The Volt represent a rational intelligent first step away from petroleum for the country in that it will operate without any gasoline for most people’s daily driving needs.
We realize another of the car’s tremendous values is its gas range extender which ensures that the car’s utility isn’t limited either as it is in pure EVs.
The car also breaks another important paradigm, performance.
Today’s hybrid cars still use gas, and frankly do not perform very well.
The Prius has improved through its three generations, but the car still takes about 10 seconds to get from 0 to 60 and doesn’t have a “sporty” feel by any stretch of the imagination. And for the new Honda Insight, lets not even go there.
But the Chevy Volt clears those hurdles with gusto.
Powered to give a 0 to 60 feel in the mid 8 second range, its instantaneous torque makes it seem like a typical 6 cylinder 250 horsepower sedan. Top speed is an electronically limited 100 MPH.
In this GM-produced video you can observe Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah taking a “hot-lap” around a course set up in LA at the Dodgers Stadium parking lot. Its the same course I test drove the car (only not so fast). As GM spokesperson Phill Colley likes to say the Volt, ” burns some rubber without burning fuel.”
I witnessed this drive in person and came away impressed.
Yup, this video is cooler than the Chevy Volt dancers, but sadly won’t get as many views (Volt Dance is around 300,000 now).
How important is performance to you in an electric car? Is it all about not burning gas or do you want more?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 23rd, 2009 at 7:15 am and is filed under Performance, Video. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+5
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:20 am)Nice, looks fairly nimble.
what we -really- need to see is how fast it goes round the Top Gear test track…
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:27 am)I’m sure it will get there….. let’s just hope they are more subjective than they were with the Tesla Roadster.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:31 am)Obviously it’s not a sports car but let’s hope they can improve handling in the production version. Definitely liking the lack of engine noise.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:37 am)TG is an entertainment show, they will make fun of it.. in any case high performance is not important to me but apparently it is to many people.. luckily this does not affect the efficiency of an electric car too much (it may actually increase the range).. perhaps a slightly heavier motor and inverter if that. It affects the efficiency of a spark ignited ICE a lot, a bigger engine that you run most of the time at low throttle settings has a lot of throttling pressure losses. This is the reason that a small ICE with a turbo is being used in modern cars to increase MPG, witness the amazing 4 cylinder Equinox.
Just about the only thing that affects the efficiency of an electric car is how fast you drive it, aerodynamic drag is the most important issue after you pass 45mph.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:37 am)How important is performance to you in an electric car? Is it all about not burning gas or do you want more?
Very important. I want more. Race track, not golf cart.
+5
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:44 am)I have been used to “less than sporty” vehicles for a long time. The Volt is well into the sporty area for me. Two thumbs up. Yes it is important. It’s the pudding (that the proof is in).
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:47 am)Very subjective demo. But important. How does it stack up to a BMW 3 or a VW TDI?
It would be very nice to see C&D or R&T or *any* car magazine have one of their standardized testing runs.
- skidpad tests
- acceleration tests
- distance to stop from various speeds
- cabin space, cargo area
- longer term testing. What’s it like to live with for a week. A year.
A long term tester for Volt would be a good gig
-1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:48 am)Lyle,
Is “sport” mode available after the battery has been depleted? (I.e. can we expect the same hot lap times once the generator takes over?)
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:56 am)Balance looks about right on the Volt. A slight oversteer w/ driver only. Should feel perfect carrying 3 people. Will be interesting to see how the 150 HP electric motor pulls from 40 mph to 80 mph.
=D~
+4
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:02 am)The most important thing is that the masses don’t perceive EREVs as underpowered. There’s a golf-cart image that must be broken. So the performance of the Volt is spot-on.
But as EREVs gain acceptance, performance won’t be as critical. For example, if GM released an EREV Orlando in 2012, they could use the exact same chassis and drivetrain as the Volt. The extra weight of the larger body would lower performance a little, but that would be acceptable for this type of vehicle.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:10 am)Personally, I don’t care much about performance and would give up performance for better fuel economy and lower price. As I’ve said many times, I’d also like less AER if it would bring a lower price. Hopefully it won’t be too long until they have a 20-mile AER version with a smaller electric motor and smaller engine for a lower price. This would be a perfect car to replace my Chevy Prism for my 12 mile round-trip daily commute.
Still, in lieu of that, I’d buy a Volt today if I could.
+5
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:11 am)I agree that both performance and efficiency will be important if we are going to have wide-spread acceptance of the Volt – and it’s got BOTH.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:15 am)Yes, very interested to hear about 40 to 80. I’m expecting Volt to be weak in that range, but possibly that weakness will be offset by being really good 0 to 40. And if 40 to 80 should be strong as well, so much the better.
+4
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:26 am)At the top of my want list is a vehicle that: (a) burns no fossil fuel; (b) drives like a BMW; (c) turns heads; and (d) costs under $35,000.
From all that I’ve read about the Volt on this site over the past two years, it looks like my “want” will soon be realized.
Thank you GM; and thank you Lyle!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:26 am)Lyle,
You put it well, it will be compared to other cars in it’s class. And yes GM will do well to make it out preform the competition. Look at the Camero, why do you think it’s doing so well? It’s faster, and gets better gas milage than any car in it’s class (and it looks better). It is a combination that works…. period.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:27 am)It would have been neat if that could have shown the speedometer in a a box on the screen. It’s tough to gauge the actual speed.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-16
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:29 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:30 am)The video immediately reminded me of my Z28 Camaro’s superb handling —I could corner at ANY speed without fear of rollover. Because of its low cg and progressively-stiffer suspension it would break into a controllable slide (or drift) in extremely hard cornering, and I believe the Volt’s low cg also makes it a very good drifter. Wheeee!
+5
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:39 am)______________________________________________________
Lyle asks: “How important is performance to you in an electric car? Is it all about not burning gas or do you want more?”
————
Prius = Good for you but tastes bland.
Volt = Great for you and tastes good.
Hmmmmmmm….which one to choose?
______________________________________________________
+3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:40 am)Troll much?.. as long as they sell their lithium fairly why should Bolivia worry about a war?.. now if they start being unfair about it due to aggression towards the US then war is called for since commercial war is a form of deadly aggression .. and free people should not tolerate that.
Lithium is so plentiful and easily mined that no one bothers to recycle the stuff (a very common element on the earth’s crust), there are even idled mines due to plentiful supply of cheaper stuff.. it is even economically feasible to extract it from sea water.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:45 am)Can’t see the speedometer but that hint of a smile on his face as he takes the turns says a lot about the fun factor which is just as important as performance. A grinning engineer says a lot!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:45 am)Lots of people have stated that performance feels the same in both CS and CD modes… but that is still a question best answered with a stop watch on a defined course.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:50 am)Very good point! I saw that grin and didn’t make the connection that it was an “engineer’s smile”. Personally, I think that the Volt team has a lot to smile about – and not just when they are driving! Everything points to the fact that they have done a fantastic job.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+6
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:50 am)Merry Christmas to all and a big thanks to Lyle for giving us a WEB site that we can check everyday for news on the Volt!
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:51 am)DITTO !
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:52 am)My latest car is a Saturn Vue designed in Germany by Opel (there it’s the very popular Antera). One thing that sold me on it was how well this fairly high-profile SUV/CUV handles in sharp cornering and I often wonder if Opel hired some people away from BMW because this newest Vue is a virtual clone of BMW’s remarkable X5 in overall dimensions and in its precise handling.
I’ve also often wondered if Frank Weber brought any Opel suspension tuners (perhaps with BMW 3-series experience?) into designing and tuning the Volt/Ampera suspension to get it “spot-on”.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:55 am)______________________________________________________
Follow up to my #19 CDAVIS post:
———————–
OK….I have given it careful consideration…I’ll pass on the bowl of cold bland oatmeal and take the glass of Red Wine.
