The Chevy Volt’s gasoline engine/generator has a unique role in this car. It doesn’t operate as do gas engines in conventional cars in that it does not turn the driveshaft. The Volt is first and foremost an EV and the engine’s only job is to spin a generator to make electricity whenever the battery reaches its low point.
We have learned that the generator will operate through an ideal RPM range anywhere from around 1400 to 4000 RPMs. The RPM and the engine load are varied by the car’s power electronics based on the need for power, which is assessed and adjusted continuously once the pure EV range is depleted.
Combustion engines run at one of two four-stroke cyles. The most commonly used is the Otto cyle. The Atkinson cycle is more efficient as it allows all four strokes (intake, compression, power and exhaust) to occur in a single turn of the crankshaft. This allows the power stroke to be longer than the compression stroke thereby generating more work for the same amount of energy.
Toyota, for example, uses an Atkinson cycle engine in its Prius to maximize efficiency and thus fuel economy. Atkinson cycle engines tend to be lower power and therefore slower off the start, though that is offset in hybrids by electric motor supplementation.
Many people have therefore asked whether GM will use the Atkinson cycle for the Volt’s generator.
GM-Volt has learned from reliable sources it will not. The generation one Volt engine is an Otto engine.
We have no more information than that or the reasoning why, but feel free to speculate in the comment section.
Keep in mind, GM of course has access to Atkinson engines as they are used in their 2-mode hybrid trucks currently on the market. The Volt generator will also be used as a common part as it will also be the powerplant for the high volume Chevy Cruze.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 15th, 2009 at 7:24 am and is filed under Engineering, Generator. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+11
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:28 am)No surprise here. Remember, they grabbed an off-the shelf engine to minimize cost and R&D for this car.
+8
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:32 am)It is a good decision by gm to keep the car closer to standard ICE systems. That gives the greatest flexibility over the Volt development cycle. It also makes the Volt maintenance more familiar. The Atkinson cycle can be a later generation.
One cannot do every new thing in a single step.
+10
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:33 am)GM engineers are not dumb. They have their reasons to use Otto over Atkinson. I’m just thankful they are making this car at all.
+4
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:34 am)If they are going to spend billions on R&D perhaps they should have gone for the gold. This seems like a strange engineering decision when they are trying to make a very efficient car. Albeit, some may say it is an EV with a generator so the generator efficiency doesn’t matter. I would like to be able to tell people that even in CS mode the Volt can get 50-60 MPG and this seems to all but throw that thought out the window.
-2
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:38 am)The Volt generator will also be used as a common part as it will also be the powerplant for the high volume Chevy Cruze.
That last sentence is remarkable. I am not sure what it means.
Any more details?
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:44 am)I’m sure gm enginers have considered Atkinson, if for no other reasons than that it is in the Toyota and their own trucks. There probably details having to do with acceleration in CS mode, or production, or something else we haven’t yet thought up
The good part is that if it is a good idea it still can come, even if not within generation one.
+8
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:45 am)I believe he means that the 1.4L engine used in the Volt to drive the generator is the same engine as is used in the conventionally powered Cruze. This choice was clearly to minimize development costs & reduce component costs for the volt.
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:00 am)I found this quote on another site, originally posted I suspect in Dec. of 2008. “The Cruze will be built in Ohio, and it will go on sale in June 2010 as a 2011 model. Although Chevy is mum about the subject, sources tell us the U.S. Cruze might use a 1.4-liter direct-injected turbocharged 4-cylinder that achieves 40 mpg on the highway.”
That 1.4 liter engine sure does sound like the Volt’s ICE, minus the turbo.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:03 am)Other than the MPG during charge sustaining mode, what else is affected by this decision, related to the Volt?
IMHO, this had everything to do with the short timeline to production the Volt has faced from day one. They had enough hurdles to overcome, without adding a different style ICE to the mix.
+13
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:04 am)I’m guessing it has more to do with the potential use of the engine in multiple vehicles.
They just sat down at a table a long while ago and said “ok, what engine do we already have available that will work for the Volt but keep in mind that we need to save some money here so if we can use 1 design for 2 cars instead of 2 designs for 2 cars then it will save us money. And remember we’re bleeding money here folks.”
This is just one of the compromises that it has taken to try to get the Volt on the showroom floor which is almost all that matters. Chalk it up to the nature of gen1 tech and hope for better things in gen2+.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:08 am)I totally agree with all your posts so far today. I think the GM engineering team is top shelf and may well want to minimize the learning curve for the dealership’s garage crews. They are going to have to receive a lot of training even as it stands now.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:10 am)I agree, they were probably reading the sign on the office wall that said Let’s just get the Volt’s wheels on the road! (lol)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-57
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:11 am)(click to show comment)
-1
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:12 am)PDNFTT
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:13 am)This would help explain the lousy charge-sustaining fuel economy.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:13 am)I’m curious as to whether the Otto cycle’s different combustion/valve timing allows it to run any smoother or quieter than an Atkinson engine?
+6
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:16 am)Thanks fo this one Lyle. I was getting quite tired of hearing about Atkinson.
Atkinson cycle is less powerful than Otto because the intake charge is mixed with more exhaust. I am thinking that Otto was used for this reason and because the engine is ‘off the shelf’.
Since the generator will not be used much by ~80% of drivers, it makes sense to use less expensive components rather than exotic ones. Yeah, they could’ve done a diesel or turbo or wankel or turbine, but, a plain ole normally-aspirated ICE is much simpler and less cost. Buy a Karma or Converj if you want higher end. At the end of the day, Volt is a Chevy.
With the additional battery capacity, Volt’s AVERAGE mpg will be much higher than Prius. Even plug-in Prius. The shoot-out will be 2011 plug-in Prius vs 2011 Volt.
May the best car win!
+9
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:17 am)GM management, on the other hand . . .
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:24 am)It is very important to not to put in all the bells and whistles in a 1.0 release – then what would you put in 2.0?
I’m sure Volt gen 2 will be cheaper, will have even higher MPG rating, will have a custom-made Atkinson-cycle ICE, will have two additional cup-holders, and will be able to pick you up outside your door if it is raining…
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:31 am)Using the 1.4 engine for both Volt and Cruze does reduce manufacturing and R&D costs. I think GM has another reason, phase out of the ICE altogether. Maybe ultracap, fuel cell or pure EV. Batteries and electronic components are getting more refined. A glimmer of charging infrastructure and distributed energy storage suggests a future of pure EV’s. Lutz has commented on GM’s EV path. Why waste R&D dollars and time on ICE when your plan is to go EV!
+6
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:31 am)“The Atkinson cycle is more efficient as it allows all four strokes (intake, compression, power and exhaust) to occur in a single turn of the crankshaft.”
______________________________________________
That’s how they originally worked.
Here is how a modern Atkinson cycle engine works: (source Wikipedia)
Modern “Atkinson-cycle” engines
A small engine with Atkinson-style linkages between the piston and flywheel. Modern Atkinson-cycle engines do away with this complex energy path.
Recently Atkinson cycle has been used to describe a modified Otto cycle engine in which the intake valve is held open longer than normal to allow a reverse flow of intake air into the intake manifold. This is more like a Miller cycle engine than an actual Atkinson cycle engine. The effective compression ratio is reduced (for a time the air is escaping the cylinder freely rather than being compressed) but the expansion ratio is unchanged. This means the compression ratio is smaller than the expansion ratio. Heat gained from burning fuel increases the pressure, thereby forcing the piston to move, expanding the air volume beyond the volume when compression began. The goal of the modern Atkinson cycle is to allow the pressure in the combustion chamber at the end of the power stroke to be equal to atmospheric pressure; when this occurs, all the available energy has been obtained from the combustion process. For any given portion of air, the greater expansion ratio allows more energy to be converted from heat to useful mechanical energy meaning the engine is more efficient.
The disadvantage of the four-stroke Atkinson-cycle engine versus the more common Otto-cycle engine is reduced power density. Because a smaller portion of the compression stroke is devoted to compressing the intake air, an Atkinson-cycle engine does not take in as much air as would a similarly designed and sized Otto-cycle engine.
Four-stroke engines of this type with this same type of intake valve motion but with a supercharger to make up for the loss of power density are known as Miller cycle engines.
[edit]
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:33 am)OT: an article about the LEAF telemetrics, with a mention of the Volt’s strength re not needing recharging stations:
http://www.technologyreview.com/communications/24209/page1/
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:40 am)The efficiency gains for an Atkinson would be nowhere near worth the offsets for its comparative power losses for that very-needed torque difference at the high end, when very frequently needed for peak genset output when, say, needing to onramp or pass after battery depletion. Also, “Off the shelf” known-reliabilities are more important as well for Gen1 vehicles of any type, as we are all aware. (But GM might have a surprise for Gen2 or Gen3 if it looks like engineering would want Atkinson cycle by then). I prefer the Otto by all means, though.
(off to work). Have a great day everyone!
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:50 am)GM is going to use one of their more efficient piston engines that they’ve been developing for years, so that they can stick with the designs and vendors that they know.
If they go to any other engine, it should be the Moller International compound rotary engine, or a micro-turbine engine.
+5
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:51 am)The more I read about the different methods of gasoline exploding in cylinders, the more I look forward to electric vehicles. I hope to own a BEV one day in my life and say goodbye to gasoline forever.
-11
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:53 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:54 am)With direct injection and VVT, it is likely that GM can use late intake valve closure to reap some of the benefits of the Atkinson cycle. Here is an excerpt from a GM paper on the 2-mode Saturn Vue (that was ultimately cancelled).
“The two-mode hybrid is mated to an optimized direct injection gasoline engine, which takes advantage of higher compression ratio enabled by direct injection technology as well as optimized late intake valve closing (LIVC) using dual independent variable valve timing (VVT) to reduce pumping losses.”
+5
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:04 am)Yes. It’s beginning to look like this figure will be disappointing.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:09 am)Please tell me what the lousy charge sustaining mileage is. I must have missed it.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+8
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:11 am)Dr. G @ 13 says “Ummmm. Y’all realize that the Volt is just another GM epic FAIL in the waiting right?”
______________________________
Ummmmmm… FAIL is not a a noun. You flunk. Go back to second grade.
+4
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:15 am)It’s beginning to look like this figure will be disappointing.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:18 am)Under-promise, over-deliver. With the aerodynamics of the Volt, it may well surprise you.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:25 am)Attkinson may be more efficient then Otto, but didn’t we have posts here about GM’s HCCI engine development progress and how that may make its way into the Volt?
+7
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:27 am)Kent @ 26 above says:
“execs decide to rape their customers and shareholders and bondholders by… continuing to pay their unskilled hourly workers higher salaries than the average medical doctor…”
___________________________________________________
Unskilled? These guys build automobiles – one of the most complicated devices that we all use and depend on for our daily survival.
I’ve known medical doctors that don’t know which way to turn a doorknob.
The last jerk-wad doctor I went to see didn’t have the social grace to introduce himself when he came in the exam room , and I had to ask three times for him to look in my throat to see if I had an obstruction because I was choking!
Maybe the people making our cars are worth at least as much to society as some medical doctors.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:30 am)There *was* some speculation about that, but then again that’s what we spend most of our time doing here – speculating. Personally, I hope they go with a tried and true, off the shelf engine, just to reduce the number of things that are brand new technologies. They already have a ton of the latter. KISS.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+4
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:36 am)Disappointing? What would you call disappointing? Anything over 30MPG would not be disappointing to me. Others will say it is disappointing even if it is over 50MPG.
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:37 am)Combine this lower sfc with the nearly 20% loss in the generator, motor controller and traction motor and you’ve killed CS mode fuel consumption. I expect low 40′s MPG in charge sustaining mode.
+7
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:42 am)In large part the CS mode mileage seems a little less important than the idea that 80% of the driving population won’t need to even USE gas on a daily basis. Granted, if it was something horrible that limited the range of a tankful, it could be a bigger issue.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:57 am)From a number of hints and estimates it looks like the MPG in CS mode will be in the 35 MPG ballpark. That’s below the 50 MPG estimate when the engineers started.
But your point that CS mode is not critical is a good one. The Volt is designed as a commuter car that minimizes gas consumption. It’s not a cross country cruiser (nor are any of the small fuel efficient cars IMHO). Time is better spent figuring out how to maximize opportunity charging than it is worrying about MPG in CS mode. Hopefully the car will rarely be driven in CS mode. At 35 MPG, if you drive 5 miles a day in CS mode, you’d still be using only a gallon of gas a week. Not a big deal.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:02 am)I guess the reason is simple – GM does not have “ready to ship” Atkinson cycle engine at the moment. Also it seems to me GM engineers prefer HCCI technology anyway, but HCCI engines are not in production stage either.
So old good reliable Otto cycle engine is a logical choice. We may eventually see Volt gen2 (or 3) with HCCI generator.
HCCI engine seems to fit much better to be a generator than Otto or Atkinson engine.
One of the main drawbacks of HCCI – narrow power range – is not a problem for electric propulsion. From other hand HCCI consumes 30% less fuel and works much cleaner than standard ICE.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:03 am)Well put! If we just knew the volume of the gas tank, we’d be able to know how many weeks we could go without ever GOING to a gas station.
I still like the idea of an electronic sign on the trunk that announces how many miles I’ve gone without using gasoline, my overall mpg, or even the # of days since I went to the gas station(lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:03 am)Thank you. I’ll think of today as rare and special.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:04 am)Here we go again with the irrelevant CS mode mileage. Other than a data item for the statistical analysts, pure CS mode mileage just doesn’t matter. Would you pay another grand for a different engine to get +5% better mileage for 0.2% of your travel time? I just doesn’t make sense.
Displacing foreign oil is the goal. Not ultimate mileage in CS mode. On E85, Volt will use WAY less foreign oil over all than any other highway capable car on the road in 2011. (Name one highway with charging stations every 75 miles and I will concede that Leaf is ‘highway capable’.)
With my 42-mile commute I will be surprised if I have to buy E85 more than 4 times a year!
+16
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:10 am)With greatest respect, I believe that a part of the logic of engineering is the logic of economics. Engineering is about building real things, cars and otherwise. Cost is a critical aspect.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:14 am)For all the money this will cost, for all talk about electric cars, for all the talk about efficiency, I am hoping for something in the mid to upper 40′s at least. 50 would be great. But my current ICE can get 39 mpg if I am careful, and 31 mpg when I am not, and I only paid $13.5K for it. My hope is the Volt gets way better mileage than that.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:16 am)Amen! It just makes my heart sing to think about just how little gasoline the Volt will actually need to use. There will need to be a lot of education for John Q Public though, or they will look at the Volt’s “mileage” as a more important factor than it really is. Especially if people are used to comparing cars based on the mpg (like Prius vs Volt).
Be well,
Tagamet
PS RB: Glad I made you smile
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:17 am)A really good idea, actually. If it can’t be on the truck, at least on the console display, to be enjoyed by all
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:19 am)How does zero gas for the first 40 miles sound? Granted, if you have a very long commute and no opportunity to plugin at work, your current car may be a better deal. JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:29 am)but but.. this means the Volt does not need infrastructure?.. why does GM talk so much about infrastructure?
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:32 am)From an interview w/Jon Lauckner this summer:
————————–
“He did highlight HCCI as an alternative that does have promise for increased efficiency. None of these alternatives are likely to appear before at least the second gen Volt. The first gen Volt will be e85 capable at launch just as announced when the original concept appeared.”
—————————
However, I’m not sure HCCI could handle the high RPMs that we are now seeing in the Volt engine now.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:33 am)Lyle you should have asked about LIVC, not atkinson cycle.
-1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:41 am)You’re evil (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:43 am)In Lyle’s test drive, he noted CS fuel economy indicated in the upper 30s. Farah (or maybe it was Weber) handwaved that away with “you must think of the car as an EV,” a point of view to which Lyle subscribes, so Lyle didn’t belabor the point. Still, upper 30s is nothing to write home about, especially for a 4-place compact car.
I overheard someone ask Farah (or maybe it was Weber) about driving the car from Detroit to Chicago. The response was, “I don’t know the distance… if it’s 300 miles, you should be OK.” If the car has an 8 gallon tank (as once reported in FreeP), that’s 40 miles electric and then 260 miles on fuel for a really noticeably mediocre 33-ish mpg.
People routinely hit the EPA numbers with their Priuses and many exceed them. As it is, I figure the current Prius gets better overall fuel economy than the Volt, assuming 38mpg in CS mode, on trips of 170 miles. If the CS fuel economy is lower still, then the breakevan is also shorter still.
If a Prius comes along with 14 miles AER, then there will be very few families for whom a Volt would actually require less gasoline during the course of a normal year of operation, once you get past the normal commute and look at trips to visit Grandma, vacationing at the beach, missed opportunities to charge, etc. As it is, with our normal annual use, if we compare a stock Prius to the (not yet available) Volt, we’d consume less gasoline with the stock Prius.
The Volt’s going to be a tough sell to people who actually take the time to run the numbers… or run any numbers. An Atkinson cycle engine’s efficiency could help the cause.
—
Someone mentioned that GM had Atkinson cycle engines available and in use in their busses. This is true but that’s hardly sized for the Volt application. Can GM build a 1.4L Atkinson cycle engine? That’s the question.
—
Vladg mentions the HCCI engine.
If I understand it correctly, the HCCI engine does a lot of its fuel economy magic when not under load (idling). This is not helpful for a parallel or serial hybrid, as there’s no reason to idle the engine at all, the software just shuts it off altogether when it’s not needed.
—
Dan Petit wrote, “The efficiency gains for an Atkinson would be nowhere near worth the offsets for its comparative power losses for that very-needed torque difference at the high end, when very frequently needed for peak genset output when, say, needing to onramp or pass after battery depletion.”
That’s ridiculous. The point of the serial hybrid power train is that energy can be stored in the battery; the software can go there to get the necessary power reserve. If GM’s concerned about power reserve, they can raise the normal charge floor a bit to make sure power is available. They could still use the more highly efficient engine to make the juice.
—
In response to Rashiid Amul’s “GM’s engineers are not dumb…” DrG wrote, “GM management, on the other hand . . . ”
DrG, you owe me a keyboard. Posts like that should start with “put down your coffeee, people…”
—
Jim I wrote, “IMHO, this had everything to do with the short timeline to production the Volt has faced from day one.”
What short timeline? Four years to production isn’t all that impressive.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:45 am)To turn a generator it takes a lot of torque. An Otto engine with a long crankshaft stroke and a low top-end (rpm), to me is the ideal engine for the Volt. (torque x rpm = horse power)
The long stroke can be compared to a bike that has a longer pedal—–giving it more torque. The lower rpm will allow the engine to operate in a wider range of torque ( sweet spot) and at the same time, will reduce the high engine whine inside the car.
+5
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:53 am)Although I disagreed with most of your post, this was the most egregious comment. So you’re saying that if you ignore the driving habits of 80% of the population, then the Prius is better than the Volt? Methinks you’ve missed the whole point of the Volt.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+5
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:56 am)Can you name 3 vehicles that went for CONCEPT to production in the same amount of time?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:57 am)Tag, I don’t restrict myself to 40 miles. I use my car for everything. Sometimes I go 200 miles on the weekend with no where to plug in.
Sure, many people don’t care about the mileage, but with the miles I put on, it is obviously an important feature to me.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:57 am)Series vs. Series/Parallel
The mpg in CS mode is important for validation of Series Hybrid technology.
We know that both series and series/parallel are adaptable to be plug in hybrids, but if series is substantially handicapped by relative inefficiency once the ICE is running, then a “leap frog” becomes improbable.
If the Volt’s mpg* comes in under 40 mpg its a detractor.
If the Volt’s mpg comes in under 30 mpg then it’s a failure. (imo, of course)
*City/hwy combined in CS mode 2008 EPA testing standards
/Lyle, thanks for putting the atkinson question to rest.
