while the ICE cars that everyone drives around in NOW shoot over 3000 RPM’s somewhat regularly for most people, and we don’t scoff at having to deal with the noise.
I don’t think this problem is a killer. I think it’s something that longtime ICE drivers will just have to get used to, and 99% most likely isn’t enough noise to drown out background radio noise
November 20th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I was thinking the same thing. GM will try to improve on this factor. But, if no improvement can be found, this is just a minor problem in perception which will disappear as drivers hear about and begin to experience it. Once they do experience this noise and feel, and they realize that nothing is wrong, it will be a mute point of contention.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
More pessimism:
On mpg:
On both reports we get a look at gasoline range on the dash readout. One is 222 (lebeau) and the otheris 157 (brooke). Since we don’t know how much gas is in the tank this data doesn’t tell us much, but it is consistent with the 300 mile-ish range we’ve heard from Gm before.
On further inspection of the photos below (incl. top and bottom views of fuel tank), I’ve revised my gas tank dimension estimate to be 28″x8″x12″ ( the 28 is averaged for the angled ends (not a true rectangular shape)). The 28×8 part we have a decent image of (using the tire known dimensions as a measuring stick), but the depth we don’t; however, from the battery lab video we can see how thick the battery is (about the same thickness as the fuel tank), and it’s definetely well over 12″ ( you can get a reference by stopping the video at 4:09 where the speaker has his hand on the battery).
So, knowing that 1 gallon is 231 in3, then we can guess the fuel tank capacity is at least 11.5 gallons, maybe more.
These guestimates would indicate not much more than 30 mpg in CS mode (and perhaps in the 20’s).
http://gm-volt.com/2009/06/22/gm-advanced-battery-lab-tour-wvideo-part-i/
http://gm-volt.com/2009/11/09/engineering-design-of-the-chevy-volts-two-electric-motors/
http://gm-volt.com/2009/11/18/chevy-volt-and-battery-program-update/
November 20th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
#62
Pessimism is fine, but remember basic engineering principles. Interior Volume is significant different than Exterior Volume. The Exterior Volume of the Fuel Tank may be ~11.5 gallons, however, I can say designing a liquid containment device that holds 80% of its exterior volume is actually a fairly nifty peice of engineering work. The additional requirements of CAFE and EPA standards for PZEV (and lower) require essentially -no- fuel vapor leakage which combined with the crash safety requirement and general system requirements means even 70% would be amazing!
A Fair(er) pessimism. Exterior Fuel Tank Volume 11.5 gallon, Interior Fuel Tank Volume 11.5*.8 ->9.2 gallons (I would be very impressed with anything above 9 given the dimensions you provide). 300 miles minimum range on CS mode, so 33 mpg in CS mode. Overall, thats fairly pessimistic given GMs impliec goal of 45 mpg+.
I am thinking though, given those dimensions that the fuel tank is more like 7 to 8 gallons (based on my experience in non-automotive liquid containment design). Range goal -should- be more like 350 in CS mode (most land in the 350-400 range in the C class segment). Looking more like 35-45 mpg CS mode, which is still a let down.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
The best way around the ICE mode engine note issue is to always have the ICE start at an RPM consistent with the smooth electric drive experience. I suggest 1800 rpm (just above an idle). The on board computer will gauge the demand being placed on the system and slowly volume slide the ICE to a higher or lower rpm position in perhaps one minute interval reassessments.
Most people get up to freeway speed by looking in the rear view mirrors and “gassing” their car to jockey to cruise position. Once there most drive at +3 to – 3 mph during their commute. The ICE will have adjusted 2 times before settling into the perfect sustaining rpm. This will feel “normal” to the driver.
And as noted in an above entry. Hope to see an EREV cross over at the L.A. Auto Show. Don’t forget GM, we’re selling these Voltec models to our significant others. All added practicality helps.
=D~
November 20th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Oh yes, yes – the engine sound is disconcerting, and well… you know – there is no horse butt visible through the windshield either! When the first car just appeared many people found THAT very disconcerting.
Frankly I think this engine sound is not an issue at all. Not a real one. This is a ghost, a horse butt. All we need is just to get use to it.
I bet in five years this will becomes a historical anecdote about GM engineers who spent a year to make sure engine RPM is synchronized to the accelerator push.
I’d rather try to play this as a positive card or something. Or I’d rather equip the car with *artificial engine noise* to smooth the transition. Remember we have electronic shutter sound on our otherwise silent modern cameras?
November 20th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
#6
Right. So does mine. We have a 3500 pickup with an Allison 5 speed. I have commented about it here before. When towing a big load in hilly country, it OFTEN shifts down when I wish it wouldn’t. A lot of the time I find it pretty irritating, but it is what it is. It’s a tough, strong piece of equipment, and it gets the job done. So I just deal with it.
I have read about manufacturers of cars with CVTs fiddling around with the functioning of the CVT to make it mimic more closely the behavior of a conventional automatic transmission. I find that to be silly, and almost certainly counterproductive to best fuel economy. People just need to step into the 21st century.
I think that sophisticated early adopters will buy the first 2 or 3 years of Volt production, and they will be able to deal with a different driving experience. So that gives GM 3 or 4 years to dial this in, assuming that it needs to be.
This is a non-problem, IMHO. Next case.
LJGTVWOTR!!