______________________________________________________
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:57 am)Note to self: Do NOT take rides with nasaman. (g).
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:00 am)Lyle – Do you happen to know what that object shaped something like a fluorescent light fixture on the Volt’s headliner in the video is?
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:11 am)Nice video!
Did anyone see the article on the new paper nano-tube batteries that are being developed? They are to have 10 times the storage capacity of Lithium Ion batteries and are much cheaper to build. Should be interesting to see how fast this can be brought to market and outfitted into the Volt and other electric devices.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/12/08/scientists-use-nanotech-print-paper-batteries/
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:16 am)Just put four people in the Tesla and race against the Volt with four people, oh wait, the Tesla can’t carry four people. Heck I don’t think the Tesla can carry two people and two golf bags! If I were rich (which you have to be to own a Tesla) then I wouldn’t mind. I’d own several different cars. Since I’m not rich, I need a car that will carry four people, plus have a good size trunk, get me at least 30+ miles on electric a day and be comfortable in pretty much all situations. The Tesla can’t do that for me, the Volt can. Two totally different classes for totally different consumers. I have to wonder if those who rate the cars even understand this simple concept or if they are just out to bash a good thing. Just because the Tesla doesn’t fit my needs or because I don’t care for the arrogance of Elon Musk doesn’t mean the Tesla is a bad car. It just means it doesn’t fit my needs and reporters/reviewers should report their findings like that.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:19 am)Yep, exciting times. They were covered at the MIT site:
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/24097/
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:21 am)Good summary, it clearly points out the misplaced priorities.
Haven’t you noticed how the top-selling vehicles don’t highlight acceleration times anymore, since all of them have exceeded the required ceiling?
The middle-market consumer simply isn’t interested. Those 4-cylinder vehicles they purchase work just fine. They are plenty fast for their needs. The more we hear about Volt, the more it sounds like a Camaro rather than a Malibu.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:27 am)Did you see the one suggestion about using the paper in compressed form to create the body of the car, so the entire body of the car becomes the battery? A 600 mile electric car may not be that far off in the future!
Merry Chirstmas to everyone!
+3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:28 am)I’ve long ago given up on sporty cars. However, driving here on the East Coast with all the Interstates, I need sporty performance just to accelerate up to speed. Too many ramps have short accell ramps and I see lots of close calls with under powered lightweights.
As long as the Volt can jump when I say so, I’ll be happy!!
-21
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:31 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:32 am)The performance aspect of the EV is a very sweet, added bonus to the fact that you are burning no gas while driving it. Icing on the cake.
For some reason as soon as I post here, my computer locks up. Any one else have that phenomena happening? Anyway, I wanted to say:
To the GM team: Thank you for the hard work and tireless efforts with this car. Keep pushing forward!
To Lyle: Thanks for your dedication and tireless efforts running this site!
To all: Merry Christmas!
+3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:35 am)The driving experience is the main advantage of the Volt over current hybrids and this is why the Volt will be a huge success. Many people buy cars for the look and feel factor, not for rational reasons. Look at the success of the new Camaro – it is certainly not due to its practicality as a transportation appliance. The Volt offers new technology that is environmentally friendly (cool) and on top of it offers a refined driving experience (super cool) that conventional cars, especially hybrids don’t have.
The Volt initiative was a bold and risky move for GM but it looks like it will pay off. In the eyes of the public GM is emerging as an innovator, willing to take risks and do the right things. What a transformation!
GO VOLT!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:35 am)Agreed. But, the comparisons that I recall were all relative to the “feel and transistion”. No one actually attempted to push the Volt to a performance level like you see in the video.
I just cannot fathom how they are able to attain this type of performance with a 1.4L engine AND pulling all the extra weight of the battery and electronics. If it does, then why would you not get this performance from a standard ICE (Honda Civic 1.5L) sans about 400 lbs.?
The difference will be that the Volt generates electricity from the shaft of the generator, and the ICE is not mechanically linked to the motors. So, does this make performance better or worse, assuming you have depleted the battery to the point where it can no longer assist.
+10
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:37 am)Have you no life? Take a walk outside and enjoy yourself.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:43 am)Disagree. Electric drive needs to be better than a gas engine. My 83-year-old mother does not accept poor performance and neither does anyone else I know. If the electric Orlando is slower than a gas one, the gas will win.
If I gave a crap about gas mileage vs performance, my daily driver wouldn’t have a V-8. The Volt better get me there with the same gusto, or no sale. (I guess I am a candidate for the SS model!)
NGNS – No Guts, No Sale.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:50 am)I think a lot of people share your feelings. The nice part about the Volt is that it has that instant electric torque AND moves us toward electrification of transportation. I don’t think that you or your mom will be disappointed.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:52 am)Why would you need to carry golf bags? If they aren’t already in your locker at The Club, you have your valet drive on ahead with the bags.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:52 am)Yes. IE8 seems to have a problem with the way posting works here. Firefox doesn’t seem to have the same issue.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:53 am)I’ve been worried lately that the government will start a war with Iraq for their oil. Is this something I should be thinking about?
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:55 am)Just use FIREFOX! Problem solved.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:56 am)Essentially, you would get that performance from a standard 1.5L engine if you could keep the gas pedal floored all the time. While the driver is braking, the ICE and the brakes are winding up the battery for the next burst of speed. Nice!
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (9:59 am)He isn’t saying the EREV Orlando would be slower than a gas-powered Orlando. He is saying that an EREV Orlando would be slightly slower than the EREV Volt because of vehicle weight. And I agree with him on both acocunts. If there is in fact a gas version of the Orlando, then the EREV version would be faster than the gas version, just like the Volt will have greater acceleration than its gas-powered brother the Cruze. It’s all about electric motor torque.
+4
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:00 am)No.
Lithium has been used in small enough quantities before now that the search for new supplies has been, shall we say, less than imperative. I suspect that it could be found anywhere that an ocean or sea dried up over geologic time (some corner of the American salt flats / dry lakes, perhaps?). Let it get expensive enough, and it will be extracted directly from sea water.
Won’t increasingly expensive lithium result in more expensive batteries? No. The main cost constraint in Li/Ion today is fabrication, which should drop with economies of scale. Also, research seems to be pointing to future designs which get more and more from less lithium.
Unlike petroleum which is expended once it is burned, lithium from batteries is theoretically recyclable (should be easier with larger automotive form-factors).
Be more concerned about the source of the electricity than the materials in the batteries.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:10 am)1) It’s almost always cheaper to buy it than to invade and take it. Iraq wasn’t about the oil.
2) We have lithium deposits in the USA that aren’t being worked. If the prices get high enough the mines will reopen.
3) At some point recycling becomes economic in addition to PC.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:11 am)That’s a very important number to me. If I can’t pass as normal, I would pass on the Volt. My commute is mostly stop-and-go traffic below 35 mph. However, there are spots where I hit 70 for short bursts.
It’s got to be at least as good as any other mainstream commuter car. which it looks to be so far. We really need some production machines to be thrashed to find out.
Oh well, back to waiting some more.
Caddy white Volt SS with tan leather. Yummy. (2- seat roadster or convertible version would be nice as well!)
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:15 am)It’s just causing IE to go to 100% CPU utilization (50% on a dual-proc). It’s not locking up the computer per se. All you have to do is kill IE and you can re-launch.
Best way is to kill IE permanently by using Firefox instead! Ya won’t be sorry.
-1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:18 am)One has to give him points for consistency — even when smashed!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:19 am)I have no doubt that driveing and rideing in electric vehicles will be very fun! Being able to merge confidently is important for most people. I am curious to know how the Volt will perform in fast brakeing and if the great torque will be a problem fighting with traction control on slippery roads? Please keep the base model affordable, however some people may like more power as an option.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:20 am)While TG is an entertainment show, they don’t make fun of everything. There are numerous segments where any member of the TG team will gush about a car they like.
