[ad#post_ad-1]The original Chevy Volt concept car was described as having twin 6 gallon gas tanks, 50 MPG in charge sustaining mode, and thus 600 miles of gasoline range.
With production, these parameters were changed.
GM has not announced the production Volt’s miles per gallon in charge sustaining mode, though the evidence suggests it will be somewhere between 30 and 50 MPG.
The size of the gas tank has also not been released yet, though in November Edmunds claimed it was 8 gallons, and went on to speculate that the Volt would thus get 38 mpg in charge sustaining mode.
“That’s interesting speculation on their part,” said Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah. ” But I haven’t told anybody who’s asked how big it is.”
“We’re not releasing the size of the tank yet,” he added.
Previously, then Volt executive Frank Weber told GM-Volt.com that the tank would be between 6 and 10 gallons, and Farah confirms at least that it is less than 10 gallons.
But why is GM being so vague about this figure?
“The reason we’re not (announcing it yet) is we want to make sure we get over 300 miles of fuel range,” says Farah. ”We’re going to tweak it as such and I’ve got plenty of time to do that.”
Thus it seems GM is aiming for 300 miles of gasoline range, and therefore average real world charge sustaining miles per gallon will be the principle determinant of how many gallons is needed to reach that goal.
The graphic above shows the underside of the Volt after a crash test. The light blue object behind the battery is the fuel tank. In the graphic below the tank can be seen from above sitting behind the T-shaped battery pack.
How big is it? You decide.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010 at 7:17 am and is filed under Engineering, Fuel. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+21
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:20 am)that’s OK, I’m going to leave mine empty (if I can).
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:32 am)I Second that opinion!
-24
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:32 am)(click to show comment)
+7
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:35 am)Somethings are best left to speculation. It keeps the excitement quotient high
+17
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:40 am)I like the original 600 miles better.
But it is still better than Tesla.
+5
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:44 am)OT Toyota’s got more problems. Prius has brake problems too.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Toyota-hit-by-over-100-Prius-apf-61349719.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=2&asset=&ccode=
-10
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:47 am)(click to show comment)
+4
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:52 am)I would have loved the 600 mile range. Because the point of getting this car is to avoid the gas station as much as possible. Now when I visit the inlaws I will have to stop and fuel up on the way unless I take our Ford Escape Hybrid then I can fuel up after we get there.
+12
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:52 am)I continue to believe GM would be wise to enlarge & partition the tank with a spare section ….remember the spare tank the original VW Beetle used instead of a fuel gauge to save the cost of a fuel gauge?
The added steel needed would be negligible in cost and a simple dash-controlled solenoid valve could increase the tankage from say 8 to 14 gallons if the driver planned an extended trip.
Added cost of parts/material? I’d estimate <$50* Added value? Priceless to answer Ford’s >700mi range for the Focus Hybrid and for extended travel with minimal stops to refuel!
* I’d gladly pay $100 more to have the spare tank capacity as an option!
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:53 am)I’m sticking with 7.8 gallons as my guess for tank size.
The Volt CS mode testing started sometime in the middle of 2009. GM had determined the tank size they wished to use. Testing began. The figure of “over 300 miles total” was already released to the public. We know that the battery will commonly provide 40 miles. And less when stressed by climate control systems such as the standard cabin heater.
Let’s call “over 300 miles range” = “330 miles”. With the battery providing at least 30, leaving 300 to fuel.
The Volt must have been achieving just about 300 miles on 7.8 gallons of fuel. The reason being that an aggressive air dam was added to the aero. This ensured the 300+ fuel range number. GM had the option of going with a larger tank. By cutting into trunk space or rear seat head room. Or by simply adding the areo adjustment.
As 250 volts post # 4 states. Some things are best left to speculation. It’s fun to play with the numbers.
=D~
+33
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:59 am)My guess would be 8 gallons.
45 MPG X 7 gallons = 315 miles + 1 gallon, becuase you would not want it to run completely empty to get the range….
So what would be the reasons to keep the tank small?
1. Engineering – Stale gas might be more of a problem than anyone is letting on.
2. Sizing – If the tank is bigger, the fold down seats may not work well.
3. Weight – Every added gallon weighs about 6.25 lbs + the additional weight of the tank. Why make the electric drive system haul extra weight around and reduce AER range?
4. Safety – Do you really want 15-20 gallons of liquid fuel sitting next to a giant battery pack that under some weird failure event, could possibly produce a lightning size spark?
5. Practicality – This car is really designed to be a daily commuter vehicle with extended range, not a car to make regular long distance trips across the country. So why put in a 20 gallon gasoline tank?
I really doesn’t matter to me. With my driving requirements, and with an 8 gallon tank, I will only be buying 7 gallons of gas every four or five WEEKS! That works!!!!!
NPNS
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:04 am)Unless GM has a better use for the space, I don’t understand why they don’t make the tank as large as possible and let the range fall where it may. From the images it sure looks like the tank coud be up to 12 gallons without a problem. Personally, I’ld rather have trunk space than tank volume but the images don’t show it to be a either/or scenario.
Perhaps since the gas will be used so infrequently by many owners, it is a special tank and extra volume is expensive. If so and the volume is otherwise unused then maybe a larger tank could be an upsell option. There are some pretty strong opinions about the value of longer range here and that could translate into extra margin for GM.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:06 am)I also believe that GM has commited to making the Volt with a completely sealed fuel system, thus eliminating evaporative emissions.
I’m not sure how they will accomplish this, but I’m sure it adds complexity and cost to the Volt (with a secondary advantage that the fuel won’t go stale as fast).
Every gallon of fuel tank reduction may be significant, as the tank may have to include some provision for fuel expansion and contraction with ambient temperatures.
Since I believe the Volt will get ~60 mpg in CS mode, I expect a 6 gallon gas tank, which gives 300 miles of range in CS mode, with 1 gallon in reserve.
+24
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:06 am)The gas engine needs to run periodically or it will stop working. The Volt does this automatically.
If you want a pure BEV, the Volt may not be what you want.
But if you want a car that replaces 90% of your gas use, has no range issues, works in cold weather, and runs on E85, then the Volt is spot on…
+11
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:07 am)Ok
I’m getting to old to sit in a car for more then 4 hours
not sure about the rest of ya.
40 mile on the battery then 300 mile on gas
I can handle that.
Remember that GM stated when the Volt was announce that most people commute 40 miles or less to work, so I think the Volt was more of the car you would drive Monday – Friday and any long trips would be in the other car or broken down into short runs
+30
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:12 am)I don’t see all the fuss over the fact that the Volt will “only” have a 300 mile range with the fuel tank, instead of 700 miles. Most people’s driving habits are going to work and back, for which the electric range will be plenty. When you take the car on a long road trip, a 300 mile range with fuel will be more than enough – I don’t know about you, who amongst us can drive 700 miles without stopping to stretch and use the washroom?!
+4
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:12 am)$100 cost add to MSRP given your scenario seems low to me. Would you be willing to pay $400 if the larger tank volume were an option?
+5
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:16 am)Just fill a portable tank and put it in the trunk?
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:17 am)IIRC, this is done using a bladder inside the gas tank.
I also remember hearing the Prius does something similar.
+10
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:17 am)hi bb #16 …
I agree. Typical long haul stops are right about 250 miles (3.5 hours on the freeway). Need to stop for 10 minutes to support my coffee and M&M’s addiction.