November 20th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
#44
Amen. +1
November 20th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Accelerating up a hill and the columnist couldn’t hear the ICE come on? I really expected a bit of perceptible noise at that point.
Remember when we were debating about putting some noisemaker device on the Volt to alert people that its coming? It seems like they are almost to that point of quiet operation.
I’m betting they will get this noise thing resolved in time for the launch. It seems as though it is the abruptness of it that is a big part of the problem.
There has to be a way for it to be somewhat more gradual.
I’m reminded of the time I was in an airliner on approach to land and it felt like something hit the plane and we got sideways in the air. The flight attendant said, “No big deal. Turbulence. Happens all the time”.
Scared me to death.
To someone use to it, “no big deal”.
BTW, the Volt looks very good in the pix. The little spoiler is a nice touch.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
I think the way I’d try to tune it in charge-sustaining mode is to emulate the “feel” of a CVT. Although still weird-feeling by conventional standards, at least a CVT would be somewhat familiar to target buyers (i.e. hybrid owners or intenders) in that it would loosely correlate engine RPM with throttle position. I’m not saying it has to be a direct 1/1 ratio of throttle position to RPM, but that it would rev up a little at full throttle, and settle back down at part throttle or cruise. I know they’re trying to optimize efficiency as much as possible, but the programming mode I suggested seems like it could still work.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
OK, good points (although losing 30% seems like a lot), but . . . I was allowing for tank wall thickness, fuel pump, etc. .. in a rough way. (trying to keep it simple) I was being conservative with my dimensions. The exterior of the tank actually looks a little bigger than 28×8x12 to me.
If we assume the tire is 25.9 OD and a width of 8.3 (the only 225/45/18 dimensions I could come up with) , maybe you can give a a better estimate for the tank dimensions.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
I believe the rolling resistance is proportional to the deflection of the tire sidewall. The continuous deformation of the tire sidewall generates heat within the rubber compound of the tire itself (this is one of the criteria for speed rating of tires). You can achieve low rolling resistance and good grip by making a stiff sidewall and using a softer rubber on the tread area. The only tradeoff is a slightly rougher ride due to the stiff sidewalls,
November 20th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Good points on the Prius selling like hotcakes despite its shortcomings in performance. Regarding the Volt, I’m not suggesting running the ICE all the time. Rather, when it must run (the CS mode), it might be a good idea to “tweak” its characteristics a little toward the traditional experience side (i.e., coupling RPM to accelerator position more than is optimal for efficiency). I’m just repeating here what I already said. Thanks to software, the engineers can work a trade-off between optimal efficiency on one side, and driving experience on the other. Then, over time, move the balance in favor of efficiency as the market comes to understand the Volt.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
I suppose what is disconcerting about it is the fact that the engine rev has to due with the state of the battery charge, and not necessarily with the power output that you demand of the car at any given moment. Consequently, when that engine revs up to 3K RPM it does so at a moment when you are not necessarily expecting it. The question is, does it do any good to have it rev up that high to re-charge the battery? I would not expect that, since the engine is being used to re-charge the battery instead of powering the drive train. So why not just limit the max RPMs that the engine is allowed to run at? I need an engineer to tell me why I’m wrong.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Ever drive a mid size car or small truck that has a small 4 cylinder engine? Yes, you can expect 30 mpg with a very slow acceleration to freeway speed. Or, you can jump on the little bugger and race the engine at 5000rpm-6000rpm for “normal” results. Would you spend your nest egg to buy one of these?
The popularity and freshness of the Volt will remain for a couple of years. The first 100,000 sales won’t need a test drive. Perspective buyers and the curious will read Motor Trend and make a decision based on fuel economy, comfort, and affordability.
CSM operation characteristics are VERY important to Road And Track professionals and writers. Don’t talk yourself into believing otherwise.
=D~
November 20th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
I did not read all the posts but this “problem” seems to me to be a non-issue. The problem was that the ICE changed speeds too quickly, going from an imperceptible speed to an unruly speed in a few seconds, like a disengaged engine RPM jump. Thus if they “feather” the RPM change over say 12 seconds, you would hear it and realize it was the “controlled” change in RPM levels due to demand/state of charge.
What is unclear is whether the rapid RPM increase was as designed or was a controls issue.
And of course let me also say – Please let Dr. Lyle drive the Volt for an extended evaluation run.
November 20th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Great picture! What a cool looking ride!
November 20th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
#70.
I have nothing wrong with the dimensions, but your have an elevated opinion of GM engineering if you think that can design a fuel restrain system that gets better than 70%. Remeber, even 60 lbs of fuel in a 50g crash situation turns into 3,000 lbs of load. This requires significant reinfocment of structure or dramatic wall thickness.
A quick survery of aftermarket gas tank replacments suggest more on the order of 50%-60% (some were as low as 40%!!!!) efficiency. If we take the high number of 60% (which is very optimistic as gas tanks become more efficient with size. The small Volt tank would likely be closer to 50% than 60%). If the tanks nominal dimensions are as you have guessed, I originally though 7-8 gallons. Based on my survery of gas tank replacements on the market, although I could still believe the 8 gallon mark, even 7 seems optomistic with ~6.5 being acceptable for the relative importance of the tank (IE, Battery First, Motor Second, Generator Third, Gas Supply Fourth)
November 20th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
When Brooks says: “But for eventual Volt owners….”
his reference point is from what he believes all cars should do.