Even Clarkson had good things to say about the Tesla Roadster, which most people seem to completely miss due to the hoopla regarding some other parts of that segment. He was completely blown away by the electric drivetrain. His major beef was with the fact that it broke down, which it did, reduced range at full chat, which is a legit concern, and the poor handling at the limit, which was obvious from the footage of the Stig’s lap. They have taken other manufacturers to task when a car broke down on them, and berate other cars for poor hadling all the time.
Given the fact that thier most recent, entertaining, leap into the world of EVs ended with the three of them designing and building a very bad EREV, I expect they have some respect for the idea of the Volt. They started with an EV, which didn’t work well and ran out of joice, and eventually decided that an EREV was the optimal solution. If (when) the TG team takes the Ampera for a spin, I’m sure we will get a very entertaining account of thier feelings towards the car, and I doubt they would be all bad.
Personally, I’m looking forward to them handing it over to the Stig.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:25 am)Electric cars are well known for thier mid range punch compared to ICEs. It’s a benefit of that whole constant torque thing that electric motors are so good at. I’m certain you won’t be dissapointed.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:26 am)=====================
Nasaman and Schmeltz:
I was having the same problem. This was discussed a while back.
I fixed it on my system by clicking on the compatibility view button. It is to the left of the refresh button at the top of the screen.
+4
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:31 am)Today’s Thread:
Now that’s what I am talking about!!!!!!
Going green does not have to mean going wimpy……
GM has got this one right!
Now, all they have to do is think about letting us gm-volt.com Want Listers go to the front of the line!!!!
Merry Christmas Everyone!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:34 am)The video strobe effect makes it look like the rims are those obnoxious ’spinners’
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:35 am)I’m in it mostly for the economy, but there are times when you need performance just to stay alive in traffic.
Sport Mode is optional at the press of a button (but in the immediacy of traffic, it may be useless if it is not as easy as possible to engage; if all I have to do is slap a dedicated button without taking my eyes off of the road it’s one thing; but if I have to choose it off a pick list, the need will have passed by the time I figure it out).
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:35 am)I am a bit disappointed that Mr. Farah didn’t drive the car on two wheels for a while.
Just joking. Nice video.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:38 am)Thanks guys. I am using this post as a test. Hope this helps.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:41 am)Just imagine how much MORE exciting that would have been with the VOLT painted in Crystal Red Metallic!!!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:42 am)Didn’t think to try that one. Thanks for the tip!
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:43 am)I still wish that a strong metallic (“electric”) blue was in the offing. I have to wait for Gen II anyway, so …
+5
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:49 am)Disclaimer: electric drive enthusiast ramblings follow:
Does the 100% electric drive Volt have proper traction control or a special launch button for clean hole shots?
The only reason I am considering the Volt is for performance, as I know exactly what a performance tuned 100% electric drive vehicle is capable of. Maximum torque from 0 rpm, instant, strong, velvet smooth, near linear acceleration available at all times, luxury quiet.
The challenge is that the luxury (liquid smooth acceleration and quiet) qualities disguise the performance characteristics a little, as we have been trained for a century to associate bellowing metal on metal and herky, jerky shifting and volatile power bands with performance, which doesn’t translate for electric drive. Where the performance dominance of properly engineered electrics becomes most noticeable is:
1) around full gasser vehicles. The full gassers end up in the rear view mirrors a lot. Just ask Jeremy Clarkson with his Tesla versus Elise run or the Stig on his Tesla beating a Porsche 911 GT3 run. “Biblically quick” is an understatement.
2) after months (or years) of using an electric drive vehicle, occasionally going back to a full gasser gives you a feeling that can only be described as heart sinking dissapointment, especially in technical (stop and go, lots of turns and speed variety) settings.
I went out for a test ride against a 400 cc dirt bike against my Zero X the other month. The other rider chose a long, straight, steep uphill, high speed paved route for the very first test, thinking that all the electric’s purported weaknesses at that would allow him to pass me. I wasn’t trying to stay in front especially, but could hear the sound of frantic shifting fading away behind me. Once we hit technical roads and off road terrain, the dominance of electric over gasser was even more extreme.
I’m looking forward to a little offroad AWD crossover version of the Volt. That would stomp butt, though I’m sure it wouldn’t be cheap (superior quality never is). That’s assuming that GM might actually want to gain market share and make profits.
Wow, to think I just got excited thinking about a GM product, unimaginable until the Volt came along. And to think that we’re only seeing the first generation and it’s that good.
+3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:51 am)Car manufacturers always need to give people a reason to buy their vehicles, which means that that premium priced vehicles have to offer something that justifies their premium price. The Volt’s performance, handling, and quiet ride fits the bill.
The WSJ had an article last weekend making the point that the speed and performance of the Tesla were making EV drives aspirational, a development needed if premiium priced EVs were to go mainstream. GM can use this to its advantage when marketing the Volt. Whether you want to do something for the environment, stop financing regimes which support terrorism, help transition the economy to a more sustainable platform, or are simply tired of a monthly gas bill, the Volt offers the possibility of achieving these goals while letting you drive a vehicle with good performance and a luxury ride.
What’s not to like? And why not pay a premium price?
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:55 am)The Honda would get the same performance if it used a 10 speed transmission (exaggerating here).. but it would have to be a special transmission that would not drop power while shifting. I think those are called double clutch robotized manual transmissions or something like that.. you are starting to see 6 speed transmissions for a reason.
Multispeed transmissions are used in conventional ICE cars to fix a major problem of ICE.. the severe lack of torque at low speeds, often the engine has to be oversized to ameliorate this problem with resulting losses in efficiency.. interesting that steam engines (external combustion engine) do not have this problem, a modern steam engined car would not use a transmission. Google Cyclone.
Of course a big advantage of electrics is brake regeneration, this negates a big portion of mpg losses in heavy cars.. notice how hybrids get very good city mileage?
BTW, I dont consider the Volt single speed “transmission” with differential a true transmission since it does not have a clutch or hydraulic torque converter… but it actually is a transmission.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:59 am)Very important!! One of the reasons I would trade my prius for an ampera (volt) is the torque.
Great vid! I had a big smile hearing the tiresound!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (10:59 am)can’t be done as it is a front wheel drive….
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:03 am)Well said.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:05 am)We still need hard data on the full range of performance by an independent 3rd party. That will be the key.
But electric doesn’t have to mean wimpy. I think the Tesla shattered that sterotype already.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:07 am)Since it uses one motor to drive both front wheels, the only way it could do traction control (I think this is actually required in modern cars?) is by selective application of the friction brakes.. even electronic brake regen wont work since it brakes both wheels simultaneously. The Audi eTron electric supercar with 4 motors will be interesting.
“Special Launch Button” wont work on an electric since there is no transmission to let the engine rev up before launching.. perhaps you could simulate it by letting the inverter and motor go to a momentary emergency 500% power boost, but only for a few seconds before everything overheated. Careful you dont snap the CV joints or the motor shaft with the instant massive torque.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:09 am)Lyle asked “How important is performance to you in an electric car?”
I would say very important! I want that “comfort feeling” to pass a car safely on a 2-lane road.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:22 am)While I might agree in principal, I really don’t want to replace wars over oil with wars over lithium.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:27 am)I think that the point is that lithium is so widely available that it’s unlikely to beget conflict.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:28 am)So, if we had to go to war over lithium extracted from the sea, would that be called an asalt?
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:29 am)Just watched the video again. At around 47 seconds into it he reaches to the right towards where the “gear” shift would be. Did he kick in the aggressive regenerative breaking? It almost looks like he down shifted?
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:31 am)8:10 am
Me too. The harder you drive it, the worse the AER and gas mileage. Kind of defeats the purpose, IMHO.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:34 am)I noticed that too, but I don’t know what he was doing.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:36 am)Yes, a number of us used to have that using IE8. Try setting IE to “compatiblility mode” (I think it is on a site by site basis).