=D~
+6
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:28 am)I think the 300 mile range is GM’s attempt to make this car “like any other car”. If you only had 200 miles of range, that wouldn’t be so good for marketing. Going above 300 miles may add unneeded costs or weight. In any case, a design goal has to be set and then engineering takes over.
+5
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:29 am)Agreed – My current car has an 11 gallon gas tank but the low fuel light comes on when you have used 9 gallons of the 11. My current range before the light comes on is about 260 miles in the winter and about 320 miles in the summer (winter tires and snowboard rack and cold air cause the difference).
I have never had a single issue with this as the car typically has a long distance range no longer than myself…
+16
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:29 am)Not true. Not by a long shot.
The U.S. imports 66% of the oil we consume. Oil consumption breaks down roughly as follows:
• 44% gasoline (mostly for passenger vehicles)
• 17% diesel (mostly for heavy duty long distance travel)
• 5% jet fuel
• 15% fuel oil (home heating and industrial)
• 19% other (petro-chemical, plastics, fertilizer, etc.)
Battery technology is nowhere near what would be required for heavy duty long distance travel (big trucks, trains, and ships). EVs target gasoline, which is only 44% of total oil consumption.
So it’s obvious to me that we need other solutions in addition to plug-ins, including:
• Ethanol from non-food sources ( http://www.coskata.com )
• Bio-diesel from algae ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ih-DLurcZA )
• More domestic oil production (stripper wells, oil shale, tar sands, offshore drilling)
• Conservation
• etc.
In addition, solar power has very little to do with energy independence. The U.S. has been called the Saudi Arabia of coal. We may want to look at solar for other reasons, but it won’t help with foreign oil.
If we really want to stop importing oil, then we need to get real, and stop making statements just because they feel right.
-1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:30 am)Jim I, I hope you are wrong. I don’t want a gocart, and I plan to take long (and fast) trips in my VOLT. 300 miles is what I get in my Cavalier now — so its not a deal-breaker, but i would rather see 400. My road trips require frequent stops so 600 may be too much e — dual tanks would have been so COOL! oh well.
+5
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:31 am)Estimating measurements, of course, the tank in the photo looks like it is 36″x8″x6″. That’s 1728 cubic inches, about 7.5 gallons.
We’ll just have to wait and see.
+11
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:35 am)I also agree. If the wife is with me, we stop every 2 hours or about 100 miles, so, 300 is three stops. I can basically fill up every time if needed.
The Volt is right in the sweet spot for my commute and travel options. It’s like the thing was designed specifically for my needs!
More important to me are:
- paint options (I think I like the Caddy White, but, would like to see the other options)
- SS options
- seating comfort
- head, hip room
- interior trim options (I like leather trim)
Gas tank size is very low on my list for almost every vehicle I have ever owned. For Volt, since most of my commute (pretty much all the time) I would be using electric mode, I would keep a couple gallons in the tank and save the weight.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:36 am)Off topic, I know, but… These silly, foolish, ignorant DC yuppies get a test drive with Tony Posawatz????
His explantion of the Volt to them seems like Michelangelo trying to explain his sculpting technique to Pee Wee Herman.
Irrefutable proof of the fundamental injustice of this corrupt world
Here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HQh2xWkWk4&feature=youtube_gdata
Of all the devotees here who would walk a hundred miles for a test drive, these tools don’t even realize what they’re holding in their hands. GM you’re killin me.
Why don’t you give Nancy Hogan a test drive??? She of Frank Weber
grilling fame, seen here 2/3 of the way in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teR6kjk815A&feature=youtube_gdata
“Who ya foolin ?! Who’s he foolin ?!!!”
I know. I know. Education. Education. Education.
But… but…
/rant off
/ faux outrage off… Maybe not so faux
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:37 am)My contention is that the tank could be enlarged and partitioned into say 8 gal & 6 gal sections very inexpensively and a driver-actuated solenoid valve could open the spare section (ala the original VW Beetle). VW achieved this for less than the cost of a fuel gauge so they could omit the gauge (although their spare tank valve was manually operated).
PS: A portable tank would still require me to pull over and pour it into the car’s tank (and Ford’s Fusion Hybrid would still win the range war). And yes, decades of 12-16 hr meetings with no rest room breaks (and countless road trips from CA to FL & back with minimal stops) have given me a “high-pressure” steel-walled bladder (a fringe benefit of the space program
).
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:38 am)“How big is it? You decide.”
That’s what she said……..
LOL
Seriously though: Since i think the Volt will get around 50MPG depending on how aggressivley you drive i’m going with a 5.5 – 6 gallon tank.
+5
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:44 am)My guess the tank will be about 5.5 gallons.. so a fill up will cost you $33 when gas gets up to $6 a gallon.
After a year or so of that gas sitting in the tank it would be a good idea to pump it out into a standard 5 gallon gas container and use it in the lawnmower.. and only buy Top Tier gasoline so that it does not go stale while sitting unused in the Volt. The other alternative is just not to plug-in the Volt for a week or so.. also I dont plan to change the oil in the engine too often, once every year or two will be plenty.
How does E85 hold up to long term storage?..
Yes, the arabs will be pounding sand.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:46 am)Have you considered one of those urine collecting devices as used by NASA in the space suits?
I think MANY people will have to deal with the stale gas problem.. so even a 5 gallon tank in the Volt will be a hassle to deal with.. I bet GM designs an automatic system to determine when was the last time you opened up the gas filler and runs the GENSET accordingly to use up the old gas.. otherwise you will have used Volts in the market with 10 year old gasoline and the resulting nightmares.
-2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:48 am)Yet another thing to fix in generation two. More rear seat headroom and leg room, larger fuel tank, higher energy density battery. GCUAPO
+9
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:49 am)“GM has not announced the production Volt’s miles per gallon
in charge sustaining mode, though the evidence suggests it will be somewhere between 30 and 50 MPG.”
Regardless of the tanks size I’ll only have 2 or 3 gallons of GAS in it most of the time, unless I’m planning a long trip.
I do hope it’s more like 40-50 MPG in CSM.
30 MPG is not acceptable.
NPNS!
+6
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:56 am)Since I live only 7 miles from work I will be leaving mine with less than a couple of gallons almost all of the time. Since I travel long distances quite frequently during the summer (lower and upper Michigan and Canada) I will fill up only for those trips.
It had better get about 40-50 in charge sustaining mode. All its doing is turning a generator so it should be able to be tweaked to sip gas not gulp it. 30 mpg in CSM is not an acceptable number it seems to me.
I can’t wait to pretty much drive gas free.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:59 am)I believe it is a weight and stale gas issue.. we know GM is not using power adjustable seats in the Volt to save weight, so obviously they are worried about every pound.
+13
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:59 am)2009 Aveo – 12 gallon fuel tank
2011/2012 Spark – 9.2 gallon fuel tank
/just saying
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:00 am)It just seems wrong to me that all that gasoline is so close to all that lithium… though I suppose it’s not inherently dangerous.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:08 am)True, though stopping on interstates at rest areas is different from going to gas stations in unknown neighborhoods. And, for a while it was a point to brag about
+6
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:14 am)I know some people want a 12 gallon tank, but not me. I’ll be pluging mine in every night and doing 90% of my driving on electric (like most people, I suspect). In that scenario, the benefit of hauling around 12 gallons of gas seems pretty trivial to me. The only reason I can think of is that it would allow me to go to the gas station 5 times a year instead of 10… not a big deal to me.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:17 am)These numbers have been posted here many times.