The good thing about that is that it tends to help keep a potential “over-demand” closer toward fulfillment levels if there would ever to be such a thing in the first place.
It still just goes to prove how “technically-locked-out” even those whom are supposed to be technical in the automotive departments of various publishers really in fact are.
Of course there are terrific things that can be done to gently “ramp up” the genset into CS mode!! And, to anticipate the timing of it based on the location of the Volt at the very next “previously-learned” route stoplight to “engage and maintain” CS rpms.
Trust me, we will all get used to it and be happy with it all!!
November 20th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Yeah, it is likely that the reporter exaggerated the
engine noise — such engine RPMs are common in all small cars, so I wonder if GM didn’t have enough sound insulation. Of course, anything the NY Times publishes
should be considered unreliable until proven otherwise. That paper has become a laughingstock and deservedly
so. What a worthless rag. Everyone I know who has had a subscription has cancelled it and the paper is cutting back drastically on reporters and losing tons of money with its Boston affiliate paper. For all intents and purposes, the NY Times is no longer viable.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
I was thinking that along the same lines, but my idea would be to have a slight sound a second or two before the generator kicked in at very high RPMs. I suspect it’s the abruptness and apparent randomness of the sound — the surprise effect — rather than the sound itself that is so off putting. If you had some warning you’d get used to it in fairly short order.
Here’s an even better idea. Instead of running a lame contest to name a color on the Volt, GM ought to lay out the issues and have a contest to see who can come up with the best solution to the problem of the genset kicking in. They might get a good solution. At the least they’d educate people on what the issues are, which, as you suggest, may be the solution.
GM is going to get cut a lot of slack on this car with respect to details like this. As I said earlier, this is very minor. It doesn’t stop you from driving the vehicle and it’s something you’d probably get used to easily enough.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Hey Tag, you out there?
Will you be here the transition to 3000RPM once in a while above the laughter as you cruise by the gas stations?
This is too much to do about too little. Yes, GM should make it as pleasing and imperceptible as possble, but nobody should be getting their nickers in a bunch about some noise heard in the IVers by a couple of reporters “tuned” to hearing the CS mode. Let’s hear (NPI) what the experiences are for people driving it for a week of their normal driving pattern.
My guess is GM is trying to minimze battery use too much. CS mode control for city driving can be drastically different then it is for highway driving because of regen and slower speeds associated with city driving. If this is the issue then GM has several options:
-Better prediction for near term energy use
-Add another RPM point
-Feather slower, smoother
-Run more energy through the battery
-Add more/better isolation/insulation
They have undoubtably been tweaking these parameters but have not had them together in the IVers for very long to make the adjustments. They still may not have all of the isolation/insulation planned for the PPVs.
I just hope GM doesn’t choose to sacrifice efficiency in any meaningful way to fix this issue. If they do, then give the customer a choice of quiet vs economy.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
It is a very incouraging report , but it does highlight something very important: The ICE should be referred to as the “Generator”, not “the engine”.
A driver expects the ‘engine’ to do certain things under certain conditions. But the term “generator” in the auto realm is something seperate from the engine, or in this case “electric motors” that are turning the wheels.
I think the driver/consumer can more easily understand the seperation of these concepts if the ICE is called the generator. It makes perfect sense that the ‘generator’ can be running at maximum output, but the vehicle speed is zero.
I sure hope the dashboard readouts do this as well.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
The noise when the ICE kicks in is a non-issue. People will get used to it. I own a hybrid Yukon and yes it is disconcerting to feel the engine start every time you accelerate. But I get used to it and accept that the car will make noises somewhat different from a non-hybrid version. Same for the Volt.
The key point in the reports is that the car seems to perform well in ICE mode. This is a critical aspect of the vehicle. The other is that overall the reporter is pretty pleased with the way it drives and the level of refinement. Remember this is a (1) prototype and (2) reporters usually test vehicles with a mindset to find some fault. These are not particularly objective test drives.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
We all generally might have the same 7 to 10 daily routes we can possibly travel.
How about a voice command advisory to the Volt PCM, where we are about a mile from exiting, and, say, we have a 2 to 4 mile remaining distance from that exit stop light to get home. How about a flexible subroutine for the Volt to just save that last 2 to 4 miles electric range for a quiet final few miles.
We would train our Volts’ CS mode for refinement on most all of our daily routes!! (We are going to drive it a lot at first anyway.) Why not have an optional “destinations advisory” in order to more closely refine CS, so that anticipations can be properly programmed possibly faster than a “self learn” method for that last four or so electric miles. That way, we can maintain that refined quietness for when we get toward home in our own neighborhoods.
I think that would be so fine!!
November 20th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Hard to believe you ever had a friend with a subscription, actually. No matter. The NY Times is still the best newspaper in the US. The WSJ is a close second. The Washington Post is good if you want inside the beltway news and gossip. Where I live the local newspaper consists mostly of reprints from the NY Times.
Out of curiosity, what newspaper do you think is better?
November 20th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
You know, we may just have to face up to the possibility that an engine running at any kind of notable rpm while you are trying to brake or decelerate… may just feel really weird and disconcerting. Unless you’ve never driven a car before, you may just be too conditioned to expect cars to behave in a way you are used to. I hate to think that they will have to somehow tie what the engine is doing to what the driver is doing simply so the driver feels more comfortable with it.