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:41 am)Back in the dark ages (pre 2009), all Camaros were rear wheel drive…… I had a nice red 75 as my first car; looked great with those chrome Keystone Classics….
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:42 am)I don’t remember where I saw it, maybe on Discovery channel about 3 weeks ago, but while channel surfing I stumbled on a guy that was racing an EV. It was on a drag strip somewhere in California. He blew away every single competitor. I had no idea that electric power was that capable. We are at the dawn of a new age.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:43 am)ICE cars use a combination of selective application of the friction brakes and engine throttling to achieve traction control and/or stability control. The Volt would be able to both apply the friction brakes selectively and “throttle”, or restrict, the motor power. No problem.
I agree though, that selective regen wouldn’t be possible without having a seperate motor at each wheel. The use of stability control or traction control are more extreme events though, so I’m not worries about loosing that little bit of regen energy when I’m trying to avoid a wayward tractor trailer on an icy road, or trying to get some grip in an wet intersection.
The T-Zero has traction control years ago, it was almost mandatory due to the stup-pulling torque.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:47 am)The US is not going to go to war with anyone over natural resources. Period. If Bolivia doesn’t want to sell us Lithium, we’ll get it elsewhere, or develop a new battery technology. Not send in the troops!
Honestly, we’re not the British empire. And I think the American people have had enough of war. If we were ready to go to war over commercial reasons, we’d have attacked Japan in the 80s. Or at least imposed tariffs.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:53 am)Camaro rather than Mailbu —> What a wonderful shift in tone.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (11:54 am)Check out the killacycle vids!
http://www.killacycle.com/
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:00 pm)Don’t you mean “objective”?
-2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:01 pm)Invading Iraq sure wasn’t about anything else — all of those other reasons have been discredited, and were obviously false at the time to anyone who was paying attention…
A number of my friends went to Iraq to fight this war, and I take sending my friends to fight over nothing rather personally.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:01 pm)Off topic:
This morning at 2:09 AM, I posted a question very late which did not get any response.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/12/22/will-gm-surprise-us-with-the-chevy-volt-price/ #188
“I have a question for everyone here that does not appear to have been talked about? What profit loss would GM take on sales of the Volt if the price were set at $40,000 and everything is a projected including the price of a second battery?”
Even though the topic today is different, I would appreciate comments on my question.
On Topic:
Performance is what will differentiate the Volt from other EVs in its class. We have seen over and over where the Volt engineering outperforms the competition. We have seen many posts on desires of potential Volt buyers, many of which may be considered for Gen 2. But out of the gate, Gen 1 answers every shortcoming of the competitions vehicles.
Merry Christmas to All and a Happier New Year.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:01 pm)Really ? So we would have invaded it even if middle east didn’t have oil ?
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:02 pm)Me too. We haven’t heard much about braking. One could imagine the worst in a heavy car with narrow, stiff tires. On the other hand, it is such an obvious issue that gm engineers certainly have considered it and probably Volt does great. But we do need to know.
+3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:03 pm)Did you notice that Japan’s Cash-for-Clunkers does not allow US made cars?
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:06 pm)HAHAHAHA! At first I thought someone simply joined me in messing with him, but then it made more sense that this actually is him. Either way, its just too funny. I can seem him now, speaking in tongues in his basement apartment, only key words being discernible.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:06 pm)It was probably White Zombie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrHXdM9f13k
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:06 pm)Well, obviously the area is (has been for a long time) important due to oil (which keeps you and me alive btw, very important stuff), but we did not invade to get THE oil..
-1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:07 pm)Performance, appearance and efficiencies are ALL critically important.
I’ll take an Ampera… instead of the jellybean.
Ditto on wanting an independent source to test drive it including consumer reports. Did anyone notice the significant lean when it was cornering? From most accounts power will not be a problem but I think the jury is still out on “sporty” handling or cornering.
IMHO
Thanks.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:07 pm)I really thought Fred was joking when I first read his post. I even laughed…
Iraq was a completely different situation. That was about power, and the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency as much as it was about oil. And, IMHO, it was about George Bush’s personal feelings as much as anything else.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:08 pm)______________________________________________________
#33 john1701a said:
“…misplaced priorities…The middle-market consumer simply isn’t interested…The more we hear about Volt, the more it sounds like a Camaro rather than a Malibu…”
————–
John1701a,
Middle-market consumers had no choice other than to eat cold bland oatmeal to get high fuel efficency…the Electric Camaro will change all that!…it will no longer an either/or proposition.
______________________________________________________
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:08 pm)Rashiid, that’s next month’s video.
Then on one wheel, just before the global launch
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:10 pm)I think that the short (accurate) answer is “no one knows”. I’d be interested in the answer to the question, though.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:14 pm)I just realized that was a no cost “option” with the Volt.. both the brakes and throttle are electronically controlled already..
Question for Dan: Electric power steering used in modern GM cars, what is the failsafe if the electricity fails?.. is there still a mechanical shaft connecting the steering wheels to the wheels?, I assume there is also a failsafe for the electrical brakes.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:15 pm)I suspect when driving like depicted in the video, that very little brake regen is occurring. When you brake HARD, the mechanical brakes must come into play. Also, even when you brake moderately, brake regen only recovers a fraction of the energy (1/4 to 1/3?).
I also wonder how responsive (ie: what is the hysteresis of the ICE-Generator-Battery-Inverter-Motor). I suspect it may be a little “soft”, and the snappy response may not be available once the battery is depleted beyond assist point.
Now, I am also not saying that I would not be willing to sacrifice some performance in specific scenarios, but these are just questions I am looking for answers to.
Merry Christmas!
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:16 pm)I hear that GM is going to produce a neat car named the Volt. It’s likely to release it in 2010! Seriously, it’ll run on electricity ALL the time and if your battery runs low, it’ll run an ICE for the electricity it needs! Really cool technology! (just trying to get away from foreign policy).
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:17 pm)The impression I got from the last Lutz interview (here) is that GM was very reluctant to take even a temporary loss on the Volt.. so I guess they wont at whatever price they set.
-2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:21 pm)Surely you mean under powered heavyweights!
The lightweights are the ones that accelerate quickly.
Back to 101 physics for you, sir.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:24 pm)I might be able to answer that one too.
Most modern electric steering systems I’m aware of are actually electric assist. There is the mechanical connection (usually rack and pinion) and an electric motor that provides the assist. That’s how the Mk5 Jetta works, as well as BMW. The failsafe would be akin to blowing a hole in your hydraulic line on a hydraulic assist ICE. Steering gets heavy, but you still have steering.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:24 pm)OT:
Digital Quantum Batteries:
http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/24265/?a=f
Keep EEStor’s claims in mind as you read this.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:29 pm)And it’s better to fight about oil? If it makes you feel any better, at the end of the war, hopefully, the Iraqi people will have a functional democracy. Or at least something resembling a democracy. And, will, in any case, be a lot less repressive than Saddam was. And it might even be a force for peace and stability in the middle east.
Of course, that’s not why we went in. We went in because George Bush had failed miserably in Afghanistan at his most important objective-al queda. We hadn’t captured Osama. And we hadn’t eliminated the people who attacked us. Or even put a significant crimp in their operations.
Meanwhile Saddam Hussein had tried to assassinate George Bush’s father. And he’d challenged US authority by pricing his oil in euros. That didn’t mean we wouldn’t be able to buy it. But it did mean that we might lose reserve currency status if all the other oil producing countries followed suit.