The 44% gasoline can be addressed with Electric cars that have the potential to get rid of 99% of that 44%. It will take 15 years but if all cars, SUVs light trucks were either BEV or EREV with E85. So I think that needs to be the goal.
The 15% fuel oil is also easily replaced if we would make it a priority.
The 17% for Diesel could also be at least cut in half in 15 years if we made it a priority. Many ways to do this, CNG is one. Also we could do a lot more to use Trains to move the Trailers and have the Tractors used more in the cities instead of cross country pulling.
The 19% other can be addressed by the market place pursuing other options based on cost.
The 5% jet fuel and what the military uses can be reduced by us not having to protect the oil lanes anymore and stationing our troops more at home (which not only saves money but keeps money in our economy).
All of the things above create jobs, and keep money in our economy instead of going overseas. Don’t know why these items aren’t #1 on all politicians priority lists.
+4
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:32 am)My Guess? 8 gal. But I just don’t see this as a big deal. I also think the 8 gal. will be enough for well over 300 mile range.
Around 1970 my dad had a PU that had 2 saddle tanks and a seat tank total about 60 gal. He would try to drive 600 miles without stopping. LOL Those were good times. ;>)
Me I stop half way on a 150 mile trip. No good reason just because I want to.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:37 am)I’m hoping for same size tank but more efficient generator for Gen2.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:37 am)I’m with you on this……100%
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:38 am)Not sure how big everyone’s bladder is, but a 300 mile trip capacity is just fine for me.
+4
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:39 am)Hi Tom,
Many people still seem to feel that EVs and solar power will eliminate foreign oil, so I feel the need to repeat myself.
My main point is that we should get real numbers and see what it takes to truly become energy independent, which is what you and I have done.
The solutions you mention above (EVs/EREVs, E85, CNG, etc.) are all valid. And as you mention, they would create jobs, and keep money in our economy instead of going overseas.
None of this is impossible. We just have to:
1) imagine viable solutions.
2) and then actually do it.
The Volt is a perfect example of this. Let’s hope there are more…
+13
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:49 am)For what it’s worth
40 miles Elec. + ~ 320 miles Gas. = 360 miles…. not great, but good enough. You can take a 680 mile trip with one stop what more do you need.?
30 mpg….NOT good
35 mpg….borderline. I think this would hurt GM in marketing, press and competitors would pounce. Ford Fusion is 41 mpg so you have to ask yourself is 40 miles of electric worth giving up 6 mpg..
40 mpg…Good Enough
45 mpg…Rock Solid
50 mpg…Home Run
Just my 2 cents.
+13
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:51 am)GM knows exactly how large the fuel tank is. To assume otherwise is crazy this late in the game. It is obvious that GM is keeping the tank volume vague to make it more difficult for people to back-calculate the mpg in gasoline mode if given other related data.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:54 am)Off Topic:
The Morning News just reported that the mighty 2010 Prius has just been recalled due to “brake issues” where the vehicle may have a problem stopping…?!!!!
“Begone Ye Trolls! Thy time has passed!”
+4
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:56 am)Its not really a bladder issue (unless the gas tank is a bladder design)….
The issue is that life is busy for many and stopping for gas is a chore and in many cases, is inconvinient. Of course its not the end of the world but I do enjoy a large gas tank on both of my vehicles. I have had cars that needed gas more than once per week and I found this to be a pain. WIth my Van, I can leave for Vacation in Ocean City, MD, spend a few days, and come home without stopping for gas. As I am driving home I often think that I never had to stop for gas and/or pay high prices at the beach.
Range is a real benefit.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:59 am)Dave G: I was going to quote just one of your posts, but they all are great.
If you keep up the wisdom you impart on this site, we might see some change for the better in this country!
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:00 am)My thoughts exactly! I can do about 300 Miles and then I need to use the Room. So on long trips it’s 1 stop with 2 purposes.
+5
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:00 am)Not good enough, my friend.
We must make them sob like little girls!
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:01 am)300 Miles on a tank is fine with me. Wondering what the fast charge time will actually be. There is a charge station about 30 miles from me. When I head north or south on I-75 I can recharge at the charge station for another 40 miles of charge. Drive on gas for 300 miles. Then get gas and a recharge at one of the charge stations or at a hotel.
I’m sure by 2011 there will be a lot more charge stations. Maybe the 2012 Volt will have a 100 mile range battery. For a 400 mile range. Maybe by 2016 the Volt will go BEV with a 600 mile range! By then charge stations should be almost everywhere.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:02 am)How the mighty have fallen
GO US GO VOLT
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:03 am)So, I just read the article; thanx for that Genfixer.
I’m not gonna go on Toyota bashing since the site is not about auto-quality but about VOLT. All I can hope is that GM has done enough testing so that when the VOLT gets released, they will not have sticky accelerator/under-responsive brake issues that is affecting Toyota. The VOLT cannot afford to have its image tarnished.
GM, please remember that you wanted the VOLT to represent a cool tech-savy GM…you wanted an iCar. Please get this right!
+7
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:04 am)My daily commute is 47 miles each way, so I defiantly fall outside the 80% under 40 miles driven per day. With that said, I have already discussed and been approved by my boss to plug in when I get to the office. The thought of only using between 14-20 miles a day of fuel is a liberating feeling, after five years of fuel purchases.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:05 am)GM is really being short sighted by sizing the gas tank to provide a 300 mi gas range. If they have the capability to provide for a longer range, what’s the problem? Just do it!
There are as many different reasons for having a larger gas tank as there are those willing to offer an opinion. In my case, it is “range anxiety”. We’ve always been able to fill the gas tank at home in SW Florida and then drive to southern Georgia (where the gas is always cheaper) before having to fill up again. I won’t be able to do that with the Volt and that fact will be on my mind everytime we take off on an extended trip.
Sizing the gas tank has nothing at all to do with stopping for a potty break or whatever as some would suggest. It is simply a matter of how often it is necessary to stop for gas and where one chooses to do that.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:08 am)http://www.detnews.com/article/20100203/AUTO01/2030376/1148/rss25
more on Toyota’s prius brake issue
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:13 am)How do you use less gas? By plugging in more often. If you have a gas tank that is smaller and gives you 300 miles or a tank that gives you 600 miles, there is no difference. In one case you are just putting more gas into the tank because it is larger. That only results in using more gasoline.
The Volt will be perfect for my wife and I; we would be able to travel to visit relatives in other cities with only the one fill-up. On longer trips we would stop to rest or eat and hopefully be able to charge the batteries at the highway rest stop or restaurant.
The shorter range would only effect drivers who do the long haul. I wonder what the statistics are on the percentage of drivers who travel around 340 miles from point of departure to destination? I venture a guess that it leaves a small percentage of drivers that would not be in favor of owning a Volt.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:20 am)What are those components labeled C17H5? The orange battery pack has the same number shown!?!
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:29 am)Dave G; I wasn’t correcting you I was agreeing with you. I think we can’t repeat it enough, as new folks drop in. We need to raise the awareness, because politicians stumble along worrying about keeping the folks that give them money happy, up until the masses rise up and make them address other issues.
And I think changing our economy so we create all our own energy instead of importing it is something that is of paramount importance because of our shortage of jobs.
Of course you point out renewable energy isn’t needed to replace imported oil, but it does need to be a part of what we are doing now, otherwise in 20 years we’ll gave switch everything to natural gas and when those prices rise we’ll be in trouble again.