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:02 am)I’m not saying that the mpg’s in CS mode is unimportant. I’m just saying that it’s not going to be an important factor for the majority of American drivers. To you it’ll be more important. Only you can decide if it’s a deal-breaker.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:13 am)I agree with some of your post but have to take issue here.
GM cannot just increase the size of the battery’s “buffer zone” without consequence. Decreased battery life (due to increased cycles), decreased mpg and increased emissions (on the other end due to ICE running longer) come to mind.
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:13 am)7:33 am
Well you beat me to it there. That was my comment exactly. +1
8:12 am PST and I’m out of the game already. Pity the poor left coasters, always 3 hours behind the curve, LMAO.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:14 am)- GM will eventually be manufacturing BEVs.
- A bad experience in your garage will make for a bad electric car experience. GM needs to make sure that everything possible is done to make sure that it is easy to charge at home. Blowing breakers, making fires, and otherwise not charging properly would be bad.
- Apartment, Condo, no garage. There are millions of potential customers that don’t have easy access to their personal electrical connections.
- 240v. GM should push 240v charging because eventually you will need this much power to charge BEVs. Do the install once and do it correctly.
- Synergy. GM needs other manufacturers and companies to make Volt and all electrics successful. GM cannot do this alone.
- EV1. For this BEV, one of the ‘lessons learned’ is that infrastructure is needed to sell non-gasoline cars.
- 100 years. GM needs to overcome 100 years of doing it the same way. This is a shift in people’s way of doing things and will not be an easy sell without many, many other companies pushing the same direction.
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:17 am)8:12 am
Yeah, just hit the “-” key and move on, LOL.
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:17 am)You mean those poor folks that will get first access to the Volt’s? (lol) Tough sell!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:25 am)10:03
That was then and this is now, LOL.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:26 am)I have had an impression that HCCI is more efficient than standard ICE the same way Diesel is more efficient – by using compression ignition.
Yes, early HCCI prototypes could only work in HCCI mode during low-load and idle conditions and switched to standard ignition for medium and high loads. This is exactly where progress is being made right now, so next gen HCCI engines are going to work with medium loads and that may make them suitable as EREV generators.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:28 am)You do realize that by saying to not feed the trolls, you are in a way feeding them, right ?
And I do realize that by posting this, I’m sort of feeding them too, lol. Damn.
+9
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:31 am)This is just plain wrong for most people. First it’s silly to think that the Prius is equal to the Volt. It’s not. The Volt looks better (even Prius owners looking at the Volt in person think this) and will have better performance. It also has way cooler technology — it’s an an EV. The plug-in Prius can act like an EV if you’re not going very far and if you’re not going very fast and if you don’t need to accelerate very hard. That’s a lot of “ifs”. (IMHO the Volt has an “if” of its own, and that’s reliability, but that’s a different matter).
Second, no one that I know drives their Prius to Grandmas unless Grandma lives around the corner. It’s just too small and too dinky for road trips. The people I know who have a Prius always take the “other” car when they’re on the road. In fact some friends who have two Prius — so they technically don’t have “the other car” — always rent something more comfortable when they need to go out of town.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:34 am)That’s why I won’t reply to your post about my post saying not to post re the trolls. Wait, er, ….. (SIGH)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:42 am)Being that the Volt does not put mechanical power to the wheels (like the Prius) and turns a generator instead, it does not need an Atkinson cycle engine. The Otto cycle engine is not efficient at low rpm because of the “pumping loss” effect. But with the Volt that does not matter because the Otto engine will not take a load until it reaches it’s “sweet spot” which will be almost instantaneous. Therefore, the Atkinson engine would be a waste of money.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:42 am)Well, this explains all the hedging around CS mpg.
Yes, all that’s been said about gas mpg being less important is valid; but from a now narrower point of view. Fewer people are likely to think of the Volt as an all-around, all-purpose car than might otherwise have been the case. Observations that future Volts may be more efficient in CS mode than gen I are also likely correct; but when those Volts do become available, people will ask the gen 1 owners what gas mileage is like, and will be conditioned by their real world responses. Please remember that by this time, the efficiency for cars of less radical design will very likely be higher than 40 mpg.
To think that the Volt could have been a win all the way around is personally disappointing, since I’ve always believed that decoupling the engine from the wheels completely has the potential for huge efficiency gains.
I agree with dagwood and caucus (someone call Guiness). The real issue with CS mode mpg turns out to be the battery. The overwhelming prerogative to make a battery last for 10 years has required the GM engineers to sacrifice much of the decoupled engine’s inherent benefits. This can all turn around with a better battery in the future, but will face yet another perception barrier when it happens.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:54 am)I wouldn’t care if they use a beefed up lawnmower engine. I just want a practical EV. EREV fills that gap perfectly, since we have no charging infrastructure at all.
I hope the Volt is a success so we can get all kinds of different configuration of Voltec. I’ll take the one with a very light but safe structure, big and fast charging battery and a limp-home 3 cylinder air-cooled gen set. Seriously, I just want the minimum ICE to keep me from being stranded or stuck in the middle of traffic with nowhere to go in 120 degree heat. This way I can tool around at 40 mph and be able to keep my A/C (life support in Texas) running.
Now that the Volt design is carved in stone, I can’t wait to see them coming off the line. The engineers are already hard at work on gen II and even gen III (advanced technology group or similar) so I hope things go our way when the production line ramps.
Another financial crash would be very bad. The price of oil going down would also be devastating. I just hope there are enough individuals and governments that are smart enough to help support this critical transition to electrification. We need this option, even if we don’t realize it yet.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:55 am)Folks, I’m thinking that this engine might have some very pleasant surprises for us. I’m thinking that is not so conventional as might seem. GM has some very bright people and the ones working on this are not the second team. The Cruze looks like it might be a masterpiece in its own rite. Give it a little time, but I think some good things are going to come out before long.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:58 am)If it can get into the upper 30′s cutting circles around a parking lot, then it should get a very impressive mileage cruising the highway.
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:59 am)I’m surprised this was even a question.
+5
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:02 pm)Almost everything we do here is speculation. I guess it’s just a little irksome that today’s discussion seems to diminish the fact that the Volt will be getting 40 miles per day without a gasoline assist and be concentrating on the “importance” of it’s CS mileage. I’m rooting for a high CS MPG, but in the greater scheme of things it pales (to me). It might just be my perception and if so, I’ll apologize in advance.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:03 pm)Agreed. But by all means give ‘em a “thumbs down”
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:03 pm)Edit ran out.
Sorry carcus1, I agree with
…but not with
The whole point is that although the engine runs longer it does so at greater efficiency, increasing mpg. Emissions for atkinson cycle must have already been solved for the GM truck hybrids.
… you knew my agreement would come with a catch …
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:03 pm)What hedging?
Once the EPA sticker is set we will see what the city/hwy/combined numbers are. The Volt is still in the development phase. Until there is a production car to test, it ain’t done and nobody knows what the exact numbers are.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:05 pm)True, that is a decision that I will have to make.
However, the price is the price. If the car comes with a 50 mpg cs mode, will that hurt anyone buying it? I think it would be a very good selling point. Free for the first 40 miles, 50 mpg after that.
All this for around $32K with tax credit.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:05 pm)That would only be true if the Otto engine could operate at high power and then shut down. Around town that can be the case.
But on the highway the engine needs to stay at a constant 25% to 35% power. This is because continually cycling the battery would wear on the battery too much on a long trip and the overall efficiency is likely less once charging and discharging losses.
At 25% power an Atkinson probably will beat a Otto engine.
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:07 pm)lol….
What’s an Otto?
/not a gearhead…..
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:07 pm)Absolutely!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:09 pm)Bingo… until I hear a denial of LIVC I don’t think the speculation is really dead.
LIVC/VVT may have already been intended for the Cruise to improve its fuel mileage and the Volt gets it for “free.”
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:09 pm)And this is a bad thing, how?
-11
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:10 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:14 pm)It is the conventional four stroke gasoline engine named after Nicolaus Otto.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-stroke_cycle
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:17 pm)Don’t misunderstand me, folks; if cs mpg turns out to be less than 50 the Volt is still a viable and valuable addition to the national fleet.
My beef is that it could have, should have (and just maybe has) been so much better than that.
If the Gen I comes out with CS mpg under 50, with the AER caveat of up to 40 miles (meaning more like 35 or less in the real world), two things will need to be true in Gen II if the Volt is to keep early adopter momentum: CS mpg above 50, and 40 mile AER in the real world, with more possible when driving carefully. Both things ought to be doable with the better batteries we know are coming.
The EPA sticker will say 230 mpg, based on an arcane driving cycle with a full battery. GM wanted it this way, and they’ve said very little on their own site (or been quoted on this one) about what CS mode mpg is likely to be (but most quotes sound a lot like “um, it depends on your point of view, but don’t get your hopes up”).
The number will become known just as soon as someone buys a Volt, and does standard calculations of fuel over distance with a depleted battery.
I really hope that the optimists are correct, but today’s post is the hardest blow yet.
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:20 pm)For me, the charge sustaining mode is important. Sales talk and I am not interested in a Volt that gets 35MPG. I will either wait for a second of third generation Volt that gets 50+MPG CSM or get a plug in Prius of Jetta TDI. Cheers tagamet!
+4
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:21 pm)The oil filter point applies to the engineers.
The rest are all examples of management decisions.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:23 pm)Thanks bro!
I learn something new almost everyday.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:25 pm)Several posters appeared to understand the difference between an Otto and an Atkinson cycle. My questions are simple, if I have a 1.4 liter engine that develops “X” horsepower at “y” RPM, while operating in the Otto cycle, how much less hp (percent) would it develop if running the Atkinson cycle, and if I have a 1.4 liter engine that has a fuel efficiency of “X” within its sweet spot RPM range running the Otto cycle, how much more fuel efficiency (percent) if running the Atkinson cycle.
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:25 pm)Can anyone recall what Lyle got “Real World” on his 100MPC Mini? Wasn’t it about 75MPC?
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:26 pm)Cheers, russ.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:29 pm)Yes, I believe that it was in the 70′s.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:30 pm)I think that this was his estimate. The trouble with determining practical mileage per charge in an EV is that you’re left on the side of the road with a dead car (range anxiety, and all).
As we think about things that affect Volt sales, it will be hard to top two things: $4+ gas, and the sight of dead EVs on the side of the road.
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:37 pm)OT
Lyle – the Detroit Auto show is less than 1 month away. Are you planning on going and do you have any inside info on the Volt? It would be great if they were giving test rides (dare i dream drives).
I see Toyota is going to show its dedicated hybrid concept
http://naias.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=463
+6
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:39 pm)So to sum up our speculation.
1. GM is using LIVC (optimized late intake valve closing (LIVC) using dual independent variable valve timing (VVT) to reduce pumping losses) which isn’t really an Atkinson cycle but would still greatly improve fuel economy.
2. At the time GM began the main thrust of their engineering efforts like deciding which engine to use (mid to late 2008), they were in their worst financial predicament in a century and it’s possible they didn’t have the money to get a more efficient engine.
3. They didn’t feel they had enough time to get it all done by November 2010 if they went with an engine they didn’t know much about.
4. They didn’t want to give their mechanics more of a learning curve until they can learn the other systems.
5. They are saving their good stuff for gen 2 when HCCI is ready since the Volt is a perfect vehicle for it since the power demands are much more predictable with a battery buffer.
6. There is some engineering reason that actually makes an Otto running its sweet spot a better pick than an Atkinson for the Volt’s purposes and less cost and time are just bonuses.
7. They really didn’t care all that much about CS mpg since it’s an EV first and foremost and didn’t feel the need to bother with the hassles of making an atkinson happen in the low production gen 1 and figure that’s a great next step to take for a later gen.
Which do I think it is?
7
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:40 pm)Another OT.
Have you guys seen this? Pretty cool fly-thru of the Volt.
http://www.chevrolet.com/pages/open/default/future/volt.do
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:46 pm)Absolutely mouthwatering.
Thanks!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:48 pm)Some have made comments to day talking about how the prius or other high MPG cars may be better then the Volt. But this car is a game-changer in general, even if it is not the complete solution to each person’s individual need. It is a great starting point to get us off foreign oil and that is the big need. It may not be the answer for everyone but it will be that answer for a lot of people. Everyone is not going to own one.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:51 pm)+1 big time. As in HUGE.
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:53 pm)Absolutely no criticism implied, but 2,3,4,5 & 7 could be simultaneously true (all part of a single truth); and until I hear better news, it’s what I think.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:55 pm)I think with direct injection, an Otto Cycle engine could come very close to the efficiency of an Atkinson cycle engine…however, I have a bad feeling that the 1.4 family of engines will not be direct injected.
That said, I still fail to see how the normally aspirated version of the 1.4L engine could have a lower fuel economy number (in CS mode) than a turbo version being driven through a 6-speed manual gearbox (typically 15% efficiency loss). When not under boost, the turbo actually decreases engine efficiency slightly. Ergo: If the Cruze can get 40 mpg with a turbo, the Volt should be able to achieve at least the same in CS mode.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (12:55 pm)You beat me to it. +1
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:00 pm)Hey! Atkinson just happens to be my last name (really)
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:00 pm)(ha talking to myself here)
I just ran across this. Electric Avenue at the Detroit Auto Show. Maybe I will get to ride in a Volt! (and who knows what else)
I wonder if the Chevy Volt bar is still open at the Ren Cen?
http://www.naias.com/electric-avenue/electric-avenue.aspx
Drive
Sponsored by the MEDC, ride in the green vehicles on display on Electric Avenue and throughout the auto show on the indoor course that winds through natural surroundings creating an outdoor backdrop for your green automotive experience.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:03 pm)As an engineer, I can confirm your belief. Engineering is a lot more than just designing gadgets. Cost is a very real constraint in every single engineering problem. Engineering is the art and science of optimizing compromises. That includes constraints due to time, money, materials, available technology, aestetics, purpose, politics, performance, profitability, consumer demand and expectations, and many, many, many, many more. Many constraints aren’t even static, they change with time, predictably or unpredictably, as the project progresses. Many constraints pull in opposite directions. Some are not compatible at all.
The devil is in the details, and there are always details. Lots and lots and lots and lots of details. Each one of which will give you more surprises and headaches than you ever imagined possible. The real world is complicated, and it’s an engineers job to find a solution amongst a flury of competing constraints.
I have no doubt that the Otto cyle engine is the best compromise the talented engineers at GM could come up with given the large number of constraints facing them.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:12 pm)That’s half the fun of a new car. You have to push it until you see how far you can go before it runs out of gas. Yes you have to run out to know for sure. But no big deal with the Volt like any other car all you do is get a can of gas and off you go. With a BEV you call a tow truck and then wait for it to charge up. What fun would that be?
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:13 pm)“Real Atkinson” uses tricky crankshaft/connecting rod setup to allow longer expansion and exhaust strokes.
1. Intake (down,short)
2. Compression (up, short)
3. Expansion/power (down,long)
4. Exhaust (up,long)
/Today’s hybrids use valve timing to emulate Atkinson cycle.
Road&Track
Video: The Real Atkinson Cycle – Tech News
Learn how a true Atkinsons cycle displays differences in piston travel.
http://archive.roadandtrack.com/video/index.html?bcpid=717440069&bclid=741861823&bctid=27318352001%2520
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:19 pm)From Edmunds spec on the Cruz 1.4L engine.
Mechanical Features
Engine direct injection
1.4L displacement
double overhead cam (DOHC)
inline 4 cylinder configuration
http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/cruze/2011/featuresandspecs.html
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:22 pm)Link may not fully work, use R&T’s search box for “atkinson cycle” to see video
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:36 pm)You may want to take a serious look at the Ford Fusion Hybrid..
Bigger car… can run in EV mode… lots of bells and whistles for under $40 k. I have one …. Central Alberta Canada…Really fridgid right now…. still averaging around 6.8 L / 100 KMS… and a lot of that is idling as it is -28 to – 35 C the last 4 or 5 days…
In Sept to Oct of this year I was averaging 5.4 – 5.7 L/100 KMS.
Beats the Pruis hands down as far as I am concerned.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:44 pm)Dan, the very ability of the Volt to obfuscate the instantaneous power requirements via the battery buffer flips your argument right around. This is seems to be the ideal situation for the atkinson cycle engine.
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:53 pm)Because there Looking at the big picture. There alot of things that need to change to support any type of Plug in EV. The trickle down cost are going to be HUGE. Which will effect how many and how fast they can sell them. Basically Right now they are limited to mostly HOME OWNER that have a garage or carport. That make about 80k a year. If you rent and apt or even a house for that matter is the landlord or the tenant going to foot the bill for providing a place to plug in you EV. What about the landlord not wanting to mess with it because he only has one or two tenets that want that service.
Then there is the issue are all EV manufactures going to use the same PLUG. On top of all that there are Vandalism and theft issues. The list goes on and on. This is why GM is talking so much about infrastructure.
Look at it this way If GM could magically wave a wand and make a 15k EV that got 400mi on a charge. Nobody would buy it if they had no place to plug it in.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (1:55 pm)I think that Dan was just saying that given all of the “unknowns” with a revolutionary vehicle, it’s good to use “known” technology when appropriate.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (2:07 pm)I agree, personally I am sure that with the same EV range a parallel-hybrid will outperform a serial-hybrid because it is more efficient. The ICE of a parallel-hybrid drives the wheels directly so there is no need to make electricity out of gas which causes severe energy loss. An ICE with Atkinson cycle does not change this.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (2:21 pm)Hard to say, there are reports that the Prius engine achieves 38% efficiency.. which is astounding and diesel like.. regular cars do around 25%.
Otto cycle engine suffer from pumping losses during part throttle operation.. diesels dont have those losses because they dont use a butterfly throttle and have wide open air flow at all times (as a result they dont produce engine vacuum to drive accessories either).. The fake atkinson cycle engines reduce those pumping losses by playing with valve timing. Note that an otto cycle engine running wide open has no pumping losses either, but it may produce too much power.
This Toyota website says improved efficiency of 12-14% with their atkinson implementation.
http://pressroom.toyota.com/pr/tms/atkinson-meets-otto–why-the-prius-is-so-efficient.aspx
Dec 15th, 2009 (2:36 pm)I love the ‘engineering’ debates you guys have, but as a simple consumer, I think having “Crystal Red Metallic” as an available color choice is far more important that today’s topic.
Dec 15th, 2009 (2:45 pm)Ditto on the economies of scale and not investing in old tech when future powerplants are on the horizon. Also it may be simply power to weight ratio being more important than fuel economy when the engine may run very infrequently. If you need a given kilowatt output you can get that with the higher power density or a larger engine which would weigh more affecting handling and electric powered range. Makes sense to go with the more intense smaller engine.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (2:50 pm)I am surprised to hear that /modified Atkinson cycle as used by the Prius was not included in the VOLT. As far as I I know it merely requires a slightly different cam grind, and the cam phasing of dual VVT, which the engine already possesses.
OTOH, the net result is not much, and the fuel economy results are inconsequential. Running the ICE in the sweet spots of the BSFC map would more than outweigh the limited fuel efficiency aspects of an Atkinson cycle, for the limited time it is operational.
Perhaps the limited power of Atkinson cycle would have revealed the 1.4 liter to be too small. Prius did have to up rate its original Prius engine from 1.5 liters to 1.8 liters in later generations..
Whether the ICE achieves 40 mpg or 50 mpg or 60 mpg in CS mode, will change the overall mileage for the “80% average driver’ for which the Volt is aimed, by less than 1% per annum. So instead of 231 mpge without Atkinson cycle, the mileage might have been 2.3 miles per gallon equivalent better, at 234 mpge, with the Atkinson cycle change. O maybe worse with an upgrade to a 1.6 liter engine. Much ado about nothing at all.
The art of Engineering is not doing something as hamhandely and where the cost is no object and without any efficiency consideration, as most anyone can do. But real Engineering is doing it with efficiency, performance and cost ALL in mind.