I think I would just want to suck it up and learn to appreciate the new reality of arbitrary engine speeds, personally.
Maybe for mass appeal they will need an optional “conventional emulation” mode button or something, though, that always cuts the engine rpm down when you are slowing down, even if it is not the optimal thing to do.
Still they have time to do some more adjustments. The feathering will probably help perceptions. In any case, it sounds like it’s not going to create a problem for vehicle performance. Anything other than that I am pretty sure I can get used to.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Sadly, I must agree with Kent Beuchert. In the last 2-3 years, the NYT has took a dramatic nose dive in terms of overall quality. In fact it seems that way for every major (US) newspaper. I usually have to turn to a conglomeration of both US and international news sources to get the same coverage I used to get from NYT + WSJ. Which isn’t to say the NYT is not the best news paper in the US. Just that 1999 NYT >>> 2009 NYT
November 20th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Seems the problem is while doing the charge sustenance.
The Generator need to produce more energy to run the car + charge the battery.
May be the intelligent charge sustenance/ recharge algorithms need to be tuned better.
I think one option may be choose engine optimal RPM as a bit higher RPM than normal needed and always give a small buffer to battery so you will never need to make it up immediately (same concept as of intelligent recharge in the BAS+ ). When the battery is charged enough for a “Return EV mode point” It can run in EV mode again till it reaches the “Threshold range extender point” or say “Depletion point”
Down side may be less mpg but choosing wise operating points and optimizing the engine one optimal rpm, i think this may be a better solution and the above give constant sound, its easy to use a noise canceler for constant sound to mask it.
BUT GM guys knows better than me.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Wow! Exciting day today – both of these reviews, IMHO, offer a very positive outlook for the VOLT. I commend GM on an amazingly thorough job on product development – they are clearly on track. Let’s face it, if the reviews were perfect, we’d all be clamoring for the VOLT to be delivered tomorrow.
The next year will go by fast – and in slow motion at the same time. Consider how many little issues have been dealt with on this site in the past year – and get an idea of how many will be dealt with over the coming year.
My mother always taught me that “Patience is a virture…”, well Mom, its never been tougher! I can’t wait to get behind the wheel of a new VOLT!
November 20th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Hey Statik – suggestion for your next op-ed piece – please post a petition for all GM-VOLT users to sign that simply says: Hey GM, wake up and get Lyle behind the wheel!!!
November 20th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
I’ll bet those tanks at 50 or 60 % had big standing seams and quite irregular shapes, the Volt’s tank appears to suffer from neither of these. Based on the photos I’ve referenced, I just can’t see that tank holding much less than 9 or 10 gallons. . . not unless it’s a lot more shallow than I think.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Validation builds are now only prototypes. Hmm.
Detail is totally absent, just vague adjectives.
When can we expect an oridinary review like with other new vehicles?
November 20th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
I’m sure his time behind the wheel is coming. Matt Lauer gets to do everything first.
/it is pretty much the code.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
I believe CARB wants the genset to burn as little gas as possible, because the Volt is an EV and not a hybrid.. the genset is really there for “range anxiety emergencies”, if GM puts that button in then the owners will use it to unnecessarily recharge the battery… normally the computers will attempt to keep genset usage to a minimum. Its similar to how they dont want the owners to tamper with the emissions control equipment.
An aftermarket solution will be quickly available.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
#68
Yeah, it really does look good. Is it just me, or did some of the black camo on the bumper/grille area go away? I hope that they will lose the remaining black strip around the bottom of the cars too, but maybe that’s some sort of flexibile, easily replaceable, ground effect kit to deal with the low ride height some people worry about.
I could do without the antenna on the roof too, but I guess you have to have it for the Onstar, LOL.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Is that the way Volt will be marketed?
November 20th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
#93
It doesn’t count until our own and totally credible journalist Dr. Dennis reports. Otherwise, “believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear.” I’m just saying.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
#81
I totally agree. +1
November 20th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Exactly. Hey, when I’m sitting in the parking lot with my engine idling as my wife drops off a few packages at the Post Office, the radiator fan loudly cycles back and forth with the engine dropping off a few 100 revs and back up again. People who buy the Volt are not expecting it to be 100% like a gasoline-only car; they will get used to it.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
this high whine rpm is a engineering flaw. Typical GM oversite. Too late to make changes other than kill some mpg so software can keep the dirty 4 banger polluter running to build up soc. Can’t wait to see what else pops up. 38mpg in CS mode?….lol
November 20th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
People expect an EV to be quite, but this isn’t an EV isn’t it?
November 20th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
The Volt is not a mild or a strong hybrid. The Volt is driven by electric motor ALL of the time. Unlike most strong hybrids that power around on gasoline all day except in parking lots and stop n’ go traffic situations. Strong hybrids typically cost between $26k and $60k.
The extended range power system of the Volt appears to be an inline engine dual electric motor configuration. Wherein a traditional efficient gasoline/E85 engine drives an external shaft. This shaft is collared to a generator and a traction motor. A computer system manages the what, when, and how elements of the power delivery system. And also manages the braking regen power reclaim.
Minor sound issues remain for R&D as conveyed through the non partisan test reviews of this week. With 12 months remaining until delivery. These results are very good news.