So truly Nuclear, Wind and other renewables are also very important to the future of our economy (we can’t assume NG prices will stay cheap forever).
To me the above things are the easy things that should be able to be done. There are many other more difficult things our goverment needs to figure out, and I have little confidence they can do that.
But opening the floodgates for EREV/BEVS AND nuclear and renewable energy should be within their grasp to deliver.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:30 am)So, a Volt with a 300 mi gas range works well for you and family. That’s great! I’m very happy it will suit your needs. But, what about the rest of us who have different situations? Some of us have to drive 1000 or more miles to visit relatives.
Everyone stops to rest and eat while on an extended trip. It is wishful thinking that you’ll be able to recharge the Volt battery during those stops. You might have that capability at some future date, but not right now. It will take time for all of that to develop.
The same goes for “plugging in” during overnight stays. That too will come one day, but that capability will be few and far between in the 2010-2012 time frame.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:31 am)Really, who NEEDS 600 miles range per tank? I don’t know anybody who can go that far non-stop. Unless they wear a diaper. I’m an experienced long-range motorcycle rider (1500 miles in 24 hours), and I welcome fuel stops for the break they give when traveling with bike or car.
If you’re city-folk, and use the Volt as a commuter, and plug it in every night, 300-mile range is a moot point. If you’re country-folk (like me), and realistic about it, 300 miles per tank is plenty.
Claiming a 600-mile range would be nothing more than a marketing tool. See present GMC and Ford commercials.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:31 am)300 miles is plenty, you still have to stop and stretch you legs, use the toilet, and grab a sandwich.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:37 am)Here is a partial list of the headlines for the Toyota mess. I wonder if they will ever recover from this. I can’t think of a bigger PR disaster for a major auto maker:
Toyota’s reputation takes a hit
Toyota sales off 16% after recalls
Toyota hit by Prius brake complaints
Toyota denies ignoring warnings, reveals pedal fixes
Toyota executive: Pedal fix too late to prevent backlash
NHTSA considers imposing civil penalty over Toyota recalls
U.S. raised Toyota gas pedal issue in ’07
Toyota hopes media blitz will reassure customers
Toyota to begin sticky pedal fix, restart production next week
Lentz says Toyota cars are safe on ‘Today’ show
Toyota defends handling of ‘very complex’ issue
Inaba to testify at Toyota hearing Feb. 10
Pedal complaints reach recalled Vibes
Toyota faces scrutiny on recall handling
Toyota to disclose solution to sticking pedals Monday
Toyota shares plunge but may go lower still
Toyota dealers face a public fretting about recalls
Toyota seeks quick fix for pedal recall
Ford posts $2.7B annual profit as Toyota struggles with quality
Toyota finds fix for gas pedals; will alert customers next week
Toyota to recall 8 models, up to 1.8M vehicles in Europe
Second House committee schedules hearing on Toyota recalls
Chrysler joins Hyundai in matching incentives for Toyota owners
Consumer Reports suspends ‘recommended’ ratings on recalled Toyotas
Toyota dealers, customers wonder what happens next
Embattled Toyota supplier CTS also works with Honda, others
GM makes bid for Toyota customers
Recall may dull Toyota’s image, resale values
Toyota expands recall to 1.1M
Toyota recall extends to China
Autos-Toyota
From The Detroit News: http://www.detnews.com/article/20100203/AUTO01/2030324/1148/rss25/Feds-weigh-civil-case-over-gas-pedal-recall#ixzz0eUG3z32A
And now I’m seeing that the venerable Prius is involved in it’s own PR flap, with the brakes failing on numerous cars.
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100203/AUTO01/2030394/LaHood–U.S.-looking-at-Prius-brakes
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:38 am)I am not quite sure why it would be a let down and not a wow factor anymore. You still get 40 miles AER and that is the important part. The gas miles is not important. There are plenty of gas stations around if you need gas.
Tom C
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:41 am)IMO 300 miles is plenty of range. For those folks who want bigger gas tanks so they can take longer trips without filling up as often they might want to consider buying a Cruise or Prius for good mileage without the big price tag. I thought the goal is to get off foreign oil not increase gas tank size for long driving trips. I’m sticking with my 38 mpg in cs mode guess.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:45 am)In a regular car, the gas tank is all you have to determine range. In the Volt, you have your 8 gallons (or so) of gas + battery that you charge every day.
So your range is really (7 * 40 miles) + 300 = 580 miles and if it so happens that you need less than 40 miles a day, your gas will become stale after a while. Why do you need to spoil more than 8 gallons ?
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:48 am)On my 2010 Fusion Hybrid…..
Gas Tank… 66 L. = 14.5 Gallons US or 17.4 Canadian Gallons
Central Alberta Canada Driving conditions….
Temp. -5 C to -25 C (19 F to – 15 F) on average with snow and Ice conditions
3 – 6 Minute warmups ( I like to be warm heading out )
Average milage for January 7.0 L/100 KMS 33.6 MPG US or 40.3 MPG Canadian.
When I fill up… the indicator on the instrument cluster tells me I have 897 – 926 KMS to empty… (around 550 Miles US) And it goes higher in the summer.
Very acceptable for a mid size car that seats 5 …
I will be buying a Volt when they get here… but am keeping the Ford for the long distance trips..
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:49 am)I’d be curious to know what the “average” range is for most cars currently being sold? I know we have 4 and the max any of them will go between fillups is ~400. The newest has a 350 range if I push it. I’m one of those old foggies that after about 2-3 hours in the car my knees and back are getting stiff and need to stop anyway so 300-350 mile range works fine.
+7
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:51 am)My last full gasser pickup truck had a real world range of 200 miles. No big deal.
This thread reads like a tempest in a teapot.
Take a chill pill, everyone, go outside for a minute, and take a 200 mile walk. Then come back and post how large you think that range is.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:52 am)For any trip longer than 300 miles, the limiting factor is not my gas tank volume, but my bladder volume. For all you people who want a 600 mile range without stopping, I have a simple question: Do you wear diapers? That’s rhetorical, by the way; if the answer is “yes” you don’t have to answer in a public forum…
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:53 am)Only 340 miles of gasoline range?
Well, there goes the Volt’s chances in the Daytona 500.
Dang!
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:54 am)The point is that a little more gas tank is cheap to add to the car and the range is a benefit for some.
300 mile range stinks in my mind.
They claim 300.. OK
Now consider actual real world range is about 225-250 based on my cars range vs. real world experience.
No consider that I never drain the tank to zero. I start thinking about filling up with about 100 miles of range left. Who can trust the computer 100% anyway.
So, the way I see it, a claimed 300 mile range means I need to start thinking about gas after driving about 125-150 miles.
This will be a pain and it could easily be remedied by adding some more volume to the tank. That is the point of some of our concerns.
For those who don’t want 12 gallons of gas, filler up with 4 and you are good to go. As for me, I would like the 12 gallon tank.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:55 am)Sounds like “fuzzy” math to me!
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:56 am)Reading between the lines:
-GM said that the Volt is primarily an EV
-Most customers wont use a drop of gas on a daily basis.
-The tank is under 10 gal + the car will go 300+ miles (on CS mode)
My guess: 310 miles with a 9 gal tank= 34 MPG
Here’s how I look at it. People who buy high performance tires do so for the advantages they provide. Those same people generally don’t upgrade their SPARE tire because how often will they use it? Is it worth the added cost for the 1 day use every few years when you get a flat?