For example, many people did design cars, but only Henry Ford could simplify the unnecessary and and construct his Tin Lizzy; and could make them at a cost that everyone could afford to buy. He put the world on wheels.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (2:56 pm)And GM can put the world on electricity!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:02 pm)We know the Cruze WILL NOT use DI, it will have a normal 1.8l and a turbo 1.4l.. the Volt will use the normal 1.4l engine.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/11/29/chevrolet-unveils-specs-on-us-version-of-the-cruze/
There are two issues, possible cost of about $1000 and carbon buildup on the intake valves since you dont have fuel washing across them.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:19 pm)Naw man, it’a “Samarian Cobalt Blue”.
-3
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:22 pm)This comment is hardly egregiously anything…
I am not ignoring the driving habits of 80% of the population. That 80% has a “normal” daily commute of less than 40 miles. All well and good. But then what do they do with the vehicle? What do they do with it on weekends? After work? That’s the trips to Grandma’s, the run to piano lessons to pick up Junior, dinner out on the other end of town, Saturday at the beach, etc, etc. This is where GM’s 40 mile model starts to break down and where the ultimate fuel economy of the vehicle starts to make more of a difference.
GM likes to talk about the “80%/Normal Daily Commute” but that’s hardly the whole story on how cars actually get used.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:23 pm)I still think Lyle asked the wrong question, GM would not use the term “Atkinson”.. they use a different term in their other cars (Tahoe 2-Mode) for essentially the same thing.
-6
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:26 pm)Toyota did the original Prius in 2.5 years. It’s at least as radical a departure as the Volt will someday (maybe) be. 4 years is unimpressive.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:30 pm)BSFC is the real issue when considering any ICE engine Si or Ci fired. Th difference in BSFC over the various loads and rpms required in everyday use a conventional ICE and even parallel-series configuration are immense compared to operating at the sweet region or even the sweet spots pf the BSFC map. Mileage in an conventional engines varies from zero to perhaps 150 mpg. The actual mileage achieved in the composite of of the time spent at 150 mpg and the time spent at zero or near zero mpg, (idling or barely be used) . The Sweet spot area is often around 150 mpg for the small ICEs and if you spend the majority of your time there that will be your composite mileage.
If the modified Atkinson cycle changes the range by 10% so instead of a maximum of 150 mpg you can achieve 165 mpg momentarily, that helps, but not a zero mpg idling. Th usual profile of a conventional engine is with the great majority of the time spent at very poor spots of the BSFC map.
It ‘s only because the “Mobil economy runners and Hypermilers work to keep their cars in the sweet spots, do they obtain those ridiculous several hundred mpg figures. A Series hybrid engine does most of the automatically . Unlike a parallel-series engine which must match demand to requirements, even spending lots of time,just not quite as much, in the poor regions of the BSFC.
Thenet result is that the series engien should still achieve 50 mpg average in the seldom used CS mode.
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:32 pm)knock knock…..
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:38 pm)I guess egregiosity is in the eye of the beholder.
So, if you subtract the commuting miles what percent of driving is left? I have no hard numbers, but just logistically (assuming that people at some point actually get *out* of their cars on their days off), it’d still seem like the minority of miles driven/week. Maybe being (semi)retired gives me a slightly different view of things, but those 40 AER miles are still on electrons.
JMO,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:41 pm)11:55 am
God send that it shall be true. +1
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:42 pm)Who’s there….?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:42 pm)Ok, I’ll bite. Who’s there?
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:43 pm)You’re two short.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:44 pm)Atkins
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:47 pm)Atkins who?
-6
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:48 pm)Well, if we presume that the people you know define the universe, I guess that’s all correct, then. I regularly post and read elsewhere. People use their Priuses on the road because they get superior fuel economy. My daughter hitched a ride home, several hundred miles, on more than one occasion with a co-worker whose highway vehicle is, of course, his Prius (doing >50mpg all the way, mind you).
You should work in GM marketing. You think people are going to buy this wonder-mobile at a super-premium price to avoid buying gas on their way to work and then take some sort of fuel-hog out on the open road when they rack up the serious mileage because they really don’t care about fuel consumption. This is the kind of thinking that led to GM’s previous hybrid efforts, all of which are snubbed by the actual marketplace.
-1
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:51 pm)NO, It’s OTTO Silly boy!!!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
aw man, pizza n beer at lunch is great.
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:53 pm)So if Atkins is supposed to get better efficiency, then the one currently otto get less?!?!?!?!?!?!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:55 pm)1:03 pm
When I was a freshman in engineering school, we took a course called Engineering 101, “Introduction to Engineering.” On the first day the Dean spoke. The first words out of his mouth were, “Ladies and Gentlemen, an engineer is a person who can do with $1.00 what any fool can do with $1.75.” I have never forgotten it.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:56 pm)Everything i read on the “interweb” says it will have DI.
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:57 pm)So if the Cruze will have the same engine, then it’s safe to say the Cruze will also come in Ottomatic transmission?
AHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:57 pm)Apperantly there was more beer than pizza… lol
+4
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:58 pm)From these comments, it seems it is all in your personal perception and travel whether CS mode mpg is important to you. My driving happens to favor an AER-40 vehicle since I drive greater than 40 miles per day and would therefore use maximum electricity (all of it) per charge.
Out of the ~15k miles I drive per year, about 11,500 are within AER-40. This means that I will be getting greater than 600mpg most of the time and I really don’t care if I get 30mpg or 50mpg (or 20mpg) for the rest of it. The difference between 30mpg and 50mpg in CS mode amounts to ~ 38 cents per day (for my specific combination of trips @$3/gallon.) Charging more than once/day would improve this slightly.
For that 70 to 116 gallons of E85 used (30 vs 50mpg for 3500mi), only 15% is ‘real’ foreign oil gasoline. That’s between 10 and 18 gallons of foreign-oil-based-gasoline PER YEAR.
The maximum a 2010 Prius can get is 51mpg or using 15k/51 = 294 gallons (of E10) per year. Which is 265 gallons of foreign-oil-based-gasoline. For you statistics freaks, that means that Prius uses FIFTEEN TIMES MORE GAS than Volt in the best-case scenario (Best-case for Prius. Again, for my specific trip log).
Conclusion: CS mode mpg doesn’t mean squat to me.
Your mileage may vary. May the best car win!
Dec 15th, 2009 (3:59 pm)Never mind beer, I think CaptJackSparrow has been into the Cap’n and the Jack…
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:00 pm)I disagree, I still believe the Volt will be getting around 45-50 MPG in CS mode once its warmed up.
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:01 pm)I dont think its “commute”. I think is miles per day average.
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:02 pm)Dont forget GM did the Vega in 2 years, and that was back in 1970.. it even included a fleet of carrier trucks that transported the Vegas standing on their noses. The car did have some very minor growing pains but GM sold 2 million of them and solved all the problems by the end of the 7 year run, the initial reviews were glowing and won many awards.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Vega
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:07 pm)You did miss his whole point. The 40 mile commute per day includes all driving done PER DAY. That includes driving to the market or grandma’s house or what ever. That does not mean specifically just to WORK only.
Now I’ll agree with you, every person driving will drive more than 40 miles in any given day for sure, and during that time you will be getting between 45-50 MPG, very similar to Prius.
The thing is as well, what are you going to say when the Volt gets 100 miles of EV range or 150? That is not to far into the future, which absolutely blows anything the Prius can hope to obtain. The expandability of the Volt is so huge that the Prius, Plug in or not, doesn’t even come close
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:08 pm)GM’s placement of oil filters is a dream compared to the Hondas and Toyotas that I have worked on. It seems that Japanese cars are designed to optimize the order of assembly, with maintainability as a distant afterthought.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:08 pm)It’s a long time I ever posted my opinion in here, but I want to share a bit of my disapointment here.
For me, the main point of interest about the Volt technical design approach is about answering following question:
- Is decoupling the ICE from the wheels permitting a substantial gain of efficiency? I mean in terms of energy ratio effectively moving the vehicle?
This question can only be answered by real world SOC MPG rate.
If the efficiency has been proven to be (very) satisfactional in comparison to concurrency, I would then see no problem to sell the volt as following:
- A 0 EV miles base version, which will simply be running on “SOC” all time (let’s say having a very small battery pack where generator keeps SOC on 50% all time) You can then sell an “efficient” car for an affordable price.
- A 40+ EV miles version, which is simply the base version of volt upgraded with a e.g. 40+ miles battery pack. I see this version as a valuable option (and not especially a core) for those who can afford it.
Imagine yourself buying a standard volt and in the future, investing for an optional “40miles”, “80miles”, +++ battery pack you can upgrade function of your needs…
My two pence
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:08 pm)Keep reading.. perhaps the XFE version of the Cruze will use it.
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:08 pm)vladg,
I took a ride in one. I could be wrong but my understanding is that they switch to spark mode under load.
Saying “at idle” is probably an oversimplification but with the Volt, there’s certainly no need to run the engine except when there’s significant power demand. In that regimen, I don’t believe they’d use compression ignition at all, so the fuel savings from HCCI would be negligible (but the cost would not).
In fact, as the world electrifies and hybridizes, the HCCI development might be something of footnote in automotive history, rather than a chapter.
Note, I just went and read the Wiki entry on this, it’s consistent with my understanding. They refer to spark compression above “part load.” If the Volt uses a wide range of power setttings, then they could benefit from HCCI but it would be cheaper, easier and just as efficient to use a narrow range of power settings in the most efficient spark regimes from an Atkinson or Otto engine. HCCI would be more likely to benefit a parallel hybrid (Toyota HSD or Honda IMA).
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:09 pm)+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:09 pm)What coincidence….
“Pizza & Beer” @ http://www.ottopizzeria.com/
AHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!
aw man, I kill myself……
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:11 pm)I think that both cars will be incredibly popular. JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-5
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:15 pm)Average vehicle use of 14,600 miles/year does not mean 40 miles per day. The amount of driving that people will do per day varies widely. Which is to say, YOU are missing MY point. I care about overall oil-derived fuel use, I’m not just a religious nut who cares about EVs for EV’s sake. The Volt will require MORE oil-derived fuel the way I use a car. The Volt will be require MORE oil-derived fuel than the PHEV Prius for many more people. The Volt’s mediocre fuel economy once the charge is gone makes the car less relevant.
As for “when the Volt gets 100 miles if EV range,” that’s going to depend on battery improvement and those batteries will be available for the Prius, too, and the PHEV Prius will get the a similarly proportioned boost in range.
This comes back to something I mentioned a long time ago: GM is in a precarious position with the Volt because GM does not own or control the enabling technology. GM will have to execute better than the competition in order to have a significant advantage. And better execution is not one of GM’s strengths.
-9
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:16 pm)Yes, and look how well that worked out. GM is still trying to live it down.
-6
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:20 pm)The oil filters in all my Toyotas are easily accessed by opening the hood and reaching down in front of the engine. One must be careful of the hot exhaust manifolds but there’s plenty of room for an oil filter wrench. It’s even easier to change the oil filter on my Toyotas than it was on my Volvo 240s (which could also be done from above but had somewhat less clearance to fit and swing the wrench). The only way a GM car could be easier would be to mount the oil filter on the front valve cover and have it pop off when you pushed a button.
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:21 pm)No sir/mam.
Ice coupled direct drives mechanical torque, has some loss, via transmission. Decoupling in this method for a series hybrid has inherent cascaded losses. Start from the ICE….
Conversion from liquid energy to mechanical energy has quite a bit of loss…..
Conversion from mechanical energy to electrical AC energy has a loss…
Conversion from AC to DC has a loss (diodes, ripple filters, bridge rectifiers, shunting caps and what not)…
Conversion from DC to 3Phase AC “Under control” (as seen in the power electronics heat dissipation) has a loss …
Conversion from 3Phase AC to mechanical energy has a loss…
Transmission to the rubber that hits the the road has a loss…
Add those losses up and you have not so good efficiency.
+4
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:22 pm)What exactly *is* the charge sustaining mileage for the Volt?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:26 pm)You are forgetting that, in a parallel hybrid, the engine must run at the vehicle speed, which is not always very efficient. A series hybrid can maintain the battery while running at its most efficient speed. Also, the parallel hybrid has mechanical losses in the transmission.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:27 pm)Okay… I think someone has been spiking the eggnog just a little bit.
And you didn’t offer us any! What’s up with that?
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:29 pm)(Sir)
So Volt approach is, according to your answer, not efficent?
If it’s the case, then assuming 2010 prius already obtain a more or less 50mpg efficiency, that mean the extended plug-in 2010 prius (parallel mode approach I believe) is the Volt killer?
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:33 pm)+4
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:37 pm)Really? 40+mpg in charge sustaining mode is lousy in your world? Welcome back Dag, we missed you’re scurrilous nonsense!
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:38 pm)+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:40 pm)The electrical losses in the series hybrid are offset by the transmission losses and the inefficient ICE operation in the parallel hybrid. Until we know how big each of these losses actually are, we can make no conclusions about which type of hybrid is more efficient.
-9
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:42 pm)One good one is enough for my purposes. As of 1998, Honda required 24 to 36 months to develop a car. At the time, they were discussing cutting product development time to 20 months. I don’t know if they have achieved that. The last I knew, Toyota also developed cars in the 24-36 month timeframe. This was kicked around on TTAC.COM a couple of years ago. GM typically required 5 years to develop a car.
-7
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:43 pm)According to the video here @ 1:12/9:53, it’s 16.5 mpg.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/12/08/chevy-volt-test-drive-the-video/
/unless, of course, there was some CD mixed in with the CS. … . then the CS mpg would be something less than 16.5.
//is that the answer you were looking for?
-6
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:44 pm)40 would not be impressive, either but it looks like, at best, 38 (go read the earlier posts). We won’t know with certainty, of course, for another year. You know, not until 2010… 13 years after Toyota developed a commercially successful gas-electric hybrid.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:46 pm)Correct. Some can argue and say you can design less loss but ANY conversion process especially in electrical form WILL have a loss.
It’s more of a challenger than a killer. Personally I think the Prius HSD is a “Series/Parallel” Remember, the Prius has an “EV” mode that means the ICE is decoupled mechanically or something. But for all intents and purposes the EV mode does not require the ICE to be on. Hence the Series part. When the ICE is coupled back in parallel mode then it’s back to a regular parallel hybrid.
The Volt has the advantage of the 40 mile electric range and the Prius has maturity and high MPG. Only time will tell who wins.
-13
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:46 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:49 pm)Not quite. Both have efficiency advantages and disadvantages. To make it more confusing, it also depends on how well each company executes thier respective designs. Even if, in theory, parallel is more efficient than serial, holding all other things constant, there is much much more to automotive design.
A badly executed parallel setup can be less efficient than a well set up serial design. Different aerodynamics, weights, etc can obfuscate the differences in drivetrain design.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:51 pm)Your posts now reek of desperation. I think someone better take your shoelaces away come Q4-10.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:58 pm)You hit the nail on the head! By using the same engine that the Cruze uses they incorporate economy of scale and can lower the cost of the ICE.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+5
Dec 15th, 2009 (4:59 pm)Just goes to show you that you can find everything on the interweb. Some of it is even true (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:00 pm)Yeah, I agree. We’re all in “Speculotto” mode today.
lol….
+9
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:00 pm)You cannot just throw away the 40AER per charge in your calculations. Electric displacement of gas is cumulative over the life of the car (or over a year). Taking a single trip out of the entire year to compare the vehicles is just du–, er, asking for a rebuttal. Especially a narrow worst-case sustained highway trip which is not the design criteria for either car. They are both basically commuter cars. Which is why both get BETTER mileage in the city than on the highway.
How about we pose the opposite worst-case scenario (this time for Prius). Take the same two cars. Drive 200 miles over the weekend (multiple trips to grocery, kid shuffling, stores, movies, church etc.) and keep Volt plugged in between trips.
0 gallons Volt (infinity mpg)
4 gallons Prius (50 mpg)
The maximum average mpg Prius can EVER GET is 51mpg. Volt has no such limitation.
Your mileage may vary. May the best car win!
+6
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:04 pm)You really otto stop that (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:06 pm)Further to that, you would have to have both drivetrains in the same vehicle in the same controlled conditions to deterimine if any difference in efficiency was if fact due to the drivetrain condition alone.
It would be better to just get rid of the vehicle all together and bench test the drivetrains against each other.
But then you wouldn’t be able to tell how each drivetrain reacted to more representative conditions, like, how sensitive is that efficiency to driving style?
Boy it gets complicated fast! I’m glad a bunch of trained and talented engineers are actually hard at work figuring all this stuff out, instead of designing the Volt based on interweb forum chat consensus.
+11
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:09 pm)Again you miss the point. No one here, including yourself, *knows* the CS mpg. Pretending you do just doesn’t cut it.
Be well,
Tagamet
/bbl
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+4
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:11 pm)The Toy company that Dagwood shills for is also reeking of desperation. Yea, we’re gonna get 14AER!!! cough JAPAN cough… Once that US sticker says 8 or 9, I’ll take pity on Dagwood and give him back his shoe laces.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:12 pm)Nice post and comments
My Comment : no comment as i dont know . Again i am with Rashiid Amul thinking in same line as GM engineers are not dumb. They know better.
May be love to see another post on the advantages and reasons for choosing the engine cycle (an Alex Cattelan talk
).
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:15 pm)I may have missed it, but I did not see a response to the question about how much less horsepower results from improving fuel efficiency by 13%. One responder did indicate that an Otto cycle engine gets around 25% fuel efficiency and the Toyota Atkinson supposedly gets 38%, or a 13% improvement. And it was pointed out that the loss of power does not hurt very much because the electric motor provides the thrust when the Atkinson is operating outside its sweet spot. So it seems if you want about 100 hp, you put in a 1.4 Otto or a 1.8 Atkinson, assuming I comprehended what I was told. In any event, thanks for bringing me closer to “up to speed.”
One other point which has not been kicked around, unless I missed it, is why the Prius PHV gets 4.1 miles per kwh, whereas the Volt gets 5 miles per kwh. Lyle can attest that his Mini EV gets less than 4 miles per kwh, so this information suggests to me at least, that the Volt’s AER will be around 33 miles, not 40. (Eight times 4.1 equals 33).
So the question is, What would allow the Volt to do so much better in EV mode? The Volt weighs about the same or weighs more.
-1
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:15 pm)You’d have to have the right mix of trips and recharge time to achieve that. Try driving it from Detroit to Chicago and back, which might be a typical weekend activity. Volt loses. If they routine daily activities of the previous workweek didn’t involve much driving, the Volt loses the for the entire week.
I did not say the Volt would never win, I pointed out that lousy charge-sustaining mileage erodes any possible advantage for the Volt. This is entirely true. Lousy charge-sustaining mileage means that wins over a PHEV Prius will be few and far between. This is also true. And “wins” must be defined very narrowly to favor the Volt. Electricity isn’t free and it mostly isn’t carbon-neutral. To win on cost against a Prius is almost impossible and to win on CO2 emissions against a Prius requires a very narrow range of circumcstances.
-7
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:18 pm)Nobody *knows* the Volt CS mileage but I pointed to two reasons why we can expect it to be thoroughly and spectacularly mediocre. Have you been so diligent in correcting the nimnos who have projected 50mpg?
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:20 pm)Good link, Tag. Thanks.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-9
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:21 pm)Pity the poor satisfied Toyota customer, eh? If I have some faith in Toyota, it’s because they’ve delivered the goods, four times, for me and GM hasn’t.
Toyota is predicting 4.1kwh per mile. GM is predicting 5kwh/mile. Toyota’s number strikes me as more conservative and realistic. GM’s looks to be much more optimistic. Which vehicle do I think likely to actually deliver the claimed AER? Guess.
You might take a trip to the EPA web site. The Prius, the Yaris and the Corolla ROUTINELY make their EPA numbers for a very wide variety of consumers. The GM products? Not so much!
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:30 pm)Then guess what, Dagwood sockpuppet? You can buy another Toy!