Personally, I think reserve currency status is a long run economic disaster for the US. It’s done a lot to destroy our manufacturing base. Yes. It makes us wealthier in the short run. But it makes us a lot poorer in the long run. And it’s going to be history at some point anyway. (Although I don’t see the euro as a viable alternative. At least not at this point.) But it is the root our political and military predominance. And allows us to function as “the world’s policeman.” And that’s why we went in. Not to protect our access to oil.
We still could have bought oil even if everyone switched to pricing it in euros. It’s not like we bought much if any of our oil from Iraq directly anyway. It would have been more expensive, but not nearly as much as the war was. Besides, higher oil prices would have been good for us. We might have invested a lot more in alternatives a lot sooner.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:33 pm)It would take some complicated cost accounting to answer this question with any precision, and we don’t even have the starting data. But we can make some reasonable guesses
Cost of assembly of 1 Volt
About $25,000, estimated as the cost of assembly of a Cruze (about $14,000) plus the cost of the Volt’s battery and its special systems
Volt Overhead — maybe $5,000 per car in the start-up phases. These are funds to pay for the machines that build it, the plants in which that machinery sits, Volt advertising, and all the other items that are required to build and sell the Volt specifically but that are not directly a part of an individual car
Corporate Overhead — maybe another $5,000 per car. This amount is simply an arbitrary accounting allocation of the very sizable totals for corporate salaries, corporate advertising, government relations, legacy retirement costs, etc. These costs have nothing to do with the Volt directly, but they are real costs and likely are charged to every car sold.
Taking all these together, the Volt “costs” gm $35K each. If the car costs $40K to the customer, the considering that a margin has to go to the dealer, salesman, and service department, $40K is essentially break-even.
It is all guesswork of course, but it is reasonable guesswork based on what we know to date.
It also is interesting to note that once gm has committed to the build of a certain number, gm “profits” from each one sold for more than the assembly cost, even though at the same time gm “loses” money when the overheads are included. That is, the overhead costs are real but largely unaffected by the build and sale of an individual car.
+8
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:34 pm)Yes. I did. They’re really good at avoiding the WTO requirements. It’s really impressive actually. It’s practically an art form for them.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:41 pm)Power is at least partly about ensuring an adiquate supply of resources. In order to have power, you have to have resources. You don’t have to invade and conquer to own the resource, you just have to control it, either politically or by force. That is the changing face of empire building. Empire’s are built to control resources. Land, food, fuel. Economic trade works just fine for the little stuff, cars and cell phones, but for the critical stuff, the stuff needed to maintain power geopolitically, trade just doesn’t cut it. I’ll be shocked if the US ever allows itself into a position where they might not have an adiquate supply of a critical resource.
The U.S. may not be like the British Empire overtly, but as a nation the US certainly does exert political and military pressure in order to control critical resources. That’s empire buildling in the modern world. After WW2 overt large scale military aggression among the world powers was deemed unacceptable. Political and military manouvering for power and control didn’t go away, it’s just more subtle from the perspective of the common citizen.
Superpowers require massive resources to maintain thier status and power, and will use that power to ensure control of key resources. The US is no different than the British Empire, the Roman Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Aztec Empire, or any other superpower in history in that regard.
+3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:46 pm)I’ve never been into sports cars. To me, the Volt is about reducing oil consumption and pollution, period. I’m happy that it will perform well because that will make it more interesting to more people. But it doesn’t factor into my own buying decision.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:50 pm)The motor-battery-throttle response can be very fast, moderated by the “sport” button on the dash.. the genset hysteresis can be very slow due to the huge buffer battery that the Volt has, even with the battery at the 30% “empty” point you still have enough buffer for a couple of minutes of hard acceleration, plenty of time for the genset to rev up to the correct level.
You would be surprised on how much regen braking a car like the Volt can do.. probably enough to 99% of the braking duties. it depends on how fast the battery can be recharged, hint its not the same as how fast it can be discharged.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (12:56 pm)The biggest reason was nukes.. EVERYONE thought Saddam was working on them, an impression he even fomented. Another important reason (IMO) is that the US wants large, reliable, military bases in the region.
-3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:00 pm)A couple of speed bumps on the lane adjacent to the accell ramps would also solve the problem of merging with fast traffic
-1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:09 pm)Your claim is that middle-market wants above-the-ceiling performance.
Ever hear of deminishing returns?
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:13 pm)Hence the desire for the dollar to stay the world reserve currency. It gives us more buying power, and we can get natural resources more cheaply from other countries. But, in the long run, it makes us more reliant on those resources, and like any empire in history, it will destroy us when we no longer have the same access. And we’re already in the process of decline.
We do have a lot in common with British empire. We’re not nearly as imperialistic. But, like them, we’re spending money and resources on building up other countries while our own falls apart. We help out our agricultural sector at the expense of manufacturing. And, like them, these policies will ultimately result in our downfall both economically and politically. Only I doubt China will be as nice to us as we were to Britain post-empire.
-1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:15 pm)A high powered Camaro EV will still be less energy efficient than an EV designed with efficiency as it’s primary focus. Just the same as a standard Camaro is less fuel efficient than a Toyota Yaris.
More power used = more power consumed. Doesn’t matter if it’s gasoline, hydrogen, or electrons.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:19 pm)______________________________________________________
Melissa falls in love with the Volt..
The True Adventures of the Chevy Volt
Episode #1:
at 4:46: “…just plug it in at night and it’s ready for the next day like me…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlJWvxsH2H0
Episode #2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mDVayYNS3Y
Episode #3:
at 4:56: “…so sleek…so bold…so confident…that’s what I want in a man….and the Chevy Volt has all those charateristics and more…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bl2bWaIJYyU
______________________________________________________
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:27 pm)I am not sure if I understand the principle being expressed by “the cost of a second battery?” This could mean at least two things (1) the price of the car includes the cost of the battery plus the replacement cost of the battery, or (2) the price of the vehicle includes the cost of warranting the battery beyond its “demonstrated” life. Some might last and some might fail so the warranty cost would be higher than normal, i.e warranting something with a proven track record.
On the other hand,a third meaning could be that the Volt only uses 50% of the initial battery capacity, so you are buying two 8 kwh usable batteries. when you pay for 16 kwh of battery.
Note that the Prius PHV uses 68% of the initial capacity, and if Volt did the same, then more than 10 Kwh of capacity would be used, providing 40 miles of range if the electric mileage was at least 4.0 miles per kwh.
Looking forward to May when we might get a clearer picture of the Volt. Also hoping for an independent evaluation of performance from say Consumer Reports.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:40 pm)================================
I thought he was adjusting the radio, or possibly turning on the exterior sound alert system for the blind people that may have been trying to cross the test track…………………
It’s a joke people, no need to flame me!!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:41 pm)Fair enough, but the locking browser problem didn’t crop up until the ‘Twitter’ thing started.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:44 pm)Damn!
Just get the car built and sold already!!!!!
/still waiting for Gen II
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:44 pm)=====================
So did it work???? Inquiring minds want to know!!!!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:49 pm)Is this Maria’s attempt at viral advertising??? (no comment)
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:53 pm)AMEN!
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (1:58 pm)Thanks, Tag, your no help at all!
lol. Just kidding.
I think in order to evaluate what GM might do on the opening price, we need to get a handle on what the loss might be. Then we can better guess what they might do to come up with a lower price.
For example, if the loss were say $2000 at a price of $40,000 and the first year, they only produce the initial 10,000, as stated, then they would receive $40,000 x 10,000 = $400,000,000 ($400 million). And the loss would be $2,000 x 10,000 = 20,000,000 ( $20,000 million). Now say they can lower the price down to $34,000 because a second battery less likely needed in the warranty period. And they ramp up to 55,000 a year then they would receive $34,000 x 55,000 = 1,870,000,000 ( $1.87 billion). The loss would be less because of the ramp up resulting in lower production costs (i.e., general expenses of running the factory would be spread over the greater production quantity, and the cost of part from their supplier would be less for the same reason.) But lets just stick to $2,000 for the example. That would be $2,000 x 55,000 = $110,000,000 ( $110 million). Would GM rather see more cash from sales and a lower actual loss than the lower initial projected sales of only 10,000?