That’s what GM has done w/the Volt. It’s a EV 1st. MOST of the time it will be electric for MOST people. For the few times a year that you need CS mode it will go only so far between fill-ups and only so efficiently.
Yes I’m sure they could put a 15 gal tank and get 55 MPG but that wasn’t the focus. It’s an EV with a spare tire.
You cant please everyone…
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:56 am)I agree that the plug-in electric capability is still a WOW. I was writing only about the range. The original range, 640 or so, was another WOW. In the case of the Volt concept the remarkable range had special attractiveness because it was such a great comeback to with people’s (incorrect) initial bias, which was that the Volt would have to stop after 40 miles.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:58 am)I would have preferred a larger gas tank, but 300 miles is OK. It’s large enough not to be too serious an inconvenience on a road trip.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:01 am)Most of us will not need more than 8 gallons, or 6 or maybe even 2 gallons, most of the time. But the high projected range of the concept was a point of pride. On some occasions and for some people it would have had substantial value.
+5
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:02 am)Hey David, let me introduce myself —I can easily go 600 miles between stops & have done it many times on extended trips. Regarding marketing, you’re right that Ford, GMC & other makes often boast of 600 mile ranges in their advertising. Don’t forget that rest stops along interstates are a great place to pull off, stretch your legs & relieve yourself without gassing up —and they’re frequently cleaner, safer & closer to nature than gas stations.
Finally, consider that GM will be promoting freedom from range anxiety while, if the Volt’s range is only 300 mi, offering a shorter overall range than many of the forthcoming 2011 ICE cars similar in size but with ranges often in excess of 400-500 mi. Yes, an 8 gal tank partitioned to provide an optional 6 gals of spare capacity could remove any seeming contradiction between eliminating range anxiety while offering only a fairly short overall range for its size class. IOW, an option for (say) 6 gals of spare tank capacity would give the Volt a significant marketing advantage at a very minimal cost!
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:03 am)I was talking about your ‘weekly’ range. In my mind, with my current car, I have a range of approx. 600 km (around 375 miles) for a week and then I have to refill the tank.
With the Volt, it means that I have to have gas for approx. 95 miles a week. I will need to refill a smaller tank every 2 weeks+ or so.
It works for me.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:03 am)The more common parts that the Volt can use for non-cosmetic parts…the better…IMHO. The Volt will have too many parts that are unique already.
I’m all for reducing the need for the ICE range extender. However if “stale gas” issues arise, the customer experience will dimish. Most drivers have a low tolerance for such things. If it was not true, more people would be driving a pure EV.
A major win for GM Marketing would be making the customer experience for EREV (Volt) drivers more positive than ICE drivers. How would you make plugging in at home every night more enjoyable? Maybe the Volt could automatically post a “that a boy” message to driver’s Facebook profile?
Something like…
- plugged in his/her Volt for first time…send him a “pat on the back”.
- has saved X gallons this week by plugging in his/her Volt.
- has made plugging in a habit. Ask him/her how you can too.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:06 am)I would. I would love 600 miles range. Not all of us are willing to use the car’s entire range. While on a road trip, I rarely drive more than 200 miles straight through. But we make other stops along the way. (Usually tourist stuff.) So the gas station would be an added stop.
Not having the extra range isn’t a deal breaker. But it would have been really really nice.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:06 am)300 mile range will work just fine.
At least for us. We make some 800-900 mile trips but almost always stop for a break, walk around, buy a snack etc. That’s about every 200 miles and a 300 mile range would give a good cushion.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:08 am)I get your point. But on the other hand, most people will consider it less painful to fill a smaller tank more often than to fill a larger tank less frequently. It’s just the way people are.
Also, more fuel means more weight to carry around for the battery. Not good to reach the promised 40 miles AER.
Engineering is always about compromises.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:10 am)The outcome of this debate was already decided 13 years ago.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:13 am)What do you mean ?
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:15 am)When the gas gauge in my truck reads 1/4 or less I use the Arco outdoor cash-pay kiosk. I nearly always insert a twenty. Doesn’t matter if I’m bouncing off of empty or indicate 3/8 full.
$20 / $2.99 = 6.7 Gallons
=D~
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:36 am)I would think that after someone actually owned the volt for a year, the gas milage wouldn’t be nearly as important as the reliability and efficiency of the EV mode.
For example would you rather average 28 AER and 50mpg or
40 AER and 30 MPG.
Further more for folks that actually drive more than 40 miles a day, the availability to get a charge at work, home or elsewhere during the day is also more important than the actual gas miles.
The whole point is to maximize AER. There aren’t a whole lot of folks that drive many trips over 100 miles in a day. And many of these may be able to charge during the day at work and get 80 miles AER.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:41 am)Every design involves balancing constraints. Given human bladder size and speed limits I think I vote for a 300 mile range and a faster better handling car with more trunk space. If you’ve got to have more try a gas can.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:42 am)That sounds reasonable to me. For some the point of a Volt is to go to gas stations less often or to pass by higher priced gas stations until reasonable priced gas is available. That is convenient.
For me the purpose of the Volt is embodied in saving plastic. The type of plastic used during desert conflicts to recover fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines. Laying my usual kidding and joking aside, the less zipping up of these large plastic bags the better I feel. So as Statik pointed out, if the 2009 Aveo – had 12 gallon fuel tank 2011/2012 Spark – has a 9.2 gallon fuel tank and 2011 Volt has a 6 gallon tank, it may not be the worlds most convenient in capacity, but too me, just IMO, it indicates the direction of progress in every way.
I agree stopping once to make a trip that is under 500 to 600 miles can seem inconvenient. But a single car cannot fit every conceivable need. And the point of the Volt for some, is not that particular convenience at all.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:43 am)#13
“From your lips to God’s ear.” +1
-2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:44 am)GM must take a very hard look at what it promised, what it can do, and what its doing. A less than 10 gal. tank would offend anyone’s intelligence. First off, the weight of an 8 gal. tank vs. 12 gal. empty/full compared to the weight of the vehicle is considerably less than 1%. Size wise we’re talking units of inches.
Now we all know concept cars are just that – a concept. That’s not the case here. GM can well fit a larger tank than 8 gal. and that’s the point. All this stuff that gave American mfgs. a bad name – brand limitations and hedge technology; a Chevy must not encroach Caddy’s turf … and what goes into Caddy this year goes into Chevy next year. Last week Lyle reported Whitacre offered the board a billion buckeroos to accelerate production. How about a few bucks to do what was set out to do to start with.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:45 am)I mean, smart companies do not compete directly, they find their own market segments and play their own game. That includes specifications.
The easiest way to avoid frequent trips to the gas station with a Volt is to not use it much in CS mode, not to have a ginormous gas tank that sacrifices interior room.
hmmmm, once again the biggest factor, in gas station frequency this time, is driver behavior and vehicle use, which are completely controlled by the driver.
The reason that the Volt is unique is that it partially meets a previously unmet market demand, demonstrated by the current purchase rate of vehicles being less than their wear out rate.
I think the engineering is pretty much done at this point. It’s time to get the Volt on the road and start listening to consumer feedback for variants on gen IV, such as:
“I want less interior space and a heavier, same sized vehicle ” (bigger gas tank and/or power pack)
“I want worse overall MPG” (smaller buffer power pack for lower price)
BTW, I’m in that latter group. I’m less concerned about overall MPG than about getting the highest performance all electric drive (yes, that includes ER-EVs like the Volt), for the performance and luxury that only all electric drive provides, at the lowest price. In normal use, that’ll give you decent overall MPG automatically anyway.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:51 am)Why does everyone equate the range of 1 tank of gas to just 1 trip?