=D~
November 20th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
Yes. It is designed for idiot owners who won’t remember to charge their car so it had to be designed to be a “dirty EV” and thus the ICE.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Just a thought, but as the Volt needs software updates throughout its life cycle, I hope that these can be downloaded and installed at home just like we can do software and firmware updates on our computers, routers, iPods, cell phones, digital cameras – heck, even DVD players. I’d hate to have to return to a dealer (and get charged a hefty service fee) for every software and firmware update.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Wow, the Volt runs on gasoline and you dare call it electric only? What happens when your charge is gone and you have an empty gas tank? You’re dead in the water. What happens when you put gas in the tank? You pollute the air and your car will continue to run.
Do you just not get it?
November 20th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
I can see the reports now. Customers cars disabled due to failed software update at home. Car stuck at customers home.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
They will interchange these nomenclatures as deemed fit to hide an actual flaw.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
hi AnonymousProxy #105,
Please reread my post #102. I believe you misread it.
The Volt can be used as a 40 mile range EV throughout it’s first 10 years of service. This is a pure EV with no liquid fuel use at all. GM battery testing reports that the Volt will retain a 32 mile EV range thereafter (80% initial battery range).
=D~
November 20th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Doesn’t that completely negate their original principle of “keeping the same driving experience”? Is that just one more thing consumers need to expect to get disappointed on?
I expect these to get removed as soon as the “Censors” of GM propaganda are aware but Troll I am in your perception but right I am on my points.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Hi Dave.
I grant that 40 miles all electric is great but if this car is to be used for single car family or double car family then it WILL use gas. It is designed to. In the most recent study I read on the cash for clunkers, owners who drove the clunkers for years drove them less. When traded in for higher mpg vehicles those same owners admitted to driving much more due to higher mpg. So with that said, owners will more likely drive longer or more with this product thus increasing the chances much higher that it will run in what is called CS mode.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
I believe that GM is using a sealed pressurized fuel system.
This will reduce evaporative emissions (this system may be mandated in the future) and also helps to reduce the problems with stale gas.
As a result, the tank may need an internal bladder that expands when the tank is low on fuel, and contracts as fuel is put into the tank. So the total exterior tank volume may not be indicative of the total tank capacity.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
I hope that GM is doing everything they can do to make that IC engine as QUIET and VIBRATION-FREE as possible. They should use the latest and greatest sound dampening materials.
Some of the journalists who test drive it are going to expect the Volt to be “library quiet” all the time since the Volt is an electric car. It would be awesome if GM could make the IC engine so quiet and vibration-free that people don’t notice much difference when it’s in charge sustaining mode.
I’m sure GM knows who the best suppliers are for noise reduction products for automobiles. Hopefully, GM will get the best sound deadeners for the money. I’m sure the suppliers will sell a LOT of their products if EREVs like the Volt become mainstream bestsellers. Maybe they’ll sell GM their products at a good discount. Maybe this is one of them:
http://www.secondskinaudio.com/products/Sound-Deadening-Materials.php
November 20th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
=D~
November 20th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Library quiet is what is expected of an electric car. A high rpm whine from a small internal combustion engine is what you hear in a “Not Electric” car.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Yup. Quiet, too
November 20th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Toyota got rid of the bladder on Gen 3 Prius. Issues with getting a consistent fill among other things. They now use some sort of vapor recovery system. The fuel systems I’ve worked on with bladders were always a pain and much more maintenance prone than solid tanks.
I haven’t heard that GM is going to use a bladder. I hope they don’t.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
You seem to be a stickler on this.Tell me this to help me understand….
What happens if you do not put gas in the gas tank after the 40 mile electric range? What has to occur to get more electricity to run the car OTHER than plugging in, because after all, it’s “Extended range”. What must be burned/consumed and what is the byproduct?
November 20th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
I have twice responded to your concerns. Please reread for a better understanding. I am home with my son now. See you tomorrow my friend.
=D~
November 20th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
“The accompanying mechanical roar reminds me of a missed shift in a manual-transmission car.”
The above quote says otherwise.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
He must mean that if you never drive over 40 miles AER for 10 years you will never use gas and it’s all electric.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
When I hear the engine reving up, it will be comforting. I’ll know that the battery will be ready when I need it next. Regardng the sudden noise, I could not care less. (literal). Or, for some of you, I could care less. (ironic)
But when my wife test drives the car, she will not be happy with that behaviour no matter how much I talk it up. And she will not get used to it. That’s a reality.
I also think carcus1 has nailed it. After this much work, you would think that this would be a non-issue. The fact that it is an issue suggests something fundamental. Of couse, I do not know for sure, but that’s what my gut is saying.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
So the gas tank, internal combustion engine etc designed into the car is just extra weight to carry around all the time and 40 miles electric is the furthets you can go. WOW, over $40K for this thing? What a waste.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Could you please provide references to these studys. I’ve never heard of this.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
The idea behind the Volt is to build a car that has same the driving capabilities of today’s cars and displaces as much gasoline as possible … AND do it a “fairly” reasonable price.
With the 40 miles of all electric driving, I bet 75-80% of the people with a Volt will not be using charge sustaining mode (gasoline generator mode) very often at all … especially if they can plug in at work. The Volt will be perfect for most people.
If you drive 100+ miles every single day, maybe the Volt isn’t for you. But with the Volt, at least you know you CAN do it. Unlike the Nissan Leaf, you can keep on trucking from coast to coast non-stop all you want in a Volt.