Would the greater infusion of cash (over $1 billion) combined with satisfying the greater demand of their customers put them in a better financial position?
Merry Christmas and a Happier New Year.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:01 pm)As with most things, the reality is a complicated mixture of many things. I agree with your comments about the reserve currency, and that the US will use economic means as a front line to achieve thier resource needs. However, when economic means break down, military means will inevitably take over. The US does not import the majority of it’s oil from the Middle East anymore (the biggest chunk now comes from Canada I believe, which is a pretty safe source for the US), but there is still a signifigant enough chunk coming from that part of the world that, should the situation become unstable and uncontrolable, the US will have a severe shortage. It’s a large enough chunk, in an unstable enough region, that it demands military presence to assert and maintain control.
I also see the same signs of decline that you do.
As for being nice, I’m not so sure “nice is a good word to describe the US’s position toward Britian during and after WW2. As the US sat back and watched, the UK got bombed to the ground and bankrupted itself fighting the Nazis. While the US got rich selling arms to a desperate Britain (paid for with debt, and interest), the Nazis damn near took over Europe. After the war was won, a bankrupt Britain was again given loans with interest as thanks for risking so much and loosing so many. Call this being nice, call it kicking a valiant hero while he’s down. Call it whatever you want, but I hope the Chinese will be just as “nice” when dealing with a bankrupt USofA.
While the critial involvement of the US later in WW2 shouldn’t be overlooked, the war might likely have been lost to the Nazis without it, the brunt of the economic devastation from the war was placed on Britain’s shoulders. The US has never been forced into a position where thier very nationhood is in jeopardy. The US has never suffered economic destruction like the UK.
While 9/11 was tragic for all those who lost loved ones, and I have no intent or desire to belittle that tradgedy, the US has never had to deal with more than a bloody nose on thier own soil (Until the end of the American Revolution, it was arguably Britain’s land, which the “rebel” US forces were attempting to take by force, and not including the Civil War, which was self inflilcted, and wasn’t an invasion by a foreign power).
When an ally looses everything fighting a foe who you damn well know is coming for you next, giving that ally a hand back up after the dust has settled isn’t out of order. Charging that friend for the service is in poor taste.
As an interesting aside, Britain didn’t finish repaying the US back for WW2 loans until December of 2006, with a total amount that was double the initial principle.
+3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:05 pm)I’m willing to bet that most people who buy the 4 cyl version of a car do so for cost reasons and NOT by desire. Given their preference most would get the better (hear bigger) engine.
A Volt with the ability to not get ’smoked’ at every light is important for people to accept it.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:07 pm)Much like our decision to love the Volt is not limited to financial issues, I think that at least part of GM’s limited release is based on prudent engineering issues (eg a recall would effect fewer vehicles). As you suggest, once they get some wind in their sails (or sales) they can unleash the production numbers.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:08 pm)How about in reverse? Since there is no transmission limiting the gearing (no gearing) you should be able to go 100mph in reverse just as easily as forward!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:11 pm)The Volt may not be all things to all people, but it sure covers an awful lot of the bases! It just makes sense that the more needs it meets, the more people there are who will be attracted to it. JMO.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:12 pm)In theory, yes, though I expect the speed in reverse will be electronically limited.
Just guessing.
-3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:15 pm)“The Prius has improved through its three generations, but the car still takes about 10 seconds to get from 0 to 60 and doesn’t have a “sporty” feel by any stretch of the imagination. And for the new Honda Insight, lets not even go there.”
We’ve been through this before Lyle… the Volt has a 4cyl 0-60 time. So if it feels like a V6 at some point then it must feel like a 2cyl at others.
We’ve also got 0-60 times of ~8.5s for the Camry Hybrid, and as per the reviews I have read, it is not being described as “sporty”. The CRZ reportedly has a near-similar 0-60 time, and it is mostly a disappointment. Certainly nothing to brag about.
The Volt looked pretty poor going around that track… lots of understeer…. however it looked to me like a lot of it was driver error… coming in too hot and braking late.
Either way…. let’s give up on this “sporty” pretense. It isn’t. Nor does it need to be for this market.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:15 pm)Depends on the “Desire”.
I desire to get the best MPG to get back and forth to work. Don’t really care what others think of my ride.
Oh yeah, does anyone have a pictorial total Idiots Guide of how to replace a starter for a 96 Saturn SL2?….lol.
Mine went out. Clicks but to turny turny. Battery is fine, 6 months old and had Kragen dudes test it. It’s intermittent.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:20 pm)Strangely, I agree. If it is sporty, let it be the “Easter Egg” of the product not the flashy sales pitch.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:26 pm)Thanks for your guesses RB. Now we have a foundation to expand on this issue. In comment #128, i conjectured that GM might bring the price down to $34,000 for the example I gave. My point in that post, was that GM might be better off cash flow wish and gain a marketing advantage by pleasing all those potential buyers that have said they would buy a Volt when it is released to the public.
You said, “That is, the overhead costs are real but largely unaffected by the build and sale of an individual car.” It is likely they may add a third shift once they get going. There was recent news that GM is contemplating adding a thrid shift to some of their plants. In that case, overhead costs would go up some but the amortization of the total overhead cost would be less with the greater production numbers. This is one factor where GM gains in their production costs, and can therefore lower the price. I would agree with you, that they need to add in what the dealers will make on the sale: don’t dealers make up profit on sales of options to the customer? Profit margin for optional equipment is usually higher than the profit on sale of the standard car.
Thanks again for getting this discussion started. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and your family.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:36 pm)Sorry, you have have muddled two separate things together.
a. “high powered Camaro EV will still be less energy efficient than an EV designed with efficiency as it’s primary focus” is simply untrue, as you get more power in an EV through increased efficiency. A high powered Camaro EV will exactly be an EV designed with efficiency as it’s primary focus.
b. “More power used = more power consumed” is correct and has nothing to do with a. In EVs, it has most to do with relative vehicle weight and to a smaller degree, driver behavior, especially from air resistance at excessive prolonged high speeds.
on b., Your gasser example is true because of weight differences and inefficiencies of more powerful gas engines.
on a., Now consider that the efficiency of a Tesla Roadster compared to a Mistsubishi i-miev, when driven the same way, is about the same (ok, the Tesla is probably more efficient due to the lighter weight of a performance car – take a bow, Colin Chapman).
Probably what you meant to say is that any vehicle hooned by EVO is less efficient than any same vehicle driven by kgurnsey.
The important point here is if you want your EV to maximize its efficiency, simply keep your mitts off the Sport Mode, take it easy on the accelerator, and above all, don’t break speed limits. It’s not like you need a separate model or even trim to get optimal efficiency or optimal performance. It’s literally as simple as a push of a button on the same model/trim or by minor modifications of driving style, like keeping off of interstates and taking a scenic route instead (more interesting, for sure).
Electric drive is so much more efficient than ICEs, though, why bother to restrict your style once you’ve made the change? That efficiency gain gives you a little breathing room to hoon it up a little bit if you want with a minimal efficiency penalty, as the Volt gen 1 shows.
That the Volt less its power pack is heavier than the engineers prefer gives me hope that they understand that vehicle weight and per unit variable cost are the biggest challenges going forward.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:38 pm)I agree with you that Iraq and oil, etc. is very complicated. And so is the US vs. the British empire question.
But the US did not support the wartime reparations in the Treaty of Versailles after WWI. That was Britian and France’s idea. It bankrupted Germany, and led to the rise of the nazi party. There probably wouldn’t have been a WWII to begin with if they had listened to Wilson.