When I fill up my tank, I know the range before my next fill up will be from “this payday” to next payday”.
Now, with the VOLT, the range will be from “this payday” until “Dang – I forgot to plug the thing in for 2 whole weeks ‘cuz I’m brain dead.”
I suppose that could happen…. NOT !
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:56 am)Since the overall MPG in Volts in normal use (80% less than 40 miles on a daily basis) will be way, way higher than 50 MPG, it’s outta the park and then some. In an EV of any type, MPG is a useless metric and getting more useless all the time.
Any engineer worth their salt would be talking kWh (or joules) / mile, anyway, which varies wildly depending mostly on DRIVER BEHAVIOR.
I’ll repeat myself – CS mode appears to be the most important and least interesting part of the Volt.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:57 am)I refuse to stay overnight at a place where I cannot plug in. Afterall, I do have to get my daily fix of GM-Volt.com
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:57 am)The point is that a little more gas tank is cheap to add to the car and the range is a benefit for some.
300 mile range stinks in my mind.
They claim 300.. OK
Now consider actual real world range is about 225-250 based on my cars range vs. real world experience.
No consider that I never drain the tank to zero. I start thinking about filling up with about 100 miles of range left. Who can trust the computer 100% anyway.
So, the way I see it, a claimed 300 mile range means I need to start thinking about gas after driving about 125-150 miles.
This will be a pain and it could easily be remedied by adding some more volume to the tank. That is the point of some of our concerns.
For those who don’t want 12 gallons of gas, filler up with 4 and you are good to go. As for me, I would like the 12 gallon tank.
(Quote)
I get what you are saying Nuclear Boy, however the Volt can’t please everyone for every concern. A bigger tank would probably mean less storage space which would upset probably more people than people who want more range capability. I think space is the trade off factor in this case. See also Big Bird’s post at 76 I agree with it and point out that the Volt was never meant to be a long range vehicle. Maybe one of the next versions of Volttech might suit your needs better. BTW I usually agree with 99% of what you post.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:57 am)Let’s see Toys run off on their own and now they can’t stop. Your right that is about as bad as it can get.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:02 pm)You are quite wrong about solar power, IMHO. By following T. Boone Picken’s Plan of using wind power to replace the 20% of NG that is used to produce electricity, we can use CNG to power our produce transportation fleets. Large Solar plants like the one China is building will provide addition power. In the short term building wind turbines and solar arrays will provide needed electricity while new nuclear plants are being constructed.
Solar arrays on home roofs adds to this mix, and is becoming very cost effective. Home construction companies are now employing energy saving features and an option including the solar arrays. What makes sense to me with regard to solar power is the construction of new homes and conversion of older homes with PV panels on the roof. This will eventually alleviate the problem of potential overload of the grid from millions of electric vehicles on the road. Home owners will be able to store the energy in state of art battery packs that can be used to recharge the Volt or other EVs during the night, or during the day with power directly from the PV system. This would help eliminate some of the problems utilities must solve to empower wide use of EV technology
The only time, a home owner would need power off of the grid would be when the sun is unable to provide the amount of electricity that is needed. With wide use of roof mounted PV systems, home owners wouldn’t have to worry so much about black or brown outs. If I were buying a new home, this would certainly be one of the options I would be thinking about.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:03 pm)????
Yes, it’s the part that’s been done for the last 100 years and it seems to be the only thing any one wants to talk about. It’s like the colleague that drops by your house and never leaves, and all he wants to talk about is work, on your day off.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:09 pm)I have lost count of how many times we have debated this issue. I DON’T CARE HOW BIG THE GAS TANK IS! Small is beautiful. Weight is the enemy. “Simplicate and add lightness.”
Sorry, but I have this recurring thought. Remember the suggested genset trailer “range extender” for BEV’s? How about a trailer mounted auxiliary gas tank, LOL.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:11 pm)#3
A fair comment IMHO. I have seen a lot worse pass with no “-1s”. Some of them from me, LOL. +1
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:12 pm)The Volt’s engine is designed for gasoline, E85, or any mixture in between.
Another important topic that we haven’t covered is whether the 300 mile range is with gasoline or E85. E85 only has about 76% of the energy content of gasoline. So does this mean if you use E85 the range in CS mode is reduced from 300 to 230 miles?
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:16 pm)That sounds very heavy and inefficient. How about we get better mileage by tossing those bulky batteries. That genset seems kinda heavy too. Don’t need much regen on a 1000 mile trip, seems like a great way to lighten up. Perfect high mileage vehicle for those long trips. Great idea Noel!!
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:20 pm)Or for those who commute 80 miles per day, but can’t plug in at work, how about a trailer mounted spare battery pack.
Then there’s the trailer mounted people carrier for families with more than 4. We could go wild with this trailer thing, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the Volt specifically prohibits trailers (too much added stress on the frame/transmission).
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:22 pm)Gas tank shmas tank. No matter the size I will never bring it to full. As it is now I never “Fill” my tank. If it’s a 6 gal tank I will have 3 gals in it. If it’s a 2 gal tank, I will have 1 gal in it.
Big whooptie dooodooo.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:28 pm)Good point. Where’s the diesel version? That’ll extend range without a bigger gas tank.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:29 pm)All this trailer talk makes me feel at home.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:30 pm)When folks are buying a car, are they more interested in Range or mpg? I think that the mpg in CS mode will need to be fairly impressive or it will be eclipsed by other hybrid (or non-hybrid) cars’ mpg in the minds of the man on the street buyer. Ads are built around mpg figures far more than range per tankful. It just makes more sense for the Volt to be able to go 50 mpg in CS mode and have a small tank, than to have consumers look at a lower mpg rating compared to other vehicles.
It’s always about trade-offs, and in this case it’s far better in my mind to have a small tank and impressive mpg, as opposed to throwing in a big tank (and it’s extra weight) to improve range. The Volt is aimed at the peak in the bell-shaped curve of the population – average drivers. Most average drivers needs are going to be handled remarkably well with the Volt. JMO.
And yes, I’m in the 120 mile bladder range group. Unfortunately, my knees are in the 100 mile range. (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’* * * Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:37 pm)I, like many here would prefer a larger tank and longer range. BUT, this would only be important to me about 4-5 times a year when I visit family in N.Y. state or going to the beach. I usually stop at rest stops along the interstate for nature breaks rather than gas stations. On these rare long trips, I want to be able to watch for gas at lower prices and not be forces to pay what ever price because I don’t know how much furthur the car can go. With a 300 mile range I will have to start looking at about 250 miles.
Most of the time my tank would only be holding about 3-5 gallons of gas.
Bottom line, tank size is not a deal breaker for me.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:37 pm)I agree with you. It is wise to be conservative on something so technologically new. Most people will stop to take a break around the 300 mile mark just to refresh from a long drive. GM is limiting the amount of Volts sold the first year just in case the Volt had a major recall, it would be a lot less of a financial disaster. Look at what is happening to Toyota.
A bigger gas tank could be added later.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:43 pm)Part of the reason that I’m driving a Honda Civic Hybrid instead of a Cavalier or Cobalt is mpg. 30mpg/390 range with the Cavalier versus 39-56 mpg and up to 660 mile range with the HCHI (similar 13 gallon tanks). Instead of stopping at the gas station every three days, it’s now every four or five in my case. I’m guessing the Volt will do better than 50 mpg based on mpg numbers for the Prius and Honda Civic (1.3 and 1.5 litre engines). 300 mile CS range is a bit light. I think 450 would be a better number if feasible.