Right now, the battery technology isn’t good enough and cheap enough so that you can drive 300+ miles before recharging. On long trips, most people ALSO would want to recharge in 5-10 minutes just like getting gasoline on the interstate. That is just not technically possible …. YET. Believe me, there’s probably thousands of engineers and scientists that are working on it now. 10 years goes by pretty fast as you get older. Be patient. Each new generation of the Volt is going to get better and better.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
One of my cars is a 2004 Saturn ION with a 4 cylinder ICE. I have brought the RPM’s to 3,400 once and would have to say it was a noisy experience. I typically never go above 2,500 RPM. I would think the Volt would be programmed to feather its RPM’s to an acceptable db noise level. Let’s face it the higher the RPM’s the noisier the ICE gets. So they should trickle charge the battery with low RPM’s before it gets to the point where it would require higher RMP’s.
NPNS!
November 20th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
I don’t care. Just get it out – I’m sure the first netscape/internet explorer wasn’t completely refined either.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Volt is a series hybrid, by definition, but does not have to be marketed that way. Calling it EV is fine, but thinking of beyond 40 miles or winter warm-up as an emergency is a bit odd.
As for reflection upon strong hybrids, many owners see 45 MPH electric-only during everyday driving… which certainly doesn’t fit that description.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/08/06/4-downsides-to-cash-for-clunkers.html
That’s counterintuitive, since drivers must trade in their old car for one that gets significantly better mileage in order to get the rebate. But with a fresh ride in the driveway, buyers are likely to change their driving habits. Surveys by research firm CNW Marketing Research have found that clunker-upgraders drove their old vehicle about 6,200 miles in 2008, barely half the typical annual mileage of 12,000. But most said they’d drive their new car more and take longer trips. CNW’s math shows that if clunker-upgraders drive just 90 percent of the annual average mileage in the first year of ownership, they’ll end up burning an extra 61 gallons of gas, even though they get better mileage.
——————————————————————————————–
I also recall several video, can’t remember the channel, interviews of buyers and past C4C buyers saying that yes, they drove more because they can get further on a gallon and more reliable on long trips. A few others admitted they drove it more because they weren’t ashamed of their car anymore. Understandable though.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
I was getting hives all day long because I couldn’t hit the site. lol.
I agree with carcus1 and some others that it was deliberate on GM’s part to avoid showing CS mode. If this is the best they can do in 6 months (and a $quarter-million$ a copy), I don’t see them ‘fixing’ this ‘problem’ before launch.
I also agree with the rest, that for most of the Volt-buying public that this is *not* a ‘problem’ that needs to be ‘fixed’.
We already know that this engine was chosen because it was off-the-shelf, not because of it’s excellent-quiet-generator characteristics. I expected it to be a little loud compared to a Northstar V-8. Do they even have all the insulation in place in pre-production cars?
Get us a real car magazine journalist to drive one on some real roads. Not these yo-yo’s that normally ride in taxis. Hopefully, Car&Driver will have a better article.
BTW, telling someone they are ‘testing CS mode’ before the test drive is stacking the deck against you. You will notice that he said he waited until the charge was low and then pointed the car up a hill. They knew before hand what they were looking for. These guys were basically hand-picked and coached.
Posawatz also poured gas on the fire supporting the conclusion that ‘there is a problem’. Maybe GM is creating this problem on purpose?
As a software developer, I usually need to show steady progress fixing bugs. It might be the same here. No bugs to fix – it’s time for shrink wrap! I expect that we will see a re-test soon showing that ‘the problem’ is resolved.
We need to somehow petition GM to give Lyle a shot. And soon!
November 20th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
I disagree. An EV is 0% emissions free 100% of the time under all conditions.
I agree it is a hybrid of series configuration that uses both electric and petroleum.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
The Volt is an EV with 40 miles of range, sometimes you hear noises from a generator if you go past those 40 miles.. if it used a fuel cell for range extension you would hear a whine from the air compressor or if it used a hamster wheel driven generator you would hear the hamster squeak.. the only silent power generation is perhaps a solar cell array that you tow behind you.
A quick test to see if its an EV is to drain the fuel tank, see if it still moves (as long as the battery is charged).. dont try this with a Prius.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Here’s a solution: when the Volt enters ER mode, an engine sound recording fades into the passenger cabin. This sound recording would have a spectrum of sounds from idle sound to full bore screaming sound. The accelerator pedal would control the RPM level of the recorded engine noise — mashing the pedal would raise the RPM sound while lifting off would decrease it, just as if the accelerator pedal was tied to a real ICE engine.
Meanwhile, the real Volt ICE engine would be operating but its noise would be drowned out by the recorded engine noise heard inside.
The end result would be that the driver would have the familiarity of engine sound as if it was real – but it would only be a recording.
As for the recording I’d like my Volt to sound like a V-12 Lamborghini…..
November 20th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Of course not.. BTW, the new 2010 Prius with the EV button is also an EV.. just very limited but that can be easily changed.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Obviously, there are several different meanings for EV “Electric Vehicle”.
It could mean having primarily electric drive, or, it could mean BEV or pure EV. Or, many other configurations. A hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle is 100% emission free as well. Is it an EV? Well, kind of. It is making on-board electricity to drive an electric motor to drive the wheels.