And Germany was coming for us next? They were overextended as it was. There is no way that they would have voluntarily taken on the United States. It was too far away. And they were basically doomed anyway the minute they took on Russia. It was only a matter of time. We didn’t start or cause the war (or WWI for that matter), but somehow we should have picked up the tab for it?
As far as the Marshall plan–it’s universally credited with rebuilding Europe after WWII. Yes. Some of the money was in loans. And, yes, we benefited too. But how generous were we supposed to be?
And the British empire was hardly a “hero” historically speaking Ask India or Pakistan what they think of the British empire. Or even the Iraqis. Or anyone from Africa. A lot of the problems in the middle east, africa, and even South America, are due to the legacy of European colonialism.
And as far as China being “nice” to us? Compare us to how the Soviet Union treated Latvia or East Germany for matter. Or how Belgians behaved in the Congo. Or the French in Algeria. Because that’s the historical norm with empires. And China’s human rights record isn’t exactly reassuring. They’re helping Sudan in Darfur, which would be like the US entering WWII to fight for Germany.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:39 pm)If you want an idiot’s guide, you’ve come to the right place
.
Is there starter motor noise when the engine fails to turn over?
If you haven’t taken the old unit off yet, try putting the car in neutral with the ignition off and doing a short roll (not enough to ‘roll start’). Let out the clutch, just enough to turn the flywheel an inch or so. If you have no trouble cranking after that, it’s your flywheel that needs the replacing, not the starter.
The bendix on the starter motor engages teeth on the rim of the flywheel. If the flywheel has missing or worn teeth at any point, the bendix will have nothing to “grab.” Potluck on where the flywheel stops when you turn the car off could account for the intermittency.
I once drove a car that would fail to start about once every 100 or so times. I accidentally discovered that if I shorted the leads on the starter motor it would crank like a somovich (or something soundling like that). Never worked out the cause.
Another car burned out ballast resistors with semi-annual regularity, which kept it from starting. Fortunately, a new one cost less than $2, and was easy to get to.
Dan Petit probably has less idiotic guidance, if he’s ‘on-line.’
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:46 pm)lol….
OK, the “Sport Mode”. Exactly what does it do different from non sport mode? If you want to go fast quicker, don’t you just push harder on the accelerator? I mean if it’s an EV and torque is there from 0RPM, why would you need a “Sport Mode”? Seems to me it is just an engineered feature that really does nothing or really doesn’t need to be there. If you want to dirve efficient then don’t slam the pedal? I think it’s a feature/gadget that is not needed.
Here’s something Lyle can test. Compare a 0-60 in Sport mode and 0-60 in non sport mode. Will there really be a difference? Do you really need it if all you have to do is drive conservatively for best range?
To me it’s more of a “the car knows better than you” on how to save energy and you as a human need to be “Throttled back”.
So then just keep it in sport mode, or better yet don’t waste $$$ engineering it into the car, and drive conservatively.
As a human the decision is there for you, as a mechanical device aka switch it’s also there. Why spend the $$ on it?
KISS!!!
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (2:56 pm)Not much too be gained by comparing antiquated ICE vehicles with the Volt. They don’t have the instant torque that gives the Volt it’s “sporty” feel.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:06 pm)I prefer to drive those underpowered lightweights, and the acceleration ramps are plenty long — if you look ahead a bit. The trick is to not-tailgate the car in front of you, which means you can look at something other than the bumper of the car in front of you. Then, you watch the traffic as you come up the ramp, figure out where you’re going to merge in, and then do it.
Putting the pedal to the floor actually makes it harder to merge, even in a Prius or a 125hp 3300lb pickup truck. When you just whump the pedal, you’re so busy avoiding objects in your immediate vicinity that you have have to figure out how to merge when you get there. If you think a few seconds ahead, merging onto the highway is boring, smooth, safe, and works best at far less than full power in any vehicle I’ve ever driven.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:08 pm)Several websites have stated that in “sport mode” available power is boosted by approximately 27 HP. Non-sport mode must limit available power for increased range. Is it needed? Probably not. If it helps me be more efficient without having to think about it might be worth it.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:12 pm)I had a 77 LT Camero … pulled the 305 out of it … dropped in a 350 with 370 HP matched to a turbo 400 tranny… Now there was a tire burner…
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:18 pm)How many times have you driven/rode in a Volt?
How many times has Lyle?
Thanks. I’ll go w/Lyle’s opionion.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:19 pm)Not when the drive wheels are also steering the car… it would be a nightmare for control..
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:20 pm)Yep, that was it. The Volt may not be White Zombie, but it is good for me. In fact, the engineers at GM really did a good job of putting a whole range of issues into sweet spots. Performance, reliability, flexibility, cost (yes, it does have to come down but this is NEW).
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:27 pm)I’m not saying that Britain has been a saint throughout history, obviously that’s not the case, but then again neither has the US. I certainly don’t expect any superpower to be “nice” to another; I expect them to be selfish. In my experience, they tend to be exactly that, and I would agree that is the norm with empires, the great USofA included. My response was meant to illustrate that the US was in no way being “nice” to the UK after WW2.
The Marshall plan isn’t universally credited with rebuilding Europe. It’s credited by many, but there are also more than a few critics, including Alan Greenspan. It is credited with giving loans (and grants as well) to buy US goods instead of rebuilding the capacity to manufacture their own. This also arguably set the stage for massive US transnational corporate “investment” in Europe. It’s like a drug dealer giving away freebies, for now, and at the same time buying your house to rent it back to you. I don’t’ call that aid, I call it engineering economic dependency. Several countries that did not receive aid, or received limited aid, from the Marshall plan grew faster than those that received significant aid, like West Germany, Belgium, and Japan. I don’t’ expect nations to be generous, but hooking a desperate, war torn, homeless person on US made consumer crack is not aid.
It also is credited with exerting influence on countries that accepted the “aid”, and has been called US economic imperialism. France and the Netherlands used a large portion of their “aid” funding for military campaigns, arguably at the behest of the allies, of which the only member with any real clout at the time would have been the US. The Netherlands were forced into the Korean conflict under the threat of reducing aid. I don’t expect nations to be generous, but that’s not benefiting from trade, its blackmail.
Saying that Germany had no plans for North American domination in time is like saying that Britain and France never had any interest in North America either. Had the Nazis conquered the whole of Europe, they my well have decided to keep on expanding. If the US can project its military power over the globe, so can anyone else. As for the Nazis being doomed the moment they took on Russia, I disagree. They made a massive tactical error when they chose to attack the heart of Russia in the middle of winter (apparently Hitler didn’t read up much on Napoleon…). Had they pressed their advantage differently, who knows. The US is lucky it never had to find out.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:28 pm)-3
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:32 pm)You miss the point… Nor does it need to be for this market.
Why is there a belief that Volt must exceed the current standard to be successful?
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:37 pm)I guess it all depends on how you define “the current standard”.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:38 pm)#150 kgurnsey
“It’s like a drug dealer giving away freebies, for now, and at the same time buying your house to rent it back to you. I don’t’ call that aid, I call it engineering economic dependency. …. I don’t’ expect nations to be generous, but hooking a desperate, war torn, homeless person on US made consumer crack is not aid. ”
—————-
This statement is way out there. I totally disagree and think humanitarianism does exist.
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:42 pm)My point was that I believe Lyle when he says the instant torque of an electric car feels sporty. So using the word “sporty” to describe the car’s performance is OK in my world.
What defines “success” is a totally different debate.
(note both of these terms are subjective)
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (3:58 pm)My metaphor may have been exagerated somewhat, in order to convey a point. The point, however, remains. The Marshall plan wasn’t necessarily all roses and happiness.
Humanitarian efforts do exist, but not on the scale of nation to nation. At least, not in the same way as a not-for profit, charitable organization, or NGO would go about it.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (4:06 pm)I’m having the same problem. Happens every time, like clockwork.