I think the Ford Fusion has a 17.5 gallon tank. I’d rather fill up the Volt at (hopefully) under $40.
I’m not a fan of SS/Z badged four door sedans. I think GM should have a different designation for sporty versions of sedans. 2-door Cavalier Z-24 was a nice car, 4-door…why?
-1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:48 pm)The gas engine eliminates range anxiety from an exhausted battery…….BUT… the 300 mile ICE range will give me anxiety about finding a gas station.
If it has a 300 mile range, I’m looking for fuel after about 150 miles, especially if I’m on unfamiliar roads.
I’d like to have a choice about where I stop instead of being forced to pull into some unsafe place with high prices, water in the gas, and bathrooms that haven’t been cleaned since the place was built.
More range would eliminate my range anxiety.
Leo
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:50 pm)I see a potential business opportunity.
(assuming the Volt has the space under the hatch floor.)
Develop a NASCAR like fuel cell that can be bolted into the space where the spare tire is normally kept. You might be able to add another 6 gallons.
Sell it as a kit on the internet as the ….. “Volt Tanks A-Lot”.
Yes, I’ll accept PayPal.
Flame shields … engaged.
-4
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:57 pm)Yeah, I like to dump in clean places myself.
Hate it when the TP roll looks like somebody pissed on it.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (12:59 pm)I don’t believe T. Boone Pickens plan will work.
Natural gas is an essential part of the fuel mix for electricity. It’s the only fuel that allows the burn rate to change very quickly. Power companies will continue to require natural gas to supply quick fluctuations in electrical demand.
To put it another way, natural gas is significantly more expensive than coal, so why would the utilities use it if they didn’t have to?
T. Boone Pickens plan is based on pie charts. It doesn’t take into account the issue of supplying quick fluctuations in electrical demand. In the end, the windmills that Pickens is funding will mostly replace coal, which isn’t a bad thing, but it has little to do with energy independence.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:05 pm)At the Detroit auto show I asked the Volt rep. about the gas tank. She said “the size has been set, but the useable volume is still subject to tweaking.” I wish I knew what that meant. But oh well, got to leave some things for speculation. Oh, the suspense…
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:10 pm)Gee, if the tank is 8 gal, 7 gal useable. Then pulling up to the filling station is under $20 at today’s gas prices. Not bad!
At a holiday party a GM engineer said that the guys who got to take the Volts home for the weekend were routinely getting 400 MPG.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:12 pm)What is it with you people and bladder control?
I can go 600 miles without stopping. That is only about 7-8 hours without stopping. I haven’t been able to do that so far because the car would run out of gas before then. But the point is I am not so old that I can’t sit in the car and do 80mph down the interstate for hours at a time.
Yes, I would like 600 miles from one fill up. I would not use it often, but when I need it, I know it is there. One fill up in between from CT to FL. The Ford Focus will kill this car on range. The Volt needs to be a winner all around, not just the first 40 miles.
Don’t get me wrong. I love the Volt. I really really want one.
But shooting for a 300 mile range in CS mode is like shooting someone in the foot. I will take the extra tank option if offered to me and those with bladder issues can stay with the one tank. This is a good compromise.
Think of the marketing. 40 miles on electric and another 600 miles on the range extender.
And why the he11 can’t this car fly above traffic jams?
This has been my 2¢
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:17 pm)Hi old man
Not a deal breaker for me either.
( Hope you all have survived the recent snow ok.)
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:24 pm)A lot of headlines; thank you.
. For sure a PR disaster. On the other hand there are, after all, a lot of Toyota cars out there giving good service to their owners day after day with no issues. It is hard to maintain any sense of balance during a media explosion.
+9
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:27 pm)Why are so many folks against a small tank? Who cares about tank size – you’ll only use the full tank in rare scenarios like long road trips. Even if you have a long commute – let’s say 80 miles round trip per day – you’re using 40 elec miles + 1 gallon of gas. So, in a 5-day work week, you’ll have driven 400 miles – used 5 gallons of gas and have a gallon left even if it’s only a 6 gallon tank. I suspect that driving 400 miles and having 1/6th a tank remaining is better than most vehicles out there.
Drop your daily round trip to 60 miles and do the math – that’s only 1/2 gallon per day. After 5 days, you’ve driven 300 miles and still have half a tank. If you drive less than 40 miles on the weekend, you can go 2 weeks on a “tank of gas” and have put 760 miles on the vehicle. That blows away almost every cars on the market today.
Why do people take the worst case scenario, in which they may find themselves doing once or twice per year, and poke at that? Who cares if you have to stop two extra times when you’re on a road trip if you’ve saved 20 stops during the rest of the year. Look at the whole picture folks.
Brian
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:27 pm)I gave you a +1 on this just because the minus ratings assigned to any post that isn’t complimentary to the Volt is irritating. Nothing wrong with your expressing your opinion.
On the other hand, I think GM is well advised to let the product develop naturally rather than trying to satisfy everyone’s perceived needs at the outset. To me complaining about the Volt’s range in CS mode is a bit like complaining about the capacity of the iPod when it was first introduced (what good is this thing if it can’t hold my ENTIRE music collection).
People are generally very poor at envisioning what they’ll need when they’ve never used a product before. The big mistake is that they assume that they’ll use the new product just like the old product which is being replaced, but that frequently turns out not to be the case. I don’t think I’d want to take the Volt on a long trip but that’s a guess. It may turn out that for many different reasons — HOV lanes or EV drive or whatever — I may find that I want to use it for this purpose. And some people like yourself who say they want a longer range may find that the extra weight and need to avoid stale gas outweighs the occasional need for a longer cruising range, especially since the EV recharges never require a trip to the gas station. Until the cars are in our hands it’s impossible to say.
As Tag says, GM should get the wheels on the road and then add features as needed rather than trying to draw the proverbial round circle out of the box.
-2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:41 pm)I just go in the back seat and pick it up when I stop.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:49 pm)It doesn’t really matter to me what size it is .
If it is what I want , I will buy it .
If it isn’t what I want I wont buy it regardless.
But , hey I am a Canadian.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (1:58 pm)Keep in mind that this is just Gen 1 Volt. No doubt, GM will be looking at customer feedback when redesigning its future versions.
For example, if the average feedback that GM is getting from its customers indicates that they would tend to prefer a 350 or 400 mile gas tank range instead of 300, then management may consider adopting a larger tank.
Similarly, I had read that GM will be looking at the feedback that it gets from its initial customers concerning the 40 miles of pure electric range. If customers say that they would have preferred to have 45 or 50 miles of pure electric range, then this might be a consideration in future designs as well.
Hopefully also, the ICE will become more fuel-efficient, say by adopting the Atkinson instead of Otto stroke etc., but that’s another matter which will also have to be left to future designs.
Best regards, George, Sudbury, Canada…go volt…
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:02 pm)So you don’t stop to GO in the back seat? Now THAT’S distracted driving! (g)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’* * * Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:06 pm)off subject…Given Toyota’s problems, there is more talk that the braking system problems are due to software….Does anyone know if the Volt’s braking system is also based on software or is it actual mechanical. Very important..thanks!
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:07 pm)Renewables and Nuclear have to do with cheap energy in the future (no fuel cost) and creating jobs now. So because of our economy it is a great time to move faster on these.