Heck, if you go far enough with this, a bicycle is an EV since it uses electrical impulses within an organic being to drive the wheels.
Cajoling and badgering and smearing may win an election, but, we are just trying to exchange ideas and information here. Not ‘win’ the argument.
BTW. A BEV is not 100% emissions free. Somehow, you need to make electricity to power the thing. However, this is a trade-off most are willing to concede to get off of the oil-based economy treadmill.
As soon as a Volt is in my Chevrolet dealership, I will go over and see if it is for me. Based on current information, it’s looking good!
November 20th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Could someone consider posting a video from inside an IVER that clearly captures, for better or worse, the “disconcerting” CSM noise levels that were being reported?
Why not let us hear for ourselves the Volt’s CSM sound levels along with a discussion of the continuing engineering challenges they present? Wouldn’t it be better to have the public better informed about the Volt’s unique sounds, soft, unique and noisy, sooner rather than later?
November 20th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Keep in mind the source… , the New Yuck Times,
arguably the most biased and unreliable news organization in the free world. Being ultra liberal, they hate anything with an American slant. Had this been the newest Toyota, he would have given it rave reviews.
Lets face it. A generator powered car is NOT going to perform like any other car and its gonna give off different queues, make different sounds, and react differently than a conventional car. Just like a hybrid does. The motoring public will just get used to it and it will be no big deal. If we want to drive cars, this is the future. Sure beats hell out of the New York subway, or any other mode of public transportation. Do you want to catch the flu on the way to work, get mugged or harassed by worthless drunks and druggies walking 10 blocks from the station to your house?, set in vomit on a bus seat because you didn’t look?, then your chu chu awaits. I have experienced all of the above ‘benefits’ of public transportation (okay, I got VERY lucky and kicked the mugger’s ass unconscious), and believe me I will take the Volt. I don’t care if it sounds like a steam locomotive!
November 20th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
If you have faith in the battery to propel the car, why the hell do you doubt the genset’s ability to do so?
November 21st, 2009 at 12:07 am
Expectations aside it would be pretty annoying to be sitting at a red light and suddenly your engine is revving to 3,000 rpm. This is unnatural to anyone’s driving experience and folks would be startled.
I think they can, and will need to, smooth that out at a very small sacrifice of battery life by opening up the charge envelope.
While you are sitting at a red light the Volt can be commanded to be patient and wait until you are underway at some minimum speed before ramping up the ICE beyond some threshold value.
I’m sure GM can figure this out, but the control algorithms are probably a lot more complicated than everyone realized at first.
November 21st, 2009 at 4:28 am
GM should make a volt simulator and release it as a game – Volt Engineer for XBOX 360. The challenge when you are driving around the streets is to find your own preferred settings and download them to the car or share them on-line with your friends. See who can get best AER or least sudden noise!
Makes a change from being the fastest around a circuit – bit like Moon Lander. Maybe you could program Beethoven’s Ode to Joy to play on the stereo when the generator kicks in.
btw what a great set of comments – up until this one that is
.
November 21st, 2009 at 8:42 am
So not exactly a show stopper then?
Looking forward to Lyles review.
LJGTVWOTR
Has Plug? Have Sale.
November 21st, 2009 at 8:42 am
Very good observations, +1.
I too am a software developer and I think they are spoon feeding us with “problems”. The are legitimate problems, but let’s face it guys, they just aren’t show stoppers. This is a good thing. Starting very soon things should start moving fairly quickly, LA auto show, Detroit auto show, opening the battery plant, activities in the Hamtramck plant, even in the Flint plant. There will be lots of news soon. And of course not the least, a report from Lyle on CS mode.
We should consider having a little Volt get-together at the Detroit auto show. Maybe GM would even meet with us and let us drive one?
November 21st, 2009 at 9:01 am
GM are you listening? This really could be great. Have a community mode where groups of Virtual Volts go on road rallies. GM could even collect usage statistics.
November 21st, 2009 at 9:24 am
and then your engine throws a rod thru the hood.. and you DRIVE it to the dealer to get it fixed.. what other car can you do that with?
November 21st, 2009 at 9:38 am
any publicity is good.. they are going to hold on to that 60mpg in CS mode until the bitter end.
November 21st, 2009 at 9:53 am
One group of Volt fans say GM is taking the necessary time to develop a refined vehicle, while the rest of us are growing weary of the dithering. LJGTVOTR
November 21st, 2009 at 10:03 am
gm-volt is no longer reliably accessible to me. I get a “database connection” message most of the time.
November 21st, 2009 at 10:17 am
RB
I am experiencing connection issues also. I also posted, and saw my post, now it is gone.
What a bummer, I thought it was a good post, and now I am to lazy to re-type it.
Oh, well I guess thats the way it is.
Lyle: I have never had issues in the past, but since yesterday, I have experienced several connection issues. Are you aware of the problem?
November 21st, 2009 at 10:19 am
That was really weird!
I tried to respond RB, by clicking on QUOTE button, but it failed. Now, I see multiples of RB in my last post.
“Things they are a changin’”
November 21st, 2009 at 11:22 am
I *only* drive small / mid-size cars and pickup trucks with 4-cylinder engines, and most of my miles are through the Appalachian mountains. I’ve driven vehicles with larger engines, but I’ve never found the (admittedly small) premium to be worth the money.