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:40 pm)That’s true, if you can’t drive in an otto-mobile it doesn’t mean a thing!
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:43 pm)____________________________________________________
Speaking as a future Volt buyer, I’m very comfortable with GM’s Volt ICE selection. It was 100% the correct choice weighing all factors at hand including GM’s aggressive development schedule to have the Volt in production by 2010.
Any other choice would have driven up the cost of the Volt and/or delayed the production of the Volt.
___________________________________________________
+6
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:55 pm)Volt: 35 AER, 40MPG
Prius: 9 AER, 50MPG
10-35 mile trip: Volt 0 big oil teet milk (BOTM) Prius .7 BOTM Prius massive FAIL
50 mile trip: Volt .25 BOTM Prius .82 BOTM Prius massive FAIL
75 mile trip Volt 1 BOTM Prius 1.32 BOTM Prius massive FAIL
100 mile trip Volt 1.625 BOTM Prius 1.82 BOTM Prius massive FAIL
150 mile trip Volt 2.875 BOTM Prius 2.82 BOTM Prius barely pulls off a win!
Oh wait, I screwed up. Since in almost all occasions, the Prius ICE will kick in during those supposed 9 miles of AER, you’ll be sucking at that big oil teet every single day. Every day, suckling like a Prius piggy.
So which car gives you the ability to avoid the teet on most occasions? Hmmm, Daggy sockpuppet master? Bueller? Anyone?
Dec 15th, 2009 (5:58 pm)Going for some sort of a record today, Jack??!?
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:06 pm)Autobloggreen’s Sam Abuelsamid did an analysis today titled, “What does the Prius PHEV mileage really mean on the JC08 cycle?”, and it concludes there will be an EPA equivalent of 10 miles AER. And from what I can approximate from 72 mpg JCO8 vs. 76.7 for the gen III Prius you should look for high 40′s for CS mpg. He concedes that Toyota drivers are, however, routinely getting about what the EPA gets.
( http://green.autoblog.com/2009/12/15/what-does-the-prius-phev-mileage-really-mean-on-the-jc08-cycle/ )
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:11 pm)Meanwhile, you’ve got to wonder if Ford’s not happy to be just out of the “GM vs Toyota limelight” . . . . just “plugging” away…
Ford Takes Another Step in Electric-Car Plans
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/ford-takes-another-step-in-globalizing-electric-car-plans/
December 4, 2009
LA Auto Show, Test Driving The Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid
http://electricnick.com/2009/12/04/la-auto-show-test-driving-the-ford-escape-plug-in-hybrid/
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:15 pm)lol…
Gotto little blotto at lunch……
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:16 pm)“LRGVProVolt Says:
December 14th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Much has been said about the size of the Prius vs Volt. I did a search on dimensions for each and found these links:
http://gm-volt.com/full-specifications/
http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1035108_plug-in-prius-statistics-revealed/page-3
From the info, there is only a few inches difference between the two on length, width, and height. In almost all other categories the Volt far surpasses the Prius. Top speed (100 mph vs 64 mph), AER (40 vs c12), electric drive motor power (150 hp vs 79 bhp) and torque (370 vs 207 nm) are a few. The Plug-in Prius merely increases the capacity of the battery ( as stated by an earlier blogger) to 5.3 Kw vs 16 Kw for the Volt. I believe that the battery size is about the same for the lithium-ion vs Nmhd, just more power than a standard Prius. And then the upgrade makes it plug-in too.
Considering everything said, the Volt is a much superior car. If the ultimate prices (2012) are comparable the Volt wins over the Prius.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again. ”
Give me a Volt any day! Not a Prius.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:19 pm)You got it right. The point is, if Toyota ever thinks about simply enhancing the battery pack into something like 25-30 AER, which should not be a big deal imo, your conclusion should be restated.
… And if Toyota ever thinks again about upgrading to the same AER as Volt, Volt is screwed, as your formula shows…
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:22 pm)I usually end up having a few more than I otto.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:25 pm)The Volt gets more range per kwh of electricity because it has less aerodynamic drag than a Prius (a prius with 17″ wheels), both cars were tested in GM’s wind tunnel.. the heavier weight of the Volt does not really affect electric range much. Note the Mini is a brick with wheels, thus the poor electric range.
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:26 pm)My VW Jetta TDI was a very nice small fuel-efficient cross-country cruiser.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:27 pm)I am not sure if the motors in the Prius, MG1 & MG2, are strong enough to sustain a constant load like that. They’re (from what I have read) permanent magnet motors that use NdFeB magnets. For electric “Assist” they work perfectly fine and in slower AER, but to make them do more without getting bigger electric motors may shorten their life. You also gotto consider the gearing in the HSD in that it may play in the limitation of the 62 MPH speed.
OK that’s JMHO.
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:35 pm)Thanks kdawg.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:40 pm)I agree, to make a bigger battery is simple but to increase the MPG number in CS mode from a serial-hybrid like the Volt to 50MPG looks impossible.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:41 pm)Let’s all lighten up for a moment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5im0Ssyyus
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:43 pm)When you atkinsonize an engine you typically lose about 25% of the horsepower.. so you make the engine a little larger or help it with an electric motor. The other side effect is that its RPM operating range drops.
These are the two reasons many of us think the Volt’s 1.4l has been atkinsonized, normally it produces 104hp but when used in the Volt it drops down to around 70hp. Also it is an in-expensive modification, just different timing and an increased compression ratio.
Has GM ever stated the compression ratio of the Volt’s ICE?
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:48 pm)Im working on project for the electric Ford Focus (among others). So Ford is serious about moving along w/the process of electrification.
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:54 pm)Don’t forget the power to weight ratio. When you up the batt pack, weight comes up too, which has an inverse effect on efficiency and performance. At one point it’s going to be a lost cause. Where that point is?……..who knows.
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:54 pm)Latest Camaro was 3 yr 3 mo from concept to dealerships.
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:56 pm)That’s right, Corvette Guy, he didn’t. And, to make matters funnier, above at #154 regarding the Quaker Oats Picture of Otto, I have been using the Old Fashioned Quaker Oats since Thanksgiving (in the evening) in an attempt to get rid of the cholesterol from my favorite holiday libation which is Skyy and (one percent fat) Egg Nogg (with or without the “nut”meg (lol)).
Make sure Dagwood55 gets some too, because he was really slammed hard today with all those negative numbers (whooooo coulda done that??), so, he might want one too so as to “chill out” with some holiday (conversationally-charitable) “cheer”.
Dec 15th, 2009 (6:58 pm)I hope you’re right about this. While at the L.A. Auto Show I asked a Ford representative about electric cars. I received a distant stare and was directed to the new Fiesta. Time will tell.
=D~
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:03 pm)Hmmm…
I thought it was going to be the Focus?
Oh well, what do I or Jay Leno know about Fords EV….
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:04 pm)+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:06 pm)So now the Prissy desperation has sunk to hypotheticals? “If” the Prius did “x”, “then” the Volt would be beat. HAHAHAHAHA, pathetic. IF GM perfects the FLUX CAPACITOR, THEN they will rule the WORLD!
-2
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:09 pm)LRGProVolt provided specs on the Volt and Prius…
You do realize those specs are fairly well worthless? They don’t tell you anything about the inside of the car, which is what dictates whether or not it’s actually comfortable? Nor is the weight of the Volt revealed anywhere.
We can make an educated guess at the interior dimensions and weight of the PHEV Prius… about the same as the current Prius. They’re mostly just replacing the existing battery with a different one. It’s possible Toyota will put a physically bigger battery in it but not very likely and the Li-Ion is probably lighter, so Prius weight and interior dimensions are likely to be little changed.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:09 pm)Hey Dan, it gets even better.
If you sign on with different usernames you can just keep piling on the negative numbers!
/perhaps you already knew that
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:10 pm)It’s more like…
“IF EEStor perfects the FLUX CAPACITOR, THEN they will rule the WORLD!”
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!
Serious though, if they did then Holy sh|t Batman!
+5
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:11 pm)Good observations posed by Lyle. Off topic, last night at a minute past 8 pm, while driving my 2001 Ford Sport Trac, complete with the GM-Volt bumper sticker, east-bound on I-696 traveling about 75 mph, a genuine Chevy Volt passed me. Not sure if the guy noticed the bumper sticker, but I’m pretty sure he noticed me trying to snap a picture or three with my cell phone camera.
Almost immediately after the driver merged to the far right and exited to I-75 south, presumably to the RenCen
Having been up close now I can tell you it doesn’t look any different that the photos or videos, but for us enthusiasts, it sure feels different
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:11 pm)Check your facts: that is not correct!
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-2
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:14 pm)I wasn’t referring to any Japanese test at all and, in a related development, Abuelsamid agrees with me about some Toyotas making their EPA numbers? I can live with that.
-3
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:16 pm)They showed it in ’95, it got the green light in the summer and delivered it in ’97.
And the Volt came out in just… waiiiit… They still haven’t delivered one.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:16 pm)Well i’ve kept reading and this is what I find.
Car & Driver says Direct Injection
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car/08q3/2011_chevrolet_cruze-car_news
Edmunds says Direct Injection
http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/cruze/2011/2011-chevrolet-cruze-prepares-to-become-gms-global-small-car.html
Green car congress same thing
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/11/cruze-20091129.html
Can you post a link that say’s it will not have DI? I have not found anything.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:16 pm)From the referenced article:
“As she moves laterally into a new post as Ford’s director of global electrification, Nancy L. Gioia sees a bright future for the triumvirate of hybrids, plug-in hybrids and battery-electric cars. In fact, by 2020 she said that 10 percent to 25 percent of new car sales will be in one of those categories. ”
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/ford-takes-another-step-in-globalizing-electric-car-plans/
Up to 25% in the next 10 years. Those are serious (and perhaps a little optimistic) numbers, but I hope she’s right.
/I still see the potential “explosive growth” market as lightweight BEV’s. They can be cheap, nearly maintenance free, and the technology to manage range anxiety (smart phones, gps, wifi, bluetooth, interactive maps, etc) is already in place and advancing rapidly.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:17 pm)Thanks stas peterson! You gave a very good explanation of why I believe the Otto cycle engine of the Volt will give better than 50 mpg in CS mode.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-2
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:17 pm)Dan Petit writes, “Make sure Dagwood55 gets some too, because he was really slammed hard today with all those negative numbers (whooooo coulda done that??), so, he might want one too so as to “chill out” with some holiday (conversationally-charitable) “cheer”. ”
I really don’t care about your approval or disapproval. I’m satisfied merely being right. If you get your joliles clicking the minus sign, well, it’s a rather poor life you lead, isn’t it?
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:18 pm)While that doesn’t surprise me because sometimes the apparently inflated numbers I see occasionally for the first dozen or two posts, the very good thing about whether or not a positive or negative set of numbers is present, is it is all exceptionally good feedback that helps us to self-critique our opinions really quite well here. Especially when our conversations are well down the list, and very dedicated readers participate in the voting. I especially get tickled when a “double vote” gets registered when something is really “off the beaten path” and just plain wrong, or, extremely right.
The overall effect of this terrific site (especially for putting up with me), is that there comes about a general uplifting of valid information as well as a valid critique of less or non valid opinion.
I especially enjoy Tags “full time job” right here. Tag is to be truly appreciated for all his intellectual work and wit graciously given here every day. (You rock Tag).
-7
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:24 pm)Actually, if you look at their record, GM might just as well try to build a flux capacitor as a hybrid car. So far, they’re about 0 for 3. That would be the mild hybrid Silverado of ’05 or so, the mild hybrid Epsilons of 2008 or so, two-mode hybrid GMT900s or ’08 or so, all of which landed with a dull thud in the marketplace.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:26 pm)Yeah, that’s what I thought.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:29 pm)Do you ever get a “double vote” when you only press the vote key once?
-6
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:30 pm)Dan Petit writes, “The overall effect of this terrific site (especially for putting up with me), is that there comes about a general uplifting of valid information as well as a valid critique of less or non valid opinion.”
Too funny. It’s the popular opinions that get the upvotes, not the realistic ones. Unpopulat opinions, no matter how realistic, get th downvotes. Statik, for example, gets more than his share of downvotes and Statik has an excellent track record for getting things right.
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:32 pm)Dan Petit: When you said “I especially get tickled when a “double vote” gets registered when something is really “off the beaten path” and just plain wrong, or, extremely right.”
I hope you don’t mean that when you vote sometimes the number goes up by two or more, because that is just your one vote registering and then the automatic refresh kicking in. So while you were reading, other folks were voting but you only see theirs when you vote and thus refresh.
My apologies if that is not what you meant.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:37 pm)No.
But then again, I almost never vote, unless something makes me laugh . . . and I give it a +1.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:39 pm)me too, it’s too much trouble to move the mouse and click after a few beers.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:46 pm)If only someone would come up with a koozie/mouse combo. . . . Hey, wait a minute.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:49 pm)Voting totals and functions seem to be somewhat fluid. Yes, the popularity-factor is certainly part of all kinds of voting, and, it is really easy to guage what proportion of a seemingly inflated positive might be just popularity by subject matter.
it’s the numbers way down the list that are closer to the neutral that matter for posters to try to guage a philosophical process or mood.
Genuine interacting is where it counts most. Many have sincere questions. Some have axes to grind because maybe they are unable to disperse unrelated frustrations not at all related to Volt, for instance (moot comparisons).
But I think sometimes when clearly there is little or no other activity in the postings for, say by fifteen minutes, and, when casting a positive vote and instantly two positive votes report back to affirm an extremely insightful and agreeable statement for example, I don’t have the impression that it relates as likely to two people casting votes at the same exact second in time, but I might be off on that.
Perhaps it may somehow be a preset stronger affimation or disagreement with a particular singular statement in a post, or the entire post. But I like it a lot, and, it seems to be a strong postive re-enforcement toward more factual participation.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:50 pm)Hmm. That’s a shame that it doesn’t use the Atkinson cycle. Just to put some stupid simple napkin numbers on what that means, that means that if I were correct in previously theorizing that they could get 50MPG in charge sustaining mode (based on a bunch of calculations I won’t repeat here) with a 37% efficient (225 BSFC) Atkinson cycle engine (such as in that popular rival hybrid
then they will only get 37.5MPG with a 27% efficient (300 BSFC) Otto cycle engine. Which is not a deal breaker, but, well… bummer. 
I know there’s some thought that they may very well optimize the engine for a lower BSFC at the desired operating points so we shall see what happens. I’m still hopeful.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:53 pm)I did find some pages that list it as multi-port fuel injection. So it looks like there are some discrepencies between the car reviewers.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:55 pm)OK, i’m done for the day. Gotto go home and rest my feet on my Ottoman. but first I need to stop off to get some Lotto numbers and some stuff for dinner. I think i’ll make some Risotto tonight.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:57 pm)There’s beer? All this time I’ve just been writing for the heck of it.
Dec 15th, 2009 (7:57 pm)I think we may need Tag to “weigh in” on this one.
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:00 pm)And Lyle too if he wants.
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:04 pm)I get two or more votes registering frequently.
I always figured that was just my one vote, which then automatically initializes the refresh, thus showing other votes which occurred since I signed on.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:06 pm)….. the sound of a beer can being crushed, thrown at the trash can and hitting the floor, loud belch, irregular beat of one shoe and one peg across the cement, fluorescent light buzz terminates, industrial door opening then swinging shut . .. . fade to black.
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:12 pm)Actually, Toyota says the weight will increase about 200 pounds above the current Prius wieght. Also the slightly larger battery will require changes to the passenger compartment.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
P.S. please comment on the specificaton comparison. Volt figures are vastly superior.
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:12 pm)Maybe when Lyle said “There are no rules, it’s a work in progress”, maybe he also gets to indirectly agree with some votes or voters. But, I now think both your explanations are more likely.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:15 pm)Gee Dan you make me blush (lol). When I first read that I thought that I was reading one of Dagwood’s posts (I thought that they’d passed him the eggnog).
I really think that years from now, when we look back at Lyle’s site, we’ll appreciate the window it provided on some very exciting times. We’ll be able to chuckle when our grandkids ask if there ever really was a time when cars actually burned stuff to make them go.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:15 pm)The point is that if GM can’t show that a serial-hybrid performs well when the battery is empty this is a problem. For the short term maybe not that big because it has a bigger EV range than competing parallel-hybrids on the market, but that won’t be for long. Maybe for some consumers who only drive in EV range it is not a big problem but if I could choose I would prefer a car that also performs well when the battery is empty.
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:20 pm)See you at the Ottobar (google it).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:22 pm)Once anything gets 36 or so mpg, then you have to more closely and strongly weigh the addtional attainment costs for going much more than that against other things like reliability, serviceability, longevity, cost of maintenance, cost of repairs, technical risks, MTBF (mean time before failure) of more parts working harder, and on and on.
36 CS mode would be perfectly fine with me, especially if parts longevity were to be in question at all anywhere.
Dec 15th, 2009 (8:30 pm)Just possibly the difference is due to their being an earlier Cruze that has been sold in Europe that does not use DI!
But the U.S. version will be “powered by a 1.4-liter turbocharged Ecotec four-cylinder and a 1.8-liter four-cylinder with a choice of six-speed automatic or manual transmissions. The turbocharged engine puts out 138 horsepower and 148 lb-ft. of torque and should be capable of up to 40 mpg on the highway, GM says. The 1.8-liter puts out 136 horsepower and 123 lb-ft. of torque.”
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+3
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:15 pm)______________________________________________________
“…As a soldier in Iraq, he lost both legs and his left hand, making it difficult to use your everyday type of wheelchair…”
Source:
http://gizmodo.com/5426692/lightweight-wheelchair-designed-for-man-with-one-limb
———–
It’s time for America to lessen its dependence on foreign sourced energy…it’s time for the Volt…anybody out there not understand the connection? GM, please get the Volt done and crank up production.
___________________________________________________
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:36 pm)______________________________________________________
Follow up to my # 252 post:
Hear Bryan Anderson tell in his own words what it is like to lose three limbs from an Iraqi roadside bomb (hit the “Slide Show” button):
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-na-newlife4jul04,0,732685.story
______________________________________________________
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:47 pm)There are other liquid fuels besides gasoline.
Coskata is already scaling up their cellulosic gasification process.
http://www.coskata.com/facilities/
This can replace up to 35% of current gasoline consumption, with no affect on our food supply.
EREVs will replace 80% of our gasoline consumption.
Add that up. 80% + 35% = 115%. More than enough say goodbye to gasoline forever, all using our current infrastructure of 110v home outlets and liquid fuel filling stations.
What’s not to like?
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:52 pm)And GM owns a good size piece of Coskata. Win/win/win.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (9:54 pm)Yes, exactly.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:00 pm)Actually, Dan wrote, “The efficiency gains for an Atkinson would be nowhere near worth the offsets for its comparative power losses for that very-needed torque difference at the high end, when very frequently needed for peak genset output when, say, needing to onramp or pass after battery depletion. ”
So no, I don’t think that is what he meant.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:05 pm)The Prius is not capable of housing a battery the size of the Volt with out a significant redesign rendering your agrument moot.
With out any signifcant changes, the current Volt can easily get 60 miles in EV mode, getting to 100 miles EV range is not far into the future, blowing away anything the Prius, plug in or not, will be capable of.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:08 pm)You’re right, I’m wrong – my bad.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:12 pm)What kind of nonsense is this? THe Volt was revealed in 2007, by the time its at dealerships it will be 2010. Thats 3 years, give me a break, you’re just pulling at straws now for your arguments, pathetic.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:14 pm)The ‘narrow’ definition for US drivers is that 80% drive less than 40 miles per day. 150 miles and greater road trips are the very small minority.
I don’t get where 15,000 miles using 294 gallons (Prius) is better than 15,000 miles using 116 gallons (Volt). True, these are using my ‘narrow’ definition of a typical commuter (myself). Also, I am using 30mpg in CS mode for Volt (fairly conservative) and 51mpg average for Prius (fairly optimistic).