After each post on gm-volt.com, my browser window locks up for around 3 minutes (if I let it sit). After that, it says
“Stop running script? A script on this page is causing Internet Explorer to run slowly. If it continues to run, your computer may become unresponsive.”
Usually, I just shut down IE8 manually, and then send an error report to Microsoft.
This only seems to happen at gm-volt.com.
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (4:14 pm)You’re not alone. People have suggested hitting the compatibility mode button or using Firefox, which doesn’t seem to share the problem with IE8.
HTH,
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 23rd, 2009 (4:28 pm)Woops. Looks like I helped trigger a downward spiral of a foreign policy war-for-lithium / war-for-oil bruhaha. My apologies. On a serious note about war for lithium…. never gonna happen. War for oil is much more likely because whereas lithium is used to make durable goods (batteries with a 10-year functional life), oil is a consumable with limited inventory on-hand. Therefore oil shortages create instant panic on how to fuel our transportation system and heat our homes. Lithium (or any other battery ingredient) poses no such immediate urgency. Yes, a shortage would hurt manufacturers, but the bottom line is that automobile manufacturing could drop off a cliff for a period of several months and it wouldn’t cause the entire nation to grind to a halt. Don’t get me wrong; it would economically devastate certain areas with work stoppage, but it would be much more limited in scope than a sudden oil shortage.
My punchline: I’d rather face a lithium shortage than an oil shortage.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (4:29 pm)Malibu.
Fusion.
Camry.
The high-volume family sedans, where a bulk of automaker profit comes from.
Cobalt.
Fusion.
Corolla.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (5:15 pm)Focus… for that second Ford vehicle example.
Point is, vehicles which a lot of are currently sold… the majority.
Also, don’t forget about markets outside the US.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (5:32 pm)Laura,
Please do not perpetuate a Communist myth.
The only reason Russia was able to beat the Nazis during WWII was because the good old U.S. of A. supplied it with everything it needed to fight a war. The program was called “Lend -Lease.” Please look it up!
The Soviet Union kept it a secret: How could the workers paradise not be able to produce enough to fight a war and instead have to rely on those evil Capitalists? I certainly did not know about it growing up in México, where education was as Communist-friendly as it gets. Americans, however, should know this.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (5:41 pm)Smoewhere *cough*JiminPa*cough* this turned into a history thread! lol.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (5:53 pm)If the battery is tested with only a voltmeter (without a load), that test is not valid. If tested with a cheap load tester, then that’s more valid for the battery. A conductance tester is by far the best, to see how many CCA’s are left in a battery. (I don’t like the ones that only tell you the battery is a “pass” or a “fail”.)
But to check cables, you can use 2 voltmeters to check the voltage at the starter motor positive lug (and also back at the battery at exactly the same time when cranking). Attempt to crank it over, and, if the voltage drops a lot there (but not back at the battery at the same time) you likely have a bad cable with green stuff (copper oxide) growing within and between the strands of copper and the end terminal lug.
The second part of the test checks the negative cable. Connect the negative voltmeter lead (aligator clip) to the starter housing and then the positive to the battery. Attempt to crank it over again and see if there is a voltage drop that way. (But not back at the battery as much).
If the starter is original and the engine has something like 200,000 miles on it, then you might need the starter after all, especially if when bench testing it, it takes a very long time to wind up to speed, and/or the speed it eventually does wind up to is far far slower than a new one that the parts store can also bench test so you can see how fast the old starter motor ought to wind up quickly. (A new starter when properly energized with full volts/amps will want to jump all over the place if not held down securely).
Dec 23rd, 2009 (5:54 pm)I just looked up the terms of those loans. And, according to the BBC (a British news service), during the war, we basically donated $30 billion worth of war materials during the war through the lend lease program. But afterward, we charged them one tenth of the price of the production price for whatever they wanted to keep. And we loaned them the money to pay us back over 50 years at 2% interest (well below the inflation rate). Gee how usurious of us.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm
We also gave them (and other european countries) outright grants afterward in the form of the Marshall plan. We also encouraged our corporations to set up manufacturing in Europe (and other countries) by giving them tax breaks. A loophole that still exists and needs to be closed. Pronto.
Maybe it backfired, although I think that’s very debatable, as is Germany and Japan “not receiving any aid.” West Germany was using money from the Marshall plan to “finance sales of German goods to underdeveloped countries” in 1964! And Belgium wasn’t really damaged during the war. But they still got aid.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,938499,00.html
Maybe you’re right though. Maybe it didn’t help in the long run.. But it’s not like we were sending them drugs. We were sending them food. Lots of it. And other things most people consider necessities. If I give a homeless man a meal, am I creating a dependence and addicting him to my consumer goods?
As far as requiring European countries to help out with Nato and the Korean war, how dare we expect our allies to help us defend “the free world” from the soviet union during the cold war? After we’d intervened to help them with two of their wars. Because the threat from the Soviets was just as real as the threat from Nazi Germany IMHO.
Yes. Countries are frequently selfish. Us included. I’d be the first to admit that the US is far from perfect. Or always benevolent. But there are degrees. Some countries are better than others. The US, after WWII, was the most powerful country in the history of the world. We dominated economically, politically, and militarily. And we didn’t take over other countries, and set up concentration camps for political dissidents. And we could have if we’d wanted to. The Soviet union certainly did. But we didn’t. West Germany is still much richer than East Germany. There is a reason for that.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (6:02 pm)Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (6:05 pm)The lend-lease program definitely helped, but it wasn’t the only factor. Russian winters are brutal. They doomed Napoleon. And, basically, Hitler overextended himself. He flat out didn’t have the manpower to a)run the holocaust, and b)occupy the entire continent.
However, if the nazis had been nicer to the Russians, and enlisted them in their “cause,” the whole war might have turned out differently. And at that point, they might have survived long enough to launch an attack on the US.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (6:06 pm)I think I got infected.. Melissa is very cute.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (6:12 pm)Will there be a compass in the Volt that reports degrees heading to the CAN (Controller Area Network)?
+2
Dec 23rd, 2009 (6:13 pm)It’s better than politics? I’m sorry. I know I have a tendency to get sidetracked, but, seriously, US conduct during and after WWII is one of the last things I think we should be attacked for. At least conduct towards Europe and Japan.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (6:16 pm)Better take notes just in case there is a pop quiz at the end of this lecture series. I wonder what effect the Voltech technology would have had on the out come of the war? LOL
Dec 23rd, 2009 (6:40 pm)I haven’t seen the clips yet, but:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Melissa
Dec 23rd, 2009 (6:50 pm)Oh man (hand smacks forehead)…. No more geopolitical comments from me ever again! Anyway, back to that instant torque….
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:03 pm)It could be worse, We could still be discussing the Volt Dancers video! Some how geopolitics doesn’t seem that bad when viewed in that light.
Yep – back to instant torque.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:36 pm)I don’t know what the effect of the Volt will be, but I am confident that there will be at least 3 versions of it (lol).
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:41 pm)I’m writing that down! (lol). Some of those posts were longer than my Thesis (g).
YAY, TORQUE! The Volt fan’s middle name. Always a crowd pleaser!
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:44 pm)I agree with your version if that means anything, and yes, it’s better than politics, but it’s one of those areas where you can be certain people will probably not change their belief. JMO.
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (7:47 pm)MY LORD, more history! (sound of single gunshot)(g).
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:22 pm)After I read your comment I went back and watched that video again.
You know, I am beginning to like it, and in fact, like it a lot.
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:25 pm)RB, Time to check your medications (lol).
Merry Christmas,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:28 pm)12:03 pm
Gee, so they’re smarter than we are again? What a shock!
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:35 pm)Project Better Place video report, 20 minutes long..lots of bicycles
http://evworld.com/evworld_tv.cfm?storyid=1776:
Dec 23rd, 2009 (8:40 pm)