Sure the 4-banger get a little noisy when you want full-power, but every vehicle does that if you mash the pedal. I rarely use all the power that’s available from the “little” 4-cylinder engine, and I almost always have time to warn the passengers before going to WOT. I just don’t understand why you need a bigger engine unless you’re hauling a heavier load. You have to know how to think ahead in order to drive with a small engine, but you should be doing that in every vehicle you drive. I just don’t get what the big deal is.
Sure, noise can take away from the impression that a car is a luxury car, but not everyone cares about luxury. Well, maybe at $40k they do. But I rode in a Lexus 450h a few months ago, and I was frankly turned off by how luxurious the vehicle was — I just don’t want to be vacuuming cheerios and sawdust out of the cupholders on a vehicle like that.
November 21st, 2009 at 11:28 am
…And the message I posted late last night is gone now.
November 21st, 2009 at 2:04 pm
#147
Me too. I’m glad to hear it’s not just me.
Maybe it’s Carlos Ghosn in his space ship jammimng the frequency, LOL. Elon Musk?? Shai Agassi?? Fisker?? Eestor?? They’re all pretty scary, if you ask me.
Or maybe the trolls have a new secret weapon.
November 21st, 2009 at 2:06 pm
AnonymousProxy,
We all know that you won’t be buying a Volt. It doesn’t meet your definition of “value”, which is all well and good.
Understand that “value” is as much an individual determination as anything in the world can be. When the first Apple iPhone went on sale at $599 (8GB model), I bought one. At that price, it represented a good value to me, given my set of circumstances at the time. Clearly, as the price of the iPhone went down in conjunction with features going up, the number of people who found value in it also went up.
The initial runs of the Volt will find plenty of customers, but not at Honda Civic or Toyota Camry levels of acceptance. Some busy lawyer / doctor / executive types who commute within the 40 mile “all electric” range will find value in avoiding the time and hassle spent in filling up the tank. You know what they say, “time is money”, and my last lawyer billed me at $250 an hour for his time, so I’d say that for certain people, they would indeed find value in mostly avoiding the gas pumps.
Some people find value in paying twice or three times more for organically-grown fruits and vegetables. Some people find value in buying a house instead of renting an apartment. Some people find value by flying to a business meeting vs. just calling everyone up on a conference call. As for me, I won’t be one of the first to buy a Chevy Volt, but I’ll be thanking all of those who did because just like the iPhone, they will push innovation up and prices down to where eventually it WILL become a good value to me.
November 21st, 2009 at 2:06 pm
#149
Amen brother. You can’t say it any better than that. +1
November 21st, 2009 at 2:49 pm
#100
They’re baaaaccckk!!! It’s a nice day under the bridge.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:10 pm
#153 Luke: I *only* drive small / mid-size cars and pickup trucks with 4-cylinder engines, and most of my miles are through the Appalachian mountains.
Dave K.: Ever drive a mid size car or small truck that has a small 4 cylinder engine?
Notice the wording on my post. A small 4 cylinder engine is the type found in Renault and Fiat cars. My family currently own two 2.4L 165 HP (large) 4 cylinder engines. These have marginal power and average around 30 mpg. We paid 20k for the truck and 26k for the sedan. Looking forward to going Voltec ASAP.
=D~
November 21st, 2009 at 4:31 pm
I agree … big deal.
3,000 rpm – so what – totally normal for a genset.
If it was 6000rpm and sitting at the light yeah that would be a drama.
People need to get overthemselves with the new “concept”
Cheers!
November 21st, 2009 at 8:24 pm
That was absolutely expected by engineers. I will tell you more – in order to avoid roaring you have to have bigger engine or more advanced either different CARB regulation with allowed lager SOC fluctuation range in the charge sustaining mode and larger capacitor. But why you man have to worry about that if it is only noise problem in very few instances?
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Perhaps ear plugs or more insulation and better motor mounts would do the trick. Kinda reminds me of the guy in the food additive business who said, “What this country needs is a better white rat.”
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:30 pm
1) This is a engineering problem – for the software engineers. The “set” genset points are the problem. They need software to act as an “overseer” – which would GRADUALLY speed up the genset to the preset genset points, then gradually slow down the genset when a surplus of electric has been added to the battery. Trying to maintain a precise, razors-edge 30% SOC at all times is a fools errand – resulting in sudden, startling changes in noise and vibration. All completely unnecessary.
2) Exactly what is wrong with a sound-cancellation system to assist the Volt is maintaining a quiet interior? Isn’t “quiet” a hallmark of electric driving? Previous posters are right – get Buick’s soundproofing engineers on the Volt immediately. $40000 is a high-end Buick price, not a Chevy price. Volt owners deserve – yes, deserve – a quiet car for that price, not a typical Chevy econo-buzzbucket racket.
——————————————————————
If I were in charge, and I heard the genset kick in, I would…
1) Pull a 45, put a hole through the ICE,
2) Tow it back to headquarters, and make the engineers look at it,
2) Fix the engineers with a steely stare, and simply say…
“Try again – and get it right this time, or you’re FIRED”.
(People work better when you give them an incentive – it works for Donald Trump). I did mention that I am somewhat of a grump, right?
November 25th, 2009 at 2:59 am
Yes very true, thank you. I misspoke in combining the reporters experiences with my attempt at a humorous interpretation of the larger experience of consumers moving from one technology to the next.