BTW, 15,000 miles divided by 365 days is ~ 41 miles per day. Funny how that works out.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:26 pm)I disagree. Housing a battery that size safely and reliably would be a totally new car design. Definately a big deal.
Again, I disagree. Competition would help everyone, including GM.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:28 pm)Let’s try this as a test:
RAH RAH GO GM GO VOLT GO GO GO GOGOGOGO!!!!!@
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:37 pm)This can easily be done using different camshafts and changing intake and exhaust flows. The people that invented the legendary small-block Chevy V-8 pretty much know how to do these tweaks
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:43 pm)Another factor is the Hyrid Synergy Drive used in the Prius. “An HSD transaxle contains a planetary gear set that adjusts and blends the amount of torque from the engine and motor(s) as it’s needed by the front wheels.” This mechanical apparatus between the motors and the wheels causes a further lose of power. This may also explain the why the Volt gets higher miles per Kwh.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:44 pm)Yes.
Gallons per year is a much better yardstick for plug-ins than miles per gallon.
GM and the EPA said the Volt should get around about 230 MPG average, but many people just can’t get their head around that, so they dismiss it as fantasy.
But gallons per year for a typical driver is much harder to dismiss, and that’s really what it’s all about anyway. It’s sort of like those yellow stickers you see on appliances that show the yearly cost of operation for an average user. But since gas prices are so volatile, it’s better to show gallons per year and then just multiply by $ per gallon.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:46 pm)Didn’t read all 200+ comments but my feeling is similar. It does take much engineering, cost, or new tech to make modified Atkinson so NVH issues make the most sense. If GM is doing some other tricks or there are enough efficiencies to keep CS highway above 40 mpg, I’m OK with it. I could care less about CS city mpg, eventhough the Volt should excell at it.
If CS highway mpg is less than 40, then I’m out (at least for gen 1). That will be one design choice too many against my preferences.
-1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:48 pm)January of 2007… shipped – maybe – in tiny quantities at the end of 2010. OK. Call it 3.8 years, if it makes you happy.
I know which car is on the road, works, is tops in reliability and sells in mainstream quantities today. I know which one is still being talked about by consumer wannabes, rather than actually driven by real consumers. I know which one has actually made a dent in oil consumption for some families over the last 10 years in the US.
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:53 pm)I have no idea why someone would vote that down!
My speculation is that they are going to be very close. I believe GM will be able to break the 80% mark with the electric transmission. Since a mechanical transmission is at best 90% efficient, that’s a small difference left for the perfect match between engine RPM and power output to gain back the difference.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:56 pm)loboc wrote, “I don’t get where 15,000 miles using 294 gallons (Prius) is better than 15,000 miles using 116 gallons (Volt). ”
It would be great… if someone actually achieved that. It won’t be someone with a 6 to 10 mile daily commute who routinely goes out of town on the weekends.
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:58 pm)And where did that information come from?
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (10:59 pm)And I know the one that will advance the ball down the field for the next 10 years (or so). It’s called the Volt.
I’m guessing that several companies will make plugin progress over the same period – and we’ll benefit from all of them. Competition is a great motivator.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:07 pm)As much as at it pains me to say it, this morsel of news appears to confirm Carcus1′s call. I thought evrything pointed pretty clearly and simply to Atkinson’s cycle when they switched to an I4.
GM has made so many well thought out decisions (IMO) in the Volt’s development, I’m hoping they’ve done something good with the engine too.
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:12 pm)Night all. Work tomorrow so won’t be on until the pm.
Play nice.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:17 pm)Do a Google search and you’ll find it. “The prototype battery system weighs about 220 lbs. more than the current production Prius pack and intrudes into the trunk so that that’s there’s only room for about two medium size suitcases.”
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:22 pm)Only the uncertainties of their scale-up capabilities and the ultimate market cost of the fuel. All in life is a risk – hopefully it pans out.
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:25 pm)35mpg in CS mode means that the car will AVERAGE over 100mpg in combined city/hwy driving. You may want to rethink this. Or just buy a Prius and leave all the Volts for us!
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:26 pm)Regarding comment 221…
HUH!!!!
+1
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:48 pm)Comment 199
Tomorrow I’m going to add 200 lbs to your car, take out some of your passenger and trunk area and charge you $3500.00. As you say it’s no big deal…
+2
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:51 pm)Toyota only shipped 300 Prius, their first year, and only 5,800 by 2000. GM states it plans to build 10,000 the first year! what you say doesn’t click.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-1
Dec 15th, 2009 (11:57 pm)The “prototype” pack. Who cares? What’s the production vehicle going to be like?
-2
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:01 am)That was a decade ago, when gas-electric powertrains were a completely new item. Now, they’re old hat. To everyone except GM.
—
Earlier today, I neglected to mention GM’s fourth failed hybrid, the Saturn VUE mild hybrid. I’m astonished that no one took the opportunity to correct me.
Nobody wanted to score points by pointing out that I was wrong? That GM has already struck out in hybrids FOUR times, rather than just THREE times, as I had written?
Seriously, people, isn’t anyone out there on the ball today?
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:02 am)The battery is the key to 50+ mpg CS mode. With a better (not “larger”) battery, more buffer space can be allocated to further disconnect engine rpm from wheel speed. This would allow a more efficiently tuned engine to provide the car’s average power requirement, depending on the battery to make up any excess in power that the driver demands. A “better” battery in this case is one which can take the larger number of cycles necessary for this function. While such a battery does not yet exist, it is far from “impossible” IMO.
Further, such a “better” battery could have a larger SOC window than the current design, meaning more of it’s capacity would be available for actual driving — increasing range without increasing pack size or weight.
On the outside chance that something almost as good as a supercapacitor is developed (perhaps EEStor, lol); I predict that a plug free Volt will make an appearance: using the combination of a much smaller energy storage bank with a highly efficient ICE tuning (of whatever kind) to provide a 50+ mpg benefit for it’s CS-mode-only operation at a much lower cost than the EREV version.
-5
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:04 am)After all those adjustments, which vehicle still has more passenger room and trunk space? And holds 5 vs 4?
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:06 am)You otto been in pictures … (or do I mean pitchers? Nah, you already been there
).
+2
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:06 am)What do you think about the comparative stats that I gave on the two vehicles? Looks like the Volt has the Prius beat in all categories except total number of passengers.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again. Just like the Volt, the Plug-in Prius hasn’t been sold yet, but there are plenty of Volts on the road being tested.
+2
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:21 am)How is it that the Volt is always viewed in the worst case scenario, while the Prius is viewed in the best case situation when comparing the two in your eyes?
Your arguments keep getting weaker and weaker the more you post.
Lets go back to one of our first arguments that you failed to grasp.
14,600 miles per year is what 80%+ of all Americans drive which equals 40 miles per day. We both understand that some will drive 50 miles one day, 30 the next, then maybe 100 miles once a month. But the majority of people will be driving right around that 40 miles per day, virtually every day including trips to work, school and grandmas’ house
Some how you’re viewing this as if every one is driving 50 miles per day while completely ignoring the fact that when you drive 30 miles, you expend ZERO fuel. The overall advantage for the Volt in this scenario is huge, which amounts to the majority of every American. The amount of fuel spend driving 50 miles is miniscule and comparable to a Prius.
The only scenario in which the Prius comes out ahead is long, sustained drives over 100 miles. How often do 80% of the population drive over 100 miles at a single sitting in a day? Not many at all and that miliage accounts for very little of the overal miles driven per year. Not to mention the Volt will be able to reach 100 miles of EV range much easier than the plug in Prius.
To add to that, 25% of American drivers, drive less than 25 miles per day.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (3:27 am)The Chevy Volt’s gasoline engine/generator has a unique role in this car. It doesn’t operate as do gas engines
in conventional cars in that it does not turn the driveshaft. The Volt is first and foremost an EV and the engine’s only job is to spin a generator to make electricity whenever the battery reaches its low point.
Well, that is wrong. The generator also connects to the “universe” gear of the dual mode planetary transmission, and DOES directly drive the wheels, when the mechanical clutch engages.
You need to get your story right. Volt is NOT a pure serial EV. It is a parallel AND a serial EV.
Sorry, but GM engineers are not that smart to figure how to engineer a pure serial EV.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:02 am)So this is another Prius???
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:53 am)Darius – its a little better than a Prius but not by much.
A Prius is a pure parallel EV with no serial capability.
The volt is a parallel EV which at times when power requirements are moderate, or when the vehicle has stopped, will act as a serial EV.
A pure serial EV requires a more powerful electric generator and motors, and more efficient ones too – and better power electronics, and more powerful batteries. GM is too technologically 2nd rate in the electromechanical and electronics depts to figure this out.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:56 am)/Hugs
-2
Dec 16th, 2009 (5:15 am)That’s exactly the point I do believe (see #151).
If we could have an efficient 40-50MPG Volt without AER for a reasonable price, this car will adresse everyone at the mass. Leave the 40+miles AER as an option for those who believe it will be worth the investment or fit their needs (and can afford the price of such a battery pack).
So here you get your $25k efficient car
Dec 16th, 2009 (7:44 am)They’re already scaling up:
http://www.coskata.com/facilities/
to scale up more than this, they would need more investors. If gas prices stay over $2.50 a gallon, they can be profitable. But remember what gas prices did earlier this year? That would backrupt any major scale-up venture. So if we want this to be real, we’ll need a floor tax on gas of at least $2.50/gal.
+3
Dec 16th, 2009 (7:48 am)Mohsen, you are a troll
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (7:51 am)Not at all. GM engineers did a good job here. To put enough batteries in the Prius, there would not be enough room in the car for people. And the cost would be quite high. And the battery would only last half of the Volt’s. Other than that…
Face it guys, some people have religious fervor for Toyota, some for the Volt. What will the general public have… CHOICE. win-win.
Dec 16th, 2009 (7:53 am)Well, we are nearing 300 messages. Once again Lyle knows what gets our juices flowing.
+3
Dec 16th, 2009 (7:58 am)Oh GAWD, another go around on the transmission and the ICE directly connected to the wheels.
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:00 am)Very true, people dont realize that lots of power is lost is gears (5-10% my guess).. true the Prius does not have a transmission but the few gears it does have (plus a chain power drive) do have losses. Interesting that the oil temperature affects these losses big time, the hotter the oil the less losses. BTW, the Volt also uses gears, for the differential and to slow down the motor rpm to more suitable levels.
Another interesting thing is that gear losses are fairly constant, independent of vehicle speed or loads.
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:06 am)Competition is good.. there is still room in the Prius for more batteries in the spare tire compartment (Hymotion puts a 5kwh pack in there).. cutout the floor and make room for a large pack.. I’m guessing you could fit a square Volt sized pack.. if the cars structure could take that severe weight shift.
A 15kwh battery pack would be a $15-20k option, very few people would opt for it, in my opinion.
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:17 am)I agree with most of what you are saying except that majority of Americans do not drive right around 40 miles/day. The majority average closer to 40 miles/day over the course of a year but that includes their longer trips. The vast majority of daily trips are fairly well spread between 5 and 50 miles/day. But even this is not fully representative of the Volt’s and other EV’s opportunity. It will be distance traveled between charging opportunity that will determine the consumer’s value for AER. This is why I’m hoping GM wil offer different battery size options for Gen 2.
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:28 am)A turbo engine is only more efficient if you don’t push it hard. If you do, it is not more efficient than a naturally aspirated engine. From what I can see, the Volt engine will operated under a heavy load most of time, therefore a turbo powered engine would not be more efficient——-plus the fact that the turbo would add unnecessary weight to the engine.
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:59 am)Tag,
You’re right in that the most important thing for me is “known” reliabilities. Second priority is making lesser-known (same as lesser available/cost-efficiency-wise) technologies more functional-to-purposes (power wise), and, there are so many new purposes for Volt, it is difficult to prioritize after these first two from what I see in service bays every day. (Atkinson isn’t as likely to be as friendly as Otto it would seem to me at this point in time).
Final note: If ethanol was the fuel that was in the tank when Lyle’s test drive video showed 16.5 mpg on the display (which GM must absolutely test to acquire software settings for ethanol), no-one should pay credence to that because the Volt isn’t likely fine-tuned for that 30% to 40% lower fuel energy content of ethanol compared to 90% to 97% pure gasoline. Especially for an average of many many test drivers “tearing up the track” and essentially abusing the energy-economy in order to guage acceleration. (Credible to know the safety margins for onramping and passing, but certainly not energy efficiency whatsoever).
(off to work (12/16/9)) Have a great day everyone.
Dec 16th, 2009 (9:05 am)Herm and LRGVProVolt, thanks for kicking it around.
Yes, the HSD might have more losses than the Volt but that is unlikely to explain almost a 20% difference in claimed mileage. Ditto for drag, since the average speed to get near 40 AER is probably under 20 MPH. But if the Prius gets its 14.5 at 45 or so MPH, then drag affecting one value (4.1 miles per kwh) and not the other value (5 miles per kwh) could explain it. Another possibility would be a greater recovery of regenerative braking energy. If the values are comparable (apples to apples) then I have seen nothing that would suggest more than about a 10% difference. Time will tell.
+3
Dec 16th, 2009 (9:25 am)The Prius is only the name that the G21 group named the car for which their research was going to create. G21 was officially created in 1993. since the Prius did not sell anywhere except Japan in 1997, this makes the research for the Prius totaling 4 years!!! that must be as unimpressive as the Volt’s in your eyes… just saying that the development times are about the same: Prius started with an idea to a vehicle and GM started with a vehicle to an idea.
Dec 16th, 2009 (10:50 am)Don’t forget new technology must be invented and mass-produced first (high cycle-tolerant batteries or economically practical ultracapacitors). Optimistically this will take 5 years after initial Volt rollout (2016-ish?). If research doesn’t cooperate, possibly much longer.
If it works out, the base CS-only version would have a small but very resilient battery to which a larger plug-in pack would be added for the EREV. The added pack would have fewer demands placed on it than the pack in Volt Gen I (just a ‘gas tank’ for electricity, basically), the load-leveling for the efficient engine and regenerative braking would be handled by the base battery. Perhaps this would result in lower costs / longer life for the plug in pack.
Perhaps the most effort should be expended on developing these smaller, high performance batteries; since their existance will lower costs for the larger storage packs even if they use older technology.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (10:54 am)In what way does the Volt “win” in this list of incomplete stats? Number of passengers is the metric in which one exceeds the other by the largest margin and that’s a huge lose for the Volt.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (11:00 am)By that line of reasoning, where does the Volt begin? With the hundreds of millions the Feds invested into the ’90′s PNGV vehicle that GM prototyped but never built? With the XP-680 of 1969 or so? With the EV-1?
Toyota showed the concept Prius in 1995 and delivered it in 1997.
And, let’s just remind ourselves, the Prius has been a commercial success, first imported to the US in 2000, profitable in late 2000, according to some accounts, well over a million on the road today and another quarter million or so other HSD-equipped vehicles on the road with it. GM has swung and missed 4 times (I’m counting chassis/hybrid combos only, if you’d like a model-by-model accounting, I can accomodate you).
Dec 16th, 2009 (11:02 am)It was reported fairly early on in the Volt’s development that a future version would have 3-across seating in the back; for a total of 5 people.
If you are basing your “win-lose” argument on a comparison between Volt Gen 1 and the current Prius, you are being grossly unfair. Give the Volt a decade, or compare against the first year Prius (or better yet; the first year, 2 passenger Insight: which was the first public-roads demonstration of the basic technology the Prius is based on) if you have any interest at all in balance.
By the way, In 10 years, the Volt will still be in a growth phase; the Prius will have already reached it’s asymptotic limit. You’d be better off comparing the first year Prius to the first year Volt.
Dec 16th, 2009 (11:12 am)The current Prius wins whenever unrecharged mileage would go over 170 miles. That’s actually 50% of my driving. If one has a commute that’s short, then the amount of gasoline saved driving a Volt (note, gasoline saved, as typically, there are still CO2 emissions from coal consumption) is also small. The big win for the Prius, of course is COST. You can drive one away, today, for $21K (they’re discounting them a little bit up the road).
The PHEV Prius is tied with the Volt until the unrecharged trip exceeds 14 miles and then beats the Volt when the unrecharged trip exceeds 100 miles. I’m presuming that the Volt actually makes the promised 40 mile AER and granting it 38mpg, where Lyle observed “32 to 36.”
Of course, if you’d like to discuss passenger miles per gallon, that changes things quite a bit. And not in a good way for the Volt.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:02 pm)My concern with the Volt is that there might not be a good balance in CS mode between the amount of electricity the generator can deliver and the demand from the electric engine. Remember the electric engine is very powerfull and the ICE is less powerfull and the electricity generated is even less. GM needs to make sure this works fine otherwise you can end up with a car that does not respond all the time when you step on the gas. If the car becomes unpredictable it actually can be dangerous. The best solution is offcourse that the generator generates more electricity but that is easier said than done maybe you need a stronger ICE. A second solution might be in CS mode to put the electric motor automatically in (super) eco mode where the demand of electricity is lower as well as the performance and give the driver a warning so he knows what to expect. There is already a sports and eco mode. Also the buffer can be made bigger but under heavy load it will still get empty and if the driver does not know that, he also does not know if the car responds if needed. There is still a year to go so hopefully GM can find a good balance.
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:07 pm)I can’t get into the comments on today’s thread, which is pretty typical when the polls are included. Anyway, I think it all was said about the dance/song the other day. I’ll try again later. Catch you on the flip-flop.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:37 pm)GM has had 10 or 12 years to compete with the Prius. It’s GM’s bad planning that they are making a half-baked “first effort” when the Prius has had 10 years of refinement. Maybe Lutz, back in ’04 or so, when there were waiting lists for the ’05 Prius, shouldn’t have said, “nobody wants hybrids” and should have started developing a serious alternative to the Prius, rather than green-lighting the Camaro, a couple of hybrids so feeble that the achieve nothing and another series of hybrids that can still be described as “gas hogs” and are marketed to people who don’t care about fuel economy.
Or, to put this another way, why would we compare the ’10 (or ’11) Prius to the ’15 or ’20 Volt? In ’15, the ’15 Prius will be available, you know. Are you expecting Toyota to hold still, so that GM can hit them?
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:51 pm)I’ve been thinking about the Volt’s CS-mode efficiency, and it seems to me there’s an aspect that hasn’t been taken into account.
Picture a typical conventional small-engined economy sedan, e.g. my Fit. Even though it’s not overpowered by current (silly) standards, it spends a lot of time on the open road with the gas pedal just barely depressed. Maintaining 60 mph on a straight, level road, I’m really just breathing on the gas pedal — but the whole time, the engine and automatic transmission are being dragged along for the ride at around 2,200 rpm, all for very little net power applied at the wheels. Then traffic slows down ahead, or I head down a slight incline, and I lift my foot completely off the gas: now I have net negative power being applied at the wheels (engine braking), but I’m still dragging the engine and transmission through their cycles.
Serial hybrids will eliminate this wastage. The engine will never be dragged along at cruising speed while the driver is requesting zero power at the wheels (as in a long, gentle downslope). If the Volt driver is requesting very little or zero power, the ICE will either be shut off or be productively engaged at a high throttle setting charging the battery. I have a feeling that in a long session of steady cruising at 60 mph, the ICE will spend a substantial percentage of the time shut off.
Maybe what I’m trying to say is that the vaunted mechanical connection between wheels and engine in a conventional car — or in the Prius configuration — is inherently a two-edged sword. I’m guessing the Volt will surprise on the upside with its CS-mode mileage.
-2
Dec 16th, 2009 (12:54 pm)Here’s the basic problem with today’s revelation…
We have ample reason to believe that the Volt’s charge-sustaining fuel economy is going to be poor.
The Volt is going to have a sticker price of $40K – or more.
The taxpayer is helping to fund this “development” or “improvement” in automobiles through a $7500 tax credit.
The Volt is a compact car with average performance.
The Volt is only going to have 4 seats and perhaps some other limitations we don’t yet know about.
To justify the cost, the public support and the various limitations, the Volt must do something very well. The Volt must be excellent in at least one dimension.
Now, we’d like to think that the Volt’s dimension of excellence is in fuel economy… that the Volt is optimized to go as far as possible on its energy inputs, to get good AER and then to squeeze more miles out of every gallon of gas so that when it’s compared to something else (like the Prius), this massive private and public investment in the future WINS.
But it won’t. And that’s a damned shame.
Dec 16th, 2009 (1:33 pm)Now you are lieing through our teeth. THe Prius just became profitable just a few years ago, what are you smoking?
Dec 16th, 2009 (1:44 pm)Negative.
Right now we can assume the Volt’s CS will be between 40-50 MPG in CS mode. Aside from that we really do not know and speculating that it WILL be poor is complete bs.
Second, the performance of the vehicle is well ahead of even the Gen III Prius, saying it’s just an average car is disingenuous.
Third, the tax rebate apply to all vehicles that meet the criteria, including the plug-in Prius which should receive about $2500, whats your point here? The idea is to get us off foreign oil.
How do you claim the Volt does not excel in EV mode? The latest plug-in Prius will get around 10 miles of EV range, that 25% of the range the Volt has. The Volt excels in EV mode, while at the same time eliminates the range anxiety usually coupled with normal EV’s. THAT IS HUGE and can not be understated.
The Volts pricing is not yet fixed and speculating on it is still just wishful thinking. I could just as easily say the plug-in Prius is going to cost $55,000 when it hits the US from the price we are getting at in Japan.
Again, your opinions are simply worst case, every case, every time. It gets old hearing you sucking the Toyota teet all day.
If you want to bring up valid arguments not meant to show that your precious “Prius” is king, I’ll listen but that’s been far and few in-between.
Dec 16th, 2009 (1:54 pm)Please feel free to inform me of ANY company that has been able to compete with the Prius?
The Ford Fusion hybrid just became the second best selling hybrid on the market and guess how many they are selling? Less than 10k.
No one has been able to compete with the Prius, even Honda or Nissan. Toyota has a complete monopoly on hybrid vehicles right now, and they’ve had it for 10 years. Pointing out GM only is very disingenuous because no one has been able to compete with them.
How ever, the Volt is the first real competitor that challenges the technical superiority of the Prius, plug-in or not. The golden age of the Prius is quickly coming to an end, and the monopoly that Toyota has had will began to erode over the next few years.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (1:57 pm)Denial is not just a river in Egypt, is it? Sadly, my better link is now broken, this will have to do you… this article is from mid-2004 or so:
http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/100302.html
I’ve seen one report that cited a Toyota source saying it was profitable in 2000. I’ve seen other sources citing it as profitable in 2002. Of course, if it wasn’t profitable, it’s hard to see how Toyota made all the money they did in the early part of the decade. And Toyota is a manufacturer that can build a $12K car in a high-wage country and make money on it (the Yaris).
Just because GM can’t build a hybrid profitably doesn’t mean nobody can do it.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (2:00 pm)Right now, you can assume that the Volt’s CS fuel economy will be in the 40-50mpg range but you will be doing so against solid evidence that the CS fuel economy will be in the 30′s.
The car’s reason for existence is to minimize gasoline use. It has nothing else going for it (except as a curiosity, like the SSR). If it doesn’t excel at minimizing gasoline use, then it’s really pointless.
Dec 16th, 2009 (2:19 pm)Real engineers (as opposed to armchair ones) are keenly aware of the law of diiminishing returns. If you have a design for a car which is already capable of going to market as a 230 mpg vehicle, it would be nuts to spend hundreds of millions to develop a new engine, just so you could get up to 235 mpg.
The goal here is efficient and affordable family transportation, not a gold plated solution at any cost.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (2:28 pm)Clearly you are basing your assumption of CS mode mileage by the vary narrow test lyle did on the small track. Perhaps then Dagwood you failed to read this post by one of our Prius owning members
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3788
The Prius gets about the same MPG as the Volt did in the same test, but some how you believe the Prius gets 50 mpg at all times, which is not the case.
The volt has not even been fully calibrated yet and those numbers that you keep referring too, though the only ones we have at the moment, do not mean much at all.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (2:31 pm)An automobile OEM has many skilled and many more unskilled workers.
If you give me a print, and I figure out how to use a complex machine to make the part, I am a skilled machinist.
If I install and tighten nuts, or load and unload an automated machine, I am an unskilled worker.
The UAW always insists on razor thin wage increments between the skilled and unskilled members, resulting in the unskilled being grossly overpaid, and the unionized US car makers (GM,Ford, Chrysler) being grossly uncompetitive with the non-union US-based car makers (Honda, Nissan, Toylta).
But its OK. Thats why we have taxpayers–to make up the difference
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (2:42 pm)The average speed for the Volt to get 40 miles AER is 48mph, is the average speed used in the EPA cycles and what GM uses for its claim.
The Prius gets its 14.5 at an even lower average speed used in the Japanese JC8 cycle, once you adjust it to the epa combined cycle then that range will drop about 25% to around 10-11 miles. Note the Prius uses 68% of its total battery capacity.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (2:56 pm)While it’s true that we have only one actual from-the-driver’s seat report on the Volt, plus one of their engineer’s descriptions of range, we actually have quite a lot of Prius mpg feedback. The average is 50.3. I’m comfortable using that. If you’d like better data, you should get after GM to provide it. Or provide a Volt for head-to-head competition. I’m sure we could dig up a Prius somewhere.
I don’t suppose you noticed that George was driving a 2008 Prius? Did you know there’s a newer model available?
Dec 16th, 2009 (2:59 pm)Or, maybe not. In the Popular Mechanics article referenced by someone else:
“Toyota claims that the electric-only range is at least 12.5 miles and about 20 miles in average use, with a full battery recharge taking 100 minutes using a 200v supply.”
Of course, we don’t have one of those to test, either. But we do have ample proof Toyota can make a reliable hybrid and sell it in volume at reasonable prices.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (3:18 pm)To bad the devil is in the details isn’t it?
The Prius began NOT losing money on every vehicle in 2002, but in order to make a PROFIT, you have to recoup all the money that was invested into it. You need to read between the lines.
In Toyotas own words they needed to sell 100,000 Prius a year to began recouping the money invested, not to just break even and not lose money on each vehicle.
The Prius didn’t reach 100,000 vehicles sold per year until 2005, and to believe they recouped all their money in that one year is a ignoring reality. So yes, a couple years ago, as in 2006-2007 is the right time frame from which Toyota truly made a profit on the Prius. As I said, the devil is in the details…
Dec 16th, 2009 (3:33 pm)Damm edit option didn’t work :/
I’m not trying to take away from the many brilliant and innovative things the Prius and Toyota has brought us, they deserve credit for sure. But GM has created a legitimate contender to the Prius that is just as innovative and brilliant and may end up reshaping the automotive industry for the next century, something you can seem to grasp.
This is all aside from the fact that Japan has deliberate trade agreements with the United States in which to benefit its own industry with in its country and prevent foreign competition, giving all Japanese companies an inherit advantage. They have a massive base from which they only need to compete with them selves. It’s complete bs. We always talk about free trade and competition, but Japan and South Korea are far from it and China is even worse.
-3
Dec 16th, 2009 (3:53 pm)Khadgars wrote, “In Toyotas own words they needed to sell 100,000 Prius a year to began recouping the money invested, not to just break even and not lose money on each vehicle.”
Got a source for that factoid?
Frankly, I don’t believe it. Toyota’s entire Lexus division is doing OK with cars that sell in the 2-5K/month range. Toyota has plenty of experience with low-volume product lines.
And, as to that putative “Japanese trade advantage,” well, I hate to tell you this, it’s real. It’s just not what you think it is. Japan’s trade advantage is that they take the trouble to make products that the target market would want. We’re free to sell Camaros to the Japanese… they just don’t want them.
-2
Dec 16th, 2009 (3:57 pm)GM hasn’t “created” any such thing. It’s still in development. When Volt #1 hits a dealer lot, then you can start using past tense. And you can talk about its success when they sell 60K/year.
Bear in mind, 60K/year is about 15% of Toyota’s current Prius capacity.
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:00 pm)The reason they aren’t using the Atkinson Cycle is because they are taking an engine off the shelf. The engine will be 8 years old by 2011. “Good ’nuff”, but a bad choice for efficiency. I predict the engine choice will be the first thing they will change on gen2 if the Volt is a success.
The Cruze engine is a variant of the Family 0 1.4L. 72.5 mm bore as opposed to 73.4mm on the Volt. Different compression (9.5:1 compared to 10.5:1 on the Volt), and the obvious turbo (Volt does not have). It also features variable valve timing and optional gasoline direct injection (again, I don’t think the Volt has).
So why? They were too freaking cheap.
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:09 pm)What’s wrong with you?
Toyota: “We get 14.5 miles on JC08″
That trumps some popular mechanics article. Its true that if you drive 20 mph the entire time you might get more than JC08, however, JC08 has proven for most cars to be 25-35% lighter than EPA cycles. This is true for the non PHEV Plug-in Prius.
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:14 pm)Evaluation of Choice of Range Extender
“40 MPG” Engine versus “50 MPG” Engine
Gasoline used for 100,000 miles
Expected Range Extention Mode 30,000 miles
40 MPG Engine is 750 gallons
50 MPG Engine is 600 gallons
So unless the cost differential between the standard 1.4L and some 1.5-1.8L special Atkinsons style engine was less than 500, they made a fairly reasonable choice. (Not that I like it)
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:19 pm)This would be great, and if something like the EESTOR was real that didn’t show significant degration due to cycling this is what would occur
I would point out that GM has been aggressively protecting battery life. I wouldn’t expect the generator to shut off unless power requests fell to under 5 kW (which is pretty small)
-2
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:33 pm)There’s nothing wrong with me, I’m just your garden-variety satisfied repeat Toyota customer. Who knows what configuration they tested on JC08 or what configuration they were discussing with PM? We will have to wait to see the actual car. On the other hand, it’s being built on top of a proven and well understood platform with 99% (by count) parts identical to the current vehicle, so it’s easy for them to understand how the vehicle can be managed and will respond to various inputs.
Let’s bear in mind, here, that GM says, “up to 40 miles” and that’s ideal conditions only.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:37 pm)You economic analysis is not bad but it ignores something important… There must be $40K worth of reasons for people to want this car. Cheaping out on the Volt is a bad plan. Unless they really don’t care if they sell any or not.
There’s a thought… Lutz did say that people don’t want hybrids and then set out to prove himself right by building hybrids that people don’t want. And GM did say that they won’t make any money on the Volt… Maybe GM is just out to prove that people don’t really want RE-EVs, either. They’ll sell a few and then, disappointed with the way the RE-EV works out in practice, people will go back to buying Silverados and Tahoes. Sure. It’s a plan.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (4:51 pm)While it is certainly true that Toyota is firmly in the lead, I can point to two companies that are doing far better than GM in hybrid sales while wasting less money in the process… Would that make you happier?
As for the end of the Prius’ “golden age,” at least Toyota made some gold in the process. And I doubt that anyone at Toyota is dim enough to believe that the Prius would go forever unchallenged.
They built an adaptable and extensible platform. Now they’re going to start adapting and extending it. There’s lots of scary numbers about how much the car will cost but they sell the base car for $22K and there’s not much in the way of development on top of it. Unit cost will include difference between the newer, more powerful, more expensive battery and the old NiMH unit that the car won’t need. They can build the car on the same line as the regular Prius and they can build as many or as few as they like with little penalty in cost or time. If people with short commutes see this as a very attractive EV sized just for them, it may be quite profitable.
Think of all the ways that the PHEV Prius program differs from the Volt program and then remember what GM’s and Toyota’s real goals are (hint: MAKE MONEY).
Dec 16th, 2009 (5:43 pm)Wrong,
GM is not free to sell Camaros or any vehicle in Japan, nor is Ford or Hyundai or KIA or any one other than Japanese manufactures. Only expensive European cars do well, and in well I mean well less than 100,000 vehicles sold PER YEAR for ALL of them combined. That equals NOTHING.
They have strict trade laws that inhibit foreign competition, as well as a cultural that only buys local that prevents foreign companies from competing in Japan. The Koreans have the same problem, who now produce higher quality electronics than most Japanese companies, yet you wont find a Samsung or LG any where in Japan. If you fail to see this then you’re fooling your self silly.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (5:50 pm)Hey dagwood55
From what I am witnessing out here in all these independent shops,
Toyota is starting to cheapen their product quality dramatically. You being a garden-variety Toyota owner ought to start putting a lot more money away for repairs because you are most certainly going to need it, and, need it badly from confirmed diagnostics of what is showing up within the 162 independent auto repair shops I support.
You’ve been forewarned.
Dan Petit
ASE-Examined L-1 Advanced
Systems Educator.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (6:31 pm)Dagwood55
What is wrong with you?
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/14/toyota-officially-launches-plug-in-prius-program-retail-sales-i/
HOW MUCH MORE CLEAR THAN THIS DO YOU NEED!?! Toyota’s OWN press release!
Current Lease Program details:
#1. MAXIMUM output power is rated at 100 kW. ICE rated at 83 kW. Thus Maximum power in EV mode appears to be 27 kW! This means PHEV Prius in leasing form will be -unable- to complete UDDS cycle or any other EPA cycle without gasoline assist. Toyota has not even said it will!
#2. EV cruising range of 23.4 km, -JAPAN ONLY-
#3. Gasoline Consumption with no PHEV assistance = 72 MPG –> 51 US EPA, reduction factor of 0.7
Taking #3 and #2 together
Expected Cruise range for US UDDS cycle? 10.2 miles… IF its even able to perform the UDDS cycle.
#4. Electric Efficieny:
6.57 km/kWh!
Taking #2 and #4, EPA UDDS cycle energy efficieny is expected to be
2.85 miles/kWh (Why so bad? E-CVT takes a significant pull of energy. Other components made to sap from the combined system are not efficient as ones going straight to battery)
Conclusions:
GM – paraphrase from press release
“We expect the Volt to get 230 MPG + 25 kWh/100 miles using EPA UDDS cycle combined with new Methodology based on Sae J1711″
Toyota- Based on the numbers presented in thier Japan filtered by the reduction factor on the -same- SAE J1711 test and EPA UDDS cycle
71 MPG + 10 kWh/100 miles
Based on this,
The Volt is -cheaper- to run than PHEV Prius whenever a gallon of gas costs more than 15 times a kWh of electricity
For the average US driver the Volt will save 1 gallon per 100 miles traveled over the PHEV Prius.
In your own words, GM not using a more expensive ICE to save 150-300 gallons of gas over a decade was “cheaping” out.
How about Toyota not using a sufficient large battery or electric motor and leaving 1,000-2,000 gallons over a decade on the table?
Dec 16th, 2009 (6:42 pm)Nothing new here.
This is how business works (unfortunately). In terms of strategy, it’s pretty clever: Introduce a new quality product on market (be the first), spread it worldwide and sit a while on it. During this period, cycle reengineer the whole production process in order to lower costs, and collect the money. After product has been set properly on peoples mind, lower the quality and make money on parts.
$$$$$
Obviously it keeps independant repair shops on track…
On a side note, I have never experienced the quality of a GM car, so I’m not able to argue on it.
Dec 16th, 2009 (7:10 pm)You are so correct about that Lawrence.
But the sooner the public knows and is forewarned, the more cautious those reductions in quality might be gambled. Especially now that we have the ‘net.
When shops are trained to prove and disprove all problems all at the same time, the more they realize that there is far far too much work for them to do, and the poor owner to have to afford. Reductions in quality ought to be revealed as soon as possible.
Thanks for your added comment.
Dan.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (7:40 pm)Your numbers are not correct.
Maximum power in EV mode for plugin Prius is not 27 kW it is actually 60 kW.
MPG for Volt in CS mode will be between 30-50MPG (my guess 35MPG) for the Prius this will be almost 50MPG.
Use of electricity for the Volt is 25 kWh/100 miles and for the plugin Prius 24.5 kWh/100 miles not 10 (that would be nice).
The advantage of the Volt is the much bigger EV range 30-40 miles against 10-15 miles. Toyota cannot simply match that with the Prius they need to come with a new hybrid wich can take a few years.
Dec 16th, 2009 (7:54 pm)Sigh
Why don’t people understand this?
Yes, the electric motor is capable of 60 kW, but just because its capable of 60 kW, doesn’t mean it ever gets fed 60 kW from the batteries.
Maximum Output from Electric Motor and ICE Engine is 100 kW. Toyota says so.
Maximum Output from ICE Engine is 83 KW.
Toyota Says so.
Ergo, at Maximum Power Output, the Electric Motor is outputing 27 kW!
Now its certainly true that electric motor power varies and it may be the it can provide more than 27 kW of power. Yet the choice of limiting the speed to 60 mph, a speed that takes less than 20 kW of power to the wheels to sustain, doesn’t give me much confidence that the PHEV Prius can supply much more than ~27-30kW from the Battery to the Electric Motor.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:00 pm)What can I say? Apparently, Toyota’s plan is to avoid making a compact car that’s laughably expensive. That seems like a sound plan to me.
As for why a Toyota rep would tell PM 20 miles… who knows? Perhaps the press release is overly conservative or the spokesperson who talked to PM was wrong. If he’s wrong and 14 miles is pretty much the limit, he’s probably closer to reality than Bob Lutz was when he first started yakking about the Volt.
I take comfort from knowing that, right now, the PHEV Prius is unbeaten by the Volt. As of today, it offers the same performance to consumers as the Volt.
-1
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:06 pm)Yeah, Dan, I’m real worried about that.
Not.
You might find it amusing to go to TrueDelta.com, where they’re surveying vehicle reliability continuously and see how, for example, the Prius and the Malibu compare.
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:07 pm)Or the electric motor is supplying its rated 60KW and the ICE is supplying 40.
-2
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:17 pm)Sure they’re free to sell them. The Japanese just don’t want them.
Given the way inventories are climbing and sales falling, I’m guessing that they’re no longer in very high demand here, either.
Now, it’s entirely possible that GM doesn’t go to much trouble to try to sell them, that they do have some grasp of Japanese market realities and figure it’s not worth their time to do much in the way of market development.
Further, the Japanese do like foreign stuff but they’re very fussy about quality and image. If they’re going to spend the bucks for something, they want top-drawer merchandise. That’s not GM.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:35 pm)The 100 kW is the maximum combined performance of the electric motor and the gas engine you cannot simply add them together. This means that if the gas engine gives maximum performance the electric motor can still add 17 kW. But if the gas engine is not used the electric motor can give 60 kW of power. The EV range of 10-15 miles could be the reason to limit the speed in EV mode to 62 mph. The electric motor is not meant for highway driving at maximum speed, this is for the gas engine.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (8:59 pm)dag ain’t gittn any.
+1
Dec 16th, 2009 (9:56 pm)Do you really think that Toyota is using a 60 kW electric motor and that it never delivers more than 30 kW?
Dec 16th, 2009 (11:18 pm)The only way you can get to that point is hard, sustained high power climbing up a hill. Anything less and the engine can outproduce the motor’s consumption.
Dec 16th, 2009 (11:34 pm)The reason the speed limit in EV mode is 62 MPH is because of the power split device.
The power split device sums the speeds of the engine and MG1 together. If the engine isn’t spinning, MG1 reaches its maximum RPM at 62 MPH. If the engine is spinning then the car can go faster before MG1 over-revs.
In the current Prius this speed limit is 42 MPH.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:37 am)No their not free to sell them. Japan has high import tariffs and trade “agreements” that inhibit foreign competition, how are you missing that? Do you think the dollar is worth 90 times that of the Yen? Japan has the second largest economy in the world with one of the best treasury reserves in the world, its the same thing China is doing on a less aggressive scale. The Chinese peg the Yuan at a set amount below the dollar, ensuring its goods are always cheaper regardless of what happens in the world economy.
Korean electronics, including batteries is basically considered superior to their Japanese counterparts, this includes Samsung, LG and other Korean manufactures. Yet they have no market share in Japan. Some how you think its coincidental? Hardly, its deliberate. The thing is, all the Asian countries do this, even with each other. Only the United States has its doors wide open which kills domestic manufacturing.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:46 am)Dagwood is the epitome of a cranktard. Notice his patterns perfectly emulate the patterns of the typical climate skeptic, or skeptard. His patterns also perfectly emulate moon landing hoaxtards. But damn all if he aint still fun to torment!
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:11 pm)“dag ain’t gittn any.”
Either that or he’s a Toyota USA employee.
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:46 pm)Matthew B says
The only way you can get to that point is hard, sustained high power climbing up a hill.Anything less and the engine can outproduce the motor’s consumption.
OK that is good news, does this also mean that the top speed for a longer period of time is the same in CS mode as in EV mode.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:59 pm)[...] trucks and SUVs. According to the reliable Lyle Dennis of GM-Volt.com, the Chevy Volt will not use an Atkinson Cycle engine, [...]
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:26 pm)Here’s an interesting bit of anectdotal info: My friend has a 2009 Highlander Hybrid. In the summer he was getting a good 30MPG. As soon as it got cold out, MPG dropped 10% based on his average. He said his wife’s 08 Prius does the same thing. Since a good chunk of North America experiences winter, and even the mythical Plug Prissy will still use the ICE almost 100% of the time, which vehicle would you want in a cold climate MPG-wise? The antiquated ICE big oil teet suckler, or the first 40 miles all EV vehicle with battery nice and conditioned every time you leave the garage? Hey Dagkook, whatchya gotta say about this INCONVIENIENT TRUTH?
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:54 pm)The inconvenient truth is that battery performance goes to hell in the cold. Why do you ask?
Dec 17th, 2009 (4:18 pm)Well, for a start, we sell into Japan and China. But we make good stuff.
Still, I’d consider that perhaps your argument that Japan and China were closed to certain US products had some merit except for GM’s stellar inability to sell their North American products into any environment. And this has been going on for a long time. I lived overseas long, long ago and American cars were highly prized but it was Toyota that was actually bulding a dealer network in that country. And that country had a domestic auto industry that they did extend a little effort to protect. GM’s indifference to that market was their doom.
As for Korean electronics and batteries being considered superior to Japanese electronics… by whom? Cheaper, maybe. But superior? Guess again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:12 pm)In all the posts regarding the efficiency of the Volt, nowhere have I seen mentioned a crucial point: there are two completely different ways of looking at this question.
First is from the viewpoint of the individual purchaser. He will probably have to lay out about $6,000 (an educated guess) more than a similar-sized conventional car would cost. But the Volt is more efficient. Assuming driving 40 miles daily, six days a week (to allow for 40 miles more on weekends), he drives 240 miles weekly, or about 12,500 miles yearly. Say a conventional car gets 30 mpg. So he would otherwise have to buy about 415 gallons of gasoline yearly. At $3 per gallon (my current lowest price on Long Island), this would cost him $1,245 yearly. Divided into his $6,000 greater investment, it comes out to less than 4.8, which means he will recover his greater investment in less than five years. This is the same as a 20% return on his $6,000 greater investment. I would grab the opportunity to make 20% on an investment (as opposed to about 1% currently from a savings bank), but each purchaser will make his own decision.
The electricity substituted for gasoline, paid for at discounted night rates, which is when the car batteries will be re-charged, is so little as to be negligible in this calculation and so is ignored.
The second way to judge the Volt’s efficiency is on a national basis. 80% of all gasoline usage is to drive cars less than 40 miles a day. This means that an all-Volt fleet would substitute electricity for 80% of all oil consumed for this purpose. Since over 80% of all oil we use comes from North America, we would no longer have to import oil from overseas, much of it from unstable or even hostile sources. Immediately we would reduce our annual balance-of-payment deficits by something like $500 billion; more, if the price of oil increases over present levels, which seems likely. This means reducing the nation’s out-of-pocket expenses, for which we are issuing Treasury bonds, on which we all pay interest and which principal sums our children will have to repay, by $500 billion each year.
Further, we will be able to save hundreds of billions of dollars by reducing our enormous armed forces, which we need largely to protect our supply of oil from unstable, even hostile overseas sources. This Federal budget reduction, added to the previous $500 billion savings, could total a national saving of a trillion dollars yearly. All our economic problems, like paying for social security and health care for an aging population, could be solved.
Saving the lives of thousands of young men who would otherwise die protecting these same unstable oil sources: what value can be placed on those?
Finally, if we wisely substitute renewable electricity sources for coal-fired power plants, as is already being done with solar-thermal plants of thousands of megawatts in California, we would solve the twin national problems of pollution and global climate change.
From a national viewpoint, the savings from renewable sources can pay for the investments in large car batteries and new solar-thermal generating plants.
So, from both an individual, as well as a national point of view, the Volt and its successors are a win-win-win self-liquidating strategy.
Dec 17th, 2009 (6:56 pm)So very well written, I just had to make it re-post.
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:14 pm)No, dummy, the battery will be fully conditioned when you unplug from your garage. Jeez, as many have asked already, what the hell is wrong with you? Oh yea, you’re a CRANKTARD, never mind.
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:59 pm)I’m not going to argue GM or other American manufactures haven’t made blunders in foreign markets, thats not what is being discussed here. One company or a few companies doing that is normal, but entire industries being locked out of Japanese and Korean markets is not simply Americans not knowing how to do business there. You are completely blind if you believe that. It is deliberate and its been going on for decades ever since Ronald Reagan took office.
In addition, GM sells many vehicles in China and else where, even with all of its troubles its still the third largest manufacture in the World at its lowest point. To say they can’t sell vehicles any where is false.
Third, in Japan there is something they call “Sony Life”, a phrase referring to their Sony products taking a dig after two years. I’m not saying Sony makes horrible products, because they don’t. However, that doesn’t mean they have the best products on the market as they used to during the 90′s. With out competition from any one including the Koreans, its impossible to make your argument.
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:12 pm)Something wonderful to read : Talks about a completely new
thermodynamic cycle variant of Atkinson cycle.
http://libralato.co.uk/docs/Libralato_Holdings_Ltd_Business_Plan_June_2009.pdf
thought its good to share
and fits this post.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:30 pm)Don’t forget E85 or gasoline or a blend in the tank. And opportunity recharge at no cost. The solar garage set up is also very attractive.
The two $20′s I withdraw from the ATM go $30 to the gasoline pump and $10 to food purchase. Over and over again. This madness has got to stop.
=D~
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:36 pm)Albert’s post was so good, I had to make it re-post a third time.
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:17 pm)And when it’s not in the garage at home? Like sitting in the parking lot with the car dripping icicles at -17F? As happens around here from time to time?
I guess I’m just the kind of “cranktard” that happens to take notice of the weather.
-1
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:36 pm)“Blunders” is putting it mildly.
To the best of my knowledge, GM doesn’t sell any NA-built vehicles in China, either. Their Buicks, except for the LaCrosse, are all designed there and built there. The LaCrosse was designed cooperatively but the Chinese LaCrosse is different in some ways.
And, as it happens, while I was in China this summer, I saw almost no GM vehicles. Most of the market looks nothing like NA-built vehicles of any type.
Now… let’s say you are right about Japan.. that their market is essentially closed to American manufacturers (somehow, the Germans slip through the borders – probably a result of a secret protocol to their pre-WWII treaties).
So what? What’s the JDM market, compared to the rest of the world? GM takes a crippling disadvantage because they’re effectively frozen out of a market of about 1% of the world’s population?
Tell me, what would GM sell into a market where the Corolla is considered extra-large? Where Kei cars rule? When has GM ever built a small car that was worth a tinker’s damn?
Even in the larger car market, what would GM sell? You don’t have some fantasy going that GM actually offers a vehicle that competes with BMW or Mercedes, do you? I’ve driven the latest Cadillac CTS and I can assure you that I was delighted to find that GM has finally developed a car that handles as well as a twenty year old Volvo.
Get real.
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:37 pm)If you were going to take the trouble to post it a third time, why didn’t you fix at least the more obvious errors?
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:58 pm)Crankwood is a real pisser!
Dude, you hold me in awe with your purity, your absolute purity of crankness. You are all alone, in the dark, and the rest of us are laughing AT you. 
Please don’t stop. I am fascinated to see the depths of madness to which you will sink. Just like a train wreck in slow motion.
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:01 pm)Unfortunately the post is not so good.
Lets take a conventional hybrid which does 50 MPG, and is $9000 cheaper (I found one for less than $23000). In his best case scenario someone drives exactly 40 miles a day and never more or less. I don’t know if such a driver exists but assume their is someone who does. For 6 days a week 40 miles that is 12500 miles a year. The conventional hybrid uses 250 gallons a year that is $ 750. The Volt uses 25 kWh per 100 miles for 12500 miles this is 3125 kWh of electricity which is called negligible but will cost more than $ 300. So you will save 450 dollars a year and it will take 20 years to get your investment back.
Dec 18th, 2009 (12:03 am)Feel free to point out any factual errors.
Dec 18th, 2009 (2:14 am)You can’t see past your own prejudices. You’re living in the past in regards to GM vehicles, but thats fine, you don’t like them so be it. But your descriptions and counter arguments reek of bias and are filled with bs.
Look, the United States accounts for only a very small portion of the worlds population as well, yet we’re the largest economy in the world. SIZE of population doesn’t matter (except with China and India) its the BUYING POWER OF THE POPULATION. In that regard, JAPAN is number TWO in the WORLD. Is it the most lucrative market in the world? No, MY POINT IS, Japanese manufactures have an inherit advantage by having an entire country as a base for all of their products with no competition. Its not just with automobiles, its with virtually every imaginable product.
Only a very select few high end European vehicles even sell at a respectable rate, even then its minuscule compared to their domestic competitors.
Why would GM make a vehicle that would sell in Japan if they cant even sell the vehicle there????? You just don’t get it.
Current GM vehicles, and Ford for that matter, are on par with any Japanese made vehicle. Come back after the 2010 reviews are done, I’d love to hear what you have to say.
In regards to China, the vehicles are not designed there I have no idea where you’re getting your information. But because you didn’t see many GM vehicles in your stay means absolutely nothing. GM is selling very well in China at the moment, one of the only bright spots that see’s the Chinese government continually manipulate currency as well as illegally dumping products that cost less than the raw materials to make it, just to maintain its 8% growth rate because the Communist leaders depend on that growth rate for their power.
Clearly you have a lot to learn about trade and how American manufacturers continually get screwed over and over again, and despite that still remain innovative and competitive.
The Volt is a great leap forward in manufacturing of automobiles and the automotive industry, simply because you don’t like GM vehicles doesn’t make the Volt any less innovative and more importantly, a leader in the new industry that lies ahead.
Dec 18th, 2009 (2:22 am)Cars are NEVER an investment, they lose value the moment you drive them off the lot
In any regard, the price of gas is still relativly cheap to where it should be at. This time next year gas will be $4. After that you’re looking at $5 and up. The math starts to add up, but not at $2,50 a gallon.
Dec 18th, 2009 (7:59 am)Oh suuuuure. You expect anyone to believe your are anything but a twisted shut-in, living in some old lady’s basement rental, utilizing Meals On Wheels for your nourishment? World traveler indeed. Liar liar pants on fire.
Dec 18th, 2009 (11:24 am)“You can’t see past your own prejudices. You’re living in the past in regards to GM vehicles, but thats fine, you don’t like them so be it. But your descriptions and counter arguments reek of bias and are filled with bs.”
Oddly, I was thinking of saying something similar to you, except that you do like GM vehicles… or the Volt’s chances, anyway.
Look, we sell stuff to the Japanese. That market is open.
What was GM’s US market share in 1969? And today? Where did all that market share go?
When the Japanese first arrived, people sneered at those vehicles as “Jap crap” and wouldn’t even test drive them. The Japanese hung in there and sold better cars. Eventually, people realized that these little cars were a good value and sales took off.
While the Japanese were plugging away, Detroit slumbered. If they woke at all, it was to commission another “Mom, apple pie and Chevrolet” TV ad to reassure the faithful that they really didn’t want “Jap crap” in their driveways. But, over time, the ranks of their faithful dwindled.
The Japanese were building better cars for this market (I think they still are), for their home market the Japanese are still building far better cars. GM doesn’t compete because GM can’t build a small car profitably.
There’s a guy who posts on TTAC.COM who recently left GM. He loved GM and felt that GM was the most advanced automaker in the world with the best people(*), equipment and techniques. Then a guy from VW described how VW swaps stamping dies in minutes. GM takes a shift to do the same work. You could almost hear the GM guy’s jaw drop in his next post.
More recently, the subject of the Lacerne and the Impala running on the same line came up. The Lucerne is a tarted-up Impala. The GM guy said it was a “logistical nightmare” to do Lucerne runs. In comparison, Honda can build their entire product line on a single assembly line. Toyota can interleave the Prius builds with other cars on a single production line.
There’s no “logistical nightmares” at Honda and Toyota plants, they are designed for flexibility and advanced manufacturing techniques. If product demand changes, product build can change with it. GM can open or close a plant and idle or employ entire shifts of workers to manage product build. Which way is more cost-effective?
GM doesn’t sell into Japan because they have not done the work necessary to compete in that market. They’re lucky to be hanging on here.
Here’s another observation on GM… Saab. Saab certainly didn’t have a lot of sales before GM bought them but by last year they were down to practically nothing at all. Now, they’re gone. GM took a perfectly good auto brand and killed it.
(*) – I agree with him on this. They’re just very badly led.
—
Willis,
I get around.
Dec 18th, 2009 (12:02 pm)With the help of your care giver I’m sure. Gotta get out to the mailbox to pickup that SS check.
All alone, barking in the dark, part of me actually feels sorry for you. Thankfully that part is very, very small.
Dec 18th, 2009 (1:56 pm)[...] to a story on GM-Volt.com, the engine/generator on the 2011 Chevy Volt will operator on the more common Otto cycle, not the [...]
-1
Dec 18th, 2009 (2:55 pm)You’re all alone, barking in the dark?
My dog is in that same situation.
Saaayyy… you aren’t my dog, are you? Hey, I told you to leave the PC alone! And don’t you get up on the couch, either!
-1
Dec 18th, 2009 (5:01 pm)Hey look folks, Crankwood is making an attempt at levity! Will wonders never cease?
Dec 18th, 2009 (6:11 pm)daggiepoo skeerd.
-1
Dec 18th, 2009 (6:16 pm)I was merely taking advantage of your inability to express yourself clearly and unambiguously.
Dec 18th, 2009 (6:37 pm)The topic of this post is:
Chevy Volt Generator Does Not Use the Atkinson Cycle
Dec 19th, 2009 (1:31 am)I suspect he’s a Toyota employee.
Dec 19th, 2009 (8:51 am)Actually, I seriously doubt he was ever a Toyota employee. He’s a hoople head crank who followed this guide to crankdom to the letter:
http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/05/crank_howto.php
Seriously, the kook is described perfectly in that piece.
Hey Crankwood, I challenge you to come out of the ether. Write a piece for one of the major auto blogs or magazines about how the Volt is a big failure and the Prius is the best. Of course you’ll have to expose your true identity, but if you’re not a shut-in crank, you should have no problem with that. You have been challenged.
-1
Dec 19th, 2009 (12:22 pm)Sure. Right after you post your name and address.
-1
Dec 19th, 2009 (12:22 pm)And we verify it.
-1
Dec 19th, 2009 (12:25 pm)And I’ll repeat my challenge to you to point out any factual errors. Somehow, you haven’t even done that.
+1
Dec 19th, 2009 (1:24 pm)Willis hit the nail on the head with that link. Dagwood, I count well over 5 posts where people pointed out your factual errors. You simply dismiss them and move the goal post. Get a life.
+1
Dec 19th, 2009 (5:25 pm)Thanks to Dan Petit for his post “getting” the point of my Dec. 17 5:12 pm post that there are two separate and distinct ways to evaluate the Volt: first, whether it’s a good deal for an individual purchaser and second, whether it will save our country from economic and environmental disaster. (As I argued, it will.)
However, I am disappointed that IQ130′s post did not appreciate my above distinction (or at least didn’t mention it). He criticized only the individual “good deal” aspect and did so in a questionable way.
He assumed a greater up-front penalty for buying a Volt ($9,000 versus my $6,000) but did so without justification. Then he compared the savings (to offset the up-front penalty) from driving a Volt with those of a hybrid instead of a conventional car, without taking into account differences in the experience and operating costs. Finally, he properly corrected my reference to the electricity costs of operating a Volt as being “negligible”. However, he used a cost of $.10 per kWh. On the Internet, some power companies are already offering retail night rates as low as $.06 per kWh. Night time, of course, is when the Volt will be re-charged.
As power companies come to realize the extra profit they stand to make by recovering overhead from additional revenue at night, I am sure night rates will tend to become even more advantageous to Volt owners. And, on the other hand, the price of gasoline will tend to rise, maybe to $4 a gallon by next year, because oil is a commodity that is not being created any more and will constantly become only more expensive to extract.
These two factors will make the first Volts less and less expensive to run compared with conventional cars and small-battery hybrids.
Volts of later years will have even greater cost advantages because their serial power trains are simple and use standardized motors and electronic parts which are really based on computer technology. And we all know the potential for computer cost savings as the years go by.
+1
Dec 19th, 2009 (6:59 pm)Albert, I really like the way you think and the way you intellectually polish and compile an excellent intellectual-archival-priority-set in your technical writing. You should apply to work for GM you are that good!
It would be so awsome if others could copy your outstanding composition style which is both extremely clear, and extremely compelling!
Well, just 48 more weeks and Volt will be out. All the silly narcissistic head trips about anything comparing to Volt will inceasingly be that much more silly, foofy, and goofy as the weeks count down.
GM will be placing Volt right up front to real consumers, not to commercial fleets whereupon the commercial warranty is only
**************************************************
* NINETY DAYS AND NINETY NIGHTS! *
**************************************************
GM is going all the way to the front line with sales to you and I, with extremely beefy warranties. THAT’S the proof. Not foofy/goofy argumentation and narcissistic frustration-displacement-denial.
There’s nothing more credible than a real EREV with a real warranty to prove it’s worth, as opposed to a three month commercial sale warranty where the OEM can legally deny warranty coverage after that.
Although I hope not, but, soon, we may be hearing more and more desperate commentary, which would be sad, because anyone wanting electrification ought to be mutually celebrating. (Especially for a prosperous New Year, and, as I’m a trend spotter for prosperity, there is ***every single sign*** related to a prosperous New Year apparent for huge job growth next year.)
Electrification will happen at the other OEM’s when they are confidently ready. (Who’s “first” is another “foofy-goofy” position). But I am truly professionally-happy and very optimistic for all of them. It is also unfortunate that so much negativity reflects backwards and has backfired backwards toward non-GM OEM’s as has occurred here in this topic. (I have a deep respect for Toyota Motors).
We’re just really lucky to have the insider’s view occasionally with these terrific GM engineers.
Dec 19th, 2009 (7:39 pm)Not at all. I went back and looked. There’s a couple situations that are equivocal but none where anyone could point out one of my posts as conclusively wrong. If you disagree, feel free to post the numbers of these “corrective” posts and I’ll be happy to rehash the actual facts.
If you’d like to start with the “concept to production” time sub-thread, I suggest you check Wiki on the Prius. The concept was showed in October of 1995 and the car shipped to a paying customer in December of 1997. Tagamet can demand three examples but I’m under no obligation to cater to his whims. One good case works for me.
Dec 19th, 2009 (7:52 pm)Looks like *someone* slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night (lol).
Nice post.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 19th, 2009 (7:56 pm)First of all I do appreciate your distinction especially when it has to do with reducing oil usage and problems of pollution and global climate change. Only the part on cost savings looks rather optimistic.
On this website I found the following:
———————————————————
Chevy Volt: Reasons For Use and Cost Of Operation
REASONS TO BUY A VOLT:
There appear to be three leading reasons people are interested in buying a Chevy Volt, in order of importance:
1. To achieve freedom from oil use
2. To achieve cost savings
3. To protect the environment
———————————————————
1. I think the Volt is very important to achieve freedom of oil use and will do a great job as most driving can be done on electricity.
2. I think especially in the short term cost savings seems questionable. But when the price of gasoline rises and batteries become cheaper cost savings can be expected in the future.
3. For protecting the environment the Volt can also be important. But this depends for instance on how the electricity is generated and how environment friendly the batteries are.
My justification for the price difference is the following. In post “Toyota Officially Launches Plug-in Prius” I found the following:
comment 65 Van Says:
December 14th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
“The Volt price is unknown but is expected to be near $40,000.”
“Next, the Volt will get the full $7500 tax benefit”.
So my calculation was based on a price of $32.500 for the Volt and less than $23,000 for a conventional hybrid. So if this is the real price for the Volt the difference was more than the $9000 I used. For the price of electricity I found on this website under Costs the following:
“The map above shows the average retail price of electricity in the U.S. by state in 2003. It ranges from around 6 cents/KWH to 17 cents/KWH. The U.S. average for 2007 is 10.65 cents.”
If you use 10.65 cents for 3125 kWh it will be more than the 300 dollars a year I used.
If am not sure if taking operating costs into account makes things better. If you need to recharge the batteries 6 times a week I am not sure if they will last much longer than 10 years.
Dec 19th, 2009 (8:04 pm)Third party users have already voiced an interest in the “used” Volt batteries as “load levelers” in large buildings. This should effect any calculations related to both #2 and #3 of your post. Hope this helps. As you suggest, most of the people here won’t be buying a Volt because it’s cost effective on Day One.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 20th, 2009 (8:28 am)Dismissing and moving the goal posts. You are nothing if not consistent.
-2
Dec 20th, 2009 (2:02 pm)Moving what goal posts? Tag can whine about wanting three cases but I’m not required to cater to his whims. The Prius was done in 26 months, the Volt will be close to 4 years from concept to production.
Here’s a bonus for you… The latest Civic was shown, for the first time, at Geneva Auto Show in Spring, 2005 and for sale in September.
My point was that 4 years was unimpressive and I proved it.
You can whine on or you can suck it up and show where one of my posts is, conclusively, factually wrong.
Dec 21st, 2009 (12:48 am)I want an electric drive car! I own a Prius now AND I do take it on very long trips AND the car is big enough to pack a lot of stuff for 2 weeks trips AND I like the great MPG.. even in the mountains. As I am reading if the Volt gives 40 miles on the battery and relative poor mileage when being charged then I see no reason to consider this car for me. 40K is way too big a price for sometimes great milage and on any trip so so mileage. I like GM but it they cannot come up with an ICE to complement the battery then I think the car will have limited appeal for many and sadly many others.
Dec 21st, 2009 (11:02 am)So… if we are going more than 40 miles we should take the “other car”, the big ICE one that gets lower mileage, pollutes more than the prius or the volt … this is a win for the environment, reducing the dependance on oil etc.???
I stand by my earlier concept that if the Volt is to be a revolutionary car it needs to have a great battery ( when will ultra capacitors come into play) AND an ICE with great milage characteristics. I think most people buy a car to drive for fun, and distance. If one is going to drive the volt only 40 miles at a time then I still believe 40K is way too much. And I am sure if this is the standard ( 40 Miles on a charge) there will be others in the very near future that will provide a vehicle that will exceed the performance parameters of the Volt for a lot lower price. GM needs to keep thinking big and come up with that “gold standard” car that will make 40K a great price.
Dec 21st, 2009 (12:52 pm)Once again, just for Crankwood’s sake:
Volt: 35 AER, 40MPG
Prius: 9 AER, 50MPG
10-35 mile trip: Volt 0 big oil teet milk (BOTM) Prius .7 BOTM Prius massive FAIL
50 mile trip: Volt .25 BOTM Prius .82 BOTM Prius massive FAIL
75 mile trip Volt 1 BOTM Prius 1.32 BOTM Prius massive FAIL
100 mile trip Volt 1.625 BOTM Prius 1.82 BOTM Prius massive FAIL
150 mile trip Volt 2.875 BOTM Prius 2.82 BOTM Prius barely pulls off a win!
Oh wait, I screwed up. Since in almost all occasions, the Prius ICE will kick in during those supposed 9 miles of AER, you’ll be sucking at that big oil teet every single day. Every day, suckling like a Prius piggy.
So which car gives you the ability to avoid the teet on most occasions? Hmmm, Daggy sockpuppet master? Bueller? Anyone?
Crankwood may be an oil/gas industry shill rather than a Toy shill.
+1
Dec 21st, 2009 (1:15 pm)Thanks once again to Dan Petit for his extraordinary kindness and support. I got my engineering degree a long time ago. We were taught on steam engines; controls included how to reverse a locomotive (more complicated than you’d think). My experience as an Air Force officer in WWII included dealing with monster carburetors for high-powered fighter engines. I had a belly-full of trying to make mechanical controls interact with complicated functions: idle jets, accelerating jets, jets for this, jets for that. And none worked really well and always required adjustment and caused trouble.
What a difference compared to today’s auto fuel controls using sensors and digital electronics (really computers) controlling fuel injection–so simple that anyone can start an engine in any weather; no pumping the pedal, no flooding, no nothing. And they never need adjustment or maintenance.
It was these experiences that convinced me GM was on the right track with its all-electric serial power train. The hybrid was a great accomplishment–as far as it went. Its limited computer control makes possible fuel-saving and performance-improving features like regenerative braking, no-idling and smaller engines by use of limited battery assist for acceleration and upgrades. However its parallel power train with its complicated mechanical power-sharing gearing is a mistake, as is its small battery that has a range of a mile or two. But it did result in a terrific 50 mpg.
I have driven the Prius and I feel it is not a substitute for a “first” car that has to be available for occasional long trips. This too was a mistake. The Volt is promised to be such a car. I look forward to it.
The Volt will build on a hybrid’s 50 mpg (in principle–maybe not immediately) when in charge sustaining mode and do a lot better when in pure electric mode.
To IQ130: I appreciate your well-reasoned post of Dec. 19 7:56 pm. You refer to my estimate of the Volt’s cost savings as “…rather optimistic…” I agree. I am optimistic that GM will think over its suggested sticker price of $40,000 and set a lower figure based on “buying its way” into the volume market. It can try to recover its supposed billion-dollar development cost from later sales rather than early ones. Recovery periods for investments in such a small part of a giant company are arbitrary anyway. And the Volt MUST be a volume car.
I am also optimistic than the Volt’s sophisticated electronic controls will eventually be more efficient and provide a better driving experience than the Prius’ old fashioned mechanical ones. All my experience tells me that, as recounted briefly above. I spent 35 years running a 300-employee plant making thousands of precision metal parts from special tooling. Every year I was threatened by disaster from a union whose members refused to understand that if we shut down for even a week, our customers would pull the special tools and we would be out of business. My choice was immediate death from a strike, a lingering death from wage increases we couldn’t afford, or pay for the increases by innovating our way out by inventing new machines and processes. I chose the last even though there was no guarantee that we could cut costs or even recover our development costs. It always worked–tho at some personal cost to me. I am an optimist because I had to be an optimist.
In the same way, I believe power companies will recognize the advantages of recovering currently-lost overhead from addition sales during night hours. In some cases this is striking. I have been through a French nuclear generating plant in the Alps where it was economical to build hundreds of millions for a hydroelectric plant equal in capacity to the original just so the nuclear plant could generate at night. The power was used to pump water to a higher reservoir, then reverse the pumps into turbine-generators in the daytime, thereby doubling the daytime capacity. True, a nuclear plant is an extreme situation in which almost all the operating cost is financial. Nevertheless, any additional overhead recovery adds mightily to profits in any factory. I am also optimistic that this rule of industrial economics will be recognized.
Cars will be electrified–there is no other practical choice. It must happen so it will happen. I am optimistic.
-1
Dec 21st, 2009 (2:49 pm)Aww, Willis, you’re too cute for words, aren’t you?
Volt $40K or more and GM, already bankrupt and unwilling to publish GAAP income statement for the most recent quarter, will “make no profit on it for years.” Prius – profitable for at least 7 years. Just what’s the “massive fail,” here?
There may be an economic case for the Volt if gas goes above $6/gallon. Current gas price $2.40. What’s the massive fail?
Passenger capacity of the Volt – 4. $13K Yaris – 5. What’s the massive fail?
By the way, the good people at Toyota are claiming 14 miles AER, not 9. That’s twice my commute or all of my wife’s (neither of which involve 70mpg freeways, so 62mph is not a problem). Why, exactly, would I spend a ton of money for the Volt over a shorter AER, less expensive alternative? Especially when the shorter AER vehicle gets better fuel economy on the longer trips we take monthly? And comes with a proven track record for reliability?
And the people who really care about oil consumption to do something about it… don’t you think most of them have already done something about it? Like… moved within 3 miles of their place of business? Or near a bus line? Or a rail line?
“Big oil teet…” vs “Government teat keeps GM alive…” Which is the massive fail?
Prius – already a million on the road, reducing oil demand since 2000… Volt – not on road yet and available in insignificant quantities may start reducing oil demand by a trivial amount in 2011… Which one is the massive fail?
All these things erode the potential market share for the Volt, which is what I’ve been saying all along. It’ s lucky thing for GM that they plan pitiful quantities of this thing in the first year because that might get the the PR win of a sellout. Or maybe not.
Dec 21st, 2009 (3:41 pm)Well, I wasn’t going to weigh in on this but it keeps coming back, again and again…
First, “a similar sized conventional car” being $6K less than a Volt. What are you smoking? One could try to make a case that a Civic is “similar sized” and it’s $15K less than the net price of the Volt.
By the way, it always offends me to see comparisons based on the Volt’s after tax credit price… just because the owner doesn’t have to pony up the extra $7500 doesn’t mean it isn’t there. I’m paying my share of that and getting nothing for it. If the goal is reduce CO2 emissions or oil use (good goals), there are FAR CHEAPER ways to do this. Having Uncle Same shell out $7500 per car for something that makes nearly no difference is a colossal waste of taxpayer money.
But I digress… A comparison with the Civic is still a very kind comparison for the Volt, as the Civic holds 5 passengers and the Volt is limited to 4. Does seating capacity matter? You bet it does… it’s one of the reasons why people didn’t buy the EXP or Fiero. Even as an nth car, people are reluctant to buy a vehicle that doesn’t do the whole job. Some people won’t mind but others will… this erodes the demand for the Volt.
And it makes the comparison question an intersting one. Given the limited seating capacity, I think it’s much more reasonable to compare the Volt to something like a Yaris hatch at $13,500 or so, making the Volt upcharge much, much closer to $20K, even after that little gift from those of us who pay taxes.
Second, as to how much gas the Volt avoids and how much the consumer saves, well, now that we’re comparing it to the real competition, in terms of size, we see that the Yaris is quite the deal. Not only does it cost $20K less, it gets 38 mpg in the real world (see 2008 Toyota Yaris on FuelEconomy.gov). While the Volt may (and we should emphasize may) get 40 miles gas-free (I’d admire to see that happen in the winter around here), once it passes that and starts to suck at the Big Oil “Teet,” it’s going to be doing it more enthusiastically than that $13,500 car. Wow… all that money and technology in the Volt and the humble Yaris is still going to be able to beat the Volt in long-distance travel.
Dec 21st, 2009 (4:00 pm)Hahahaha! Crank the crank round and round, too much fun!
Oh, and your claim that Toy claims 14AER…WRONG AGAIN bubbie. Try 9-10 in the US. You are massive fail but can haz cheezberger.
+1
Dec 21st, 2009 (4:15 pm)I note dagwood55′s post of Dec. 21 3:41 pm criticizing my comments on the Volt. I looked back at the record and found that dagwood55′s style of discourse emphasizes ambiguity, spewing of venom and hissing. I choose not to exchange venom with him or get into a hissing contest.
Dec 21st, 2009 (4:22 pm)Good move. There is no winning a discussion when only one party is concerned with reality. Still, he/she/it is good for a chuckle.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 21st, 2009 (4:29 pm)Your post was wrong, as I outlined.
-1
Dec 21st, 2009 (4:43 pm)He’s also a big yellow coward. I challenged him, and like the typical coward, he fell back on the “no, you!” gambit. I love when he follows the Crank How-To to the letter: I smack him across the face with the gas usage numbers and he ignores and instead mumbles some non sequiturs about financing. Hey crankmonster-bubbielicious, VW TDI’s: reducing oil demand and far less embodied energy to produce (than your Rube Goldberg now antiquated Peeus), for almost two decades. BLAHAHAHAHAHA!
+2
Dec 21st, 2009 (4:59 pm)Looks like you met his challenge to find an error of his. Who is this fruitcake?
As for the upcoming plug in Prius, if the engine will kick in frequently well below highway speed, how can they claim any AER at all? I think it reasonable that the average driver should expect the engine not to kick in at all for that AER in average driving conditions. If the average US driver is more aggressive, that’s life, and the manufacturer must be required to adjust their claims accordingly. In fact, I see a potential consumer protection case here if the engine ends up kicking in as frequently as it seems.
-3
Dec 21st, 2009 (6:00 pm)http://pressroom.toyota.com/pr/tms/toyota/2010-prius-plug-in-hybrid-makes-149402.aspx
Awww… I was off by 1.5 miles. I feel soooo bad.
Wait… no, I don’t! I still think the Volt is a pointless waste of money by a bankrupt company. Better yet, that’s all still true!
Dec 22nd, 2009 (6:03 am)But the clear article at Autoblog states that converting the 2010 plug-in Prius JC08 numbers to US means 10 AER and 50mpg in hybrid mode. How does your math come out to an error of only 1.5? Regardless, you were quite arrogant in claiming you were never wrong and challenging others to find your errors. Now that they have, you continue to be arrogant and dismissive. You are not a nice person.
My conclusion and professional diagnosis is that you subscribe to the contrarian viewpoint in most arenas. Your sense of self worth is based on garnering attention through blatant contrarian behavior regardless of logic or facts. It would not at all surprise me if you have a persona who haunts Prius enthusiast sites and bashes it in favor of the Volt. Simply put, you are someone who would go to a Star Trek fan forum and tell everyone that Star Trek sucks and Star Wars is so much better.
Of course this behavior only manifests behind the safety of the anonymous Internet. Your kind, as a rule, is mild mannered, almost timid, when dealing with others in real life. Your poor socialization skills have left you no way to positively interact with others on the Internet, and no way to interact with others at all in real life.
I do not harbor pity for your kind as it is a conscious choice not to improve these skills. It is also a conscious choice to indulge your borderline sociopathic needs with your negative online behavior. In simple terms, you reap what you sow, and I can only imagine that your life is a miserable one. Please seek professional help.
Dec 22nd, 2009 (7:33 am)HAHAHAHA! JT FTW!
I’m nowhere near as eloquent as JT, nor learned enough to diagnose Crankwood. In my simple terms, he’s just a jackass that needs a real world open palmed slap across his pasty face.
His maths not so goods neither.
Dec 22nd, 2009 (9:49 am)Uh-huh. You might look back and see who’s called who a “cranktard,” etc, before you make a judgement on who’s spewing the venom.
I said your post is wrong and I gave you an excellent reason why. You can’t take that? How do you get along in the real world?
Dec 22nd, 2009 (9:51 am)Now, when I get called a “cranktard,” etc, and am offered a “real world open palmed slap across the face,” explain to me how I should consider your “challenge” as something other than the further rantings of a child.
The adults around here aren’t calling each other names, you know.
Dec 22nd, 2009 (12:03 pm)They also are not jackass cranktards neither. JT said “you reap what you sow”, well I’m your crop!
Dec 22nd, 2009 (2:51 pm)J Test writes, “But the clear article at Autoblog states that converting the 2010 plug-in Prius JC08 numbers to US means 10 AER and 50mpg in hybrid mode.”
AutoBlog can opine anything they like but, at the moment, the car scores 14 or so on the JC08. Perhaps JC08 is kinder to electric vehicles, perhaps not. The score is the score.
We have exactly as much consumer experience with the “40 mile AER” Volt – anybody’s guess what the actual range will be in routine use – as with the “14 mile AER” Prius. The only difference is that GM has been already spent 3 years promising much, yet delivering nothing.
And in spite of GM’s 3 years of talk, the PHEV Prius will go to at least semi-commercial release first, with leased vehicles due in a few months.
As for your diagnosis, who cares? The Volt has much to criticize and is sucking up a lot of my tax money. I’ve been involuntarily sold part owership in GM and, as a consequence, have a strong interest in what GM is doing. As a consequence, if I think they are wasting money, as I think they are in this case, it’s just looking out for my own interests to point it out. Dime store psychology has nothing to do with it.
Dec 22nd, 2009 (2:56 pm)By the way, J Test, I find it amusing that you’re going to offer a less-than-flattering diagnosis of me in public, for arguing the merits – or lack thereof -of the Volt, yet let Willis’ suggestions of violence from behind his shield of anonymity slide right by unremarked.
Way to go, Doc.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:03 am)My remark of “you reap what you sow” is punctuated by your point. But if you read his obviously boorish remark, he says you “need” a slap, not that he would be slapping you. I might add “feelings of persecution where none exists” to my diagnosis.
Your remarks about the JC08 are completely erroneous. The basic conversion from JC08 to US is used throughout the industry with great accuracy. You know this too, but this clear fact will not stand in the way of your contrarian behavior.
You do not have a say, nor a stake, in GM in any sense of the word. None. Just like you would be in error if a police officer pulled you over and you yelled at him/her that you pay their salary. You do not have a say in any concern that has received government loans. And to be clear, the money GM received is legally a loan.
I am sure your response will be filled with more vagaries and non sequiturs which satisfy your need to be contraian with even the most basic and clear facts, so in a sense, I am wasting my time typing this. It will be my last response to you, and your clear need for the last word is glaring, so please claim it.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:03 am)J Test,
You really don’t get it. I argue the merits of the vehicle and others are calling the names. Add in your dime store psychology and who is creating the hostile environment?
The JC08 is what it is. Toyota of America’s press release says, “up to 13 miles,” which is the same phrase GM uses to announce Volt range of “up to 40 miles.”
Dec 27th, 2009 (1:59 pm)This is not a decision by engineers, the executives want to keep costs down, by using parts they have already developed. This drives down cost significantly. So they doing the best they can with what they have. I believe if (I really mean when) the volt takes off, on gen. two they create a better engine and hopefully some solar panels to create even more range extension. It would be best as far as far as fuel economy goes to use a small diesel engine, which GM does not currently have in production. They would be very wise to make a small diesel engine ASAP. They could also use said diesel engine in the Cruze, and I think it would take off and have a very good payoff. but then less people would be using gas, and would be bad for mister oil company. I believe It would be best to have a E- REV that had a solar panels (for free charging in the parking lot, and if cloudy you still have your trust worthy ICE to home)and diesel engine back up. That is my dream for a car of efficiency and the future. I hope GM wakes up and takes this free advise or somebody else will and they will regret it. They are on the right track though, I just hope they don’t fall behind or off the trail.
Dec 29th, 2009 (6:55 pm)IIRC the most efficient cycle for a generator which can be easily fueled…. would be the Diesel cycle. Yep, just checked, it has the best thermal efficiency.
Why not a diesel generator? I too have been waiting for a diesel EREV. Mercedes announced one for the European market and then cancelled it. :-/