The importance of eliminating imported Oil – which we’ve gone over many times – is not talked about enough by our politicians. I keep wondering if this is because they are afraid to piss off the Saudis.
But we can reach this goal and everyone buying BEV/EREVs is a HUGE step along the way.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:15 pm)Actually leveling the electric load will reduce the importance of this issue.
And I believe it is a fact that Utilities could have dealt with this already but they didn’t want to because they could get by regulators the need for building more plants to meet peak demands, when all they needed to do was have smart meters so they could charge a night , day and peak rate.
That way people would already be running their dish washers and dryers late at night etc. And electric cars in 10 years will allow utilities to balance their load.
Also they already have proven that Wind Power can be forecasted 24 hours in advance because of weather models, enough for them to manage their supply and demand.
So wind easily can support over 20% of Grid power, probably could do 30-40%. We do need more Nuclear, and all the other renewables as it is always good not to put all your eggs in one basket.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:20 pm)#105
Well, if Rashiid’s commute is 100 miles uphill each way, maybe I can figure out how mine is downhill both ways. Let me get back to you on that.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:21 pm)#107
My sentiments exactly. +1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:22 pm)Wishful thinking? I think NOT. I read about EV enthusiasts that have converted their ICE to lead acid battery BEV’s that have charged their car while on the road. Charging Infrastructure is already under development in a number of locations across the nation. With public awareness, hotels, motels, restaurants, Malls, and other businesses will make 110V locations available to attract customers. Some utilities are already putting rapid chargers along the highway in sight of high tension transmission lines.By the year 2012, available infrastructure will be widespread. It won’t be a problem.
In addition, by 2012, battery technology will give us the option of greater AER, and ICE technology will give greater CS mpg for EVERs. If demand for an EREV with over 500 miles range is sufficient, then all auto EV manufacturers will have to up-size their vehicles to provide a large enough gas tank.
As for your problem with how far away your relatives, I can only recommend moving closer to them, or forcing them to move closer to you. Then again you can always rent a vehicle for the trip, or own two cars (one EV and one ICE).
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:22 pm)#106
Well, there’s always the roof rack option, also suggested here recently. Not too good for the aero though, LOL.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:23 pm)Umm, I choose not to. Just in case I actually do use the engine/generator I don’t want stale fuel. Nothing worse than running an engine on fuel and not maximizing the mpg.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:24 pm)#109
Glad to be of service, LOL. +1
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:26 pm)#110
Damn right! +1
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:39 pm)#122
I have to agree. +1
I’m as much of a GM loyalist as anybody here, but I personally don’t think that GM and others do themselves any credit by appearing to kick Toyota while they’re down. The rebates for Toyota owners are a prime example. Better to just keep on trying to develop better products and let Toyota’s problems speak for themselves, IMHO.
I think it was Rashiid who comment to the effect that he among us who is perfect should cast the first stone. God forbid, but we could be next, you know.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:41 pm)I agree with you 100% on this BUT you’re assuming you can do one or ther other. I doubt the engineers can do anything about the MPG in CS Mode at this point. That would probably take a different engine or a big design change, something along these lines. Changing the size of the gas tank on the other hand is easily doable. In fact Farrah is basically saying that the size of the gas tank is a tweak they can do fairly easily.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:50 pm)I’d like to agree with you but I’m not sure this is the case. The primary reason for this is that Toyota has been riding (coasting in my mind) on their reputation for quality and reliability for several years now. Since quality is in essence Toyota’s positioning statement, raising doubts about Toyota’s product quality might be effective in a way that raising doubts about another car maker, say Kia, would not be. Once those doubts are raised and people start actually looking at the reliability numbers they may draw different conclusions than they would have arrived at had they just relied on conventional wisdom.
This could be worth a point or two of market share, and since Toyota has a big market share that’s a lot of vehicles.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (2:52 pm)Well said! I think that GM can stand tall on their own without having to stand on top of Toyota’s problems.
What goes around, comes around, and Gm has a really neat new car about to be released!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’* * * Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:14 pm)A 300 mile range seems pretty typical in the US, although this metric, like everything else except fuel efficiency, saw a fair amount of bloat from 1970 to 2010. If you need more range, you can just fill your trunk and rear seats with gasoline, like the mini E did with its power pack to get a decent range, right?.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071220211509AAQnuJe
It turns out that gas station use frequency is determined more by gas tank size than MPG, so gas station use frequency is a pretty meaningless metric for efficiency or measuring gas usage by volume. That’s why it’s featured prominently in ads, which are usually almost completely informationless.
What’s important in the photo to this article is that the challeges are laid bare to all. Combine (bio) diesel fuel and electric drive for best energy density and efficiency and improve everything in between them. Voltec turbo TDI, anyone? Gen IV?
+4
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:20 pm)Hi DonC,
It’s just my personal belief that GM’s Volt history has been pretty good at under-promising and over- delivering. I think that they are sensitive to the CS mpg as a key to out-shining it’s competition – not “just” the facts that it has an AER of 40, no range-anxiety, and range of 300 or so. Because of this, I’m thinking that they already *have* the 50 mpg CS mode wrapped up. No changes necessary. Surely they have to keep *SOMETHING* amazing under cover prior to the spring EPA testing and the Volt’s release. As always, I’m just making my own assumptions. The neat part is that we no longer have 3 years to wait to find out!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’* * * Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:22 pm)300 gas-only range thus 340 total?
I think having a total ranger longer than most gas cars would be a great idea. It would put the bed the complaint about EVs having short range . . . he, this EV has range LONGER than gas cars!
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:24 pm)600 miles was CRAZY. Use that space for storage. Or an area for battery expansion would be cool but that is dreaming.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:32 pm)#141
This is clearly true, but the massive negative publicity noted above must surely be enough to get the public’s attention without GM having to give the impression of piling on.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:35 pm)#144
“From your lips to God’s ear” as well. +1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:38 pm)Between 300 to 350 mile range sounds completely reasonable to me. That’s roughly what my Jeep Grand Cherokee gets. I can understand people’s opinions wanting more range to beat the Fusion Hybrid and so forth, but in reality, if the Volt scores a 300 mile range or better, it should match-up fine in comparison to everything else.
For the customers who are adamant that they need a vehicle with longer range, I suppose a larger gas tank option would be really easy to accommodate for GM provided they have the space under the car, (which I think they do looking at the pictures).
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:38 pm)I’m totally with you, Rashiid! I often drive from NYC to my home near Orlando with 600 mi between stops. And have driven Orlando to LA & back with 600 mi between stops as well. I just can’t see why GM won’t at least offer an option for a spare 6 gals in the one tank. (It seems LauraM here agrees as well.)
BTW, I LOVE YOUR HUMOR: “And why the he11 can’t this car fly above traffic jams?”
Feb 3rd, 2010 (3:43 pm)+1 Agreed! I don’t think most Americans like “unnecessary roughness” penalties (sticking with the football metaphor).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’* * * Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (4:00 pm)Pickens Plan is everything about energy independence! Your comment is a bit ingenuous. Go back and study:
http://push.pickensplan.com/index.php
Note the heading: “Push.PickensPlan.com A Social Action Network fighting for Energy Independence” says it all. I’ll put it in simple terms so you can understand what Pickens Plan is:
One) Pickens supports all domestic sources of energy.
Two) The United States of America is blessed with the best
wind corridor from Western Texas up to North Dakota.
Three) Wind power can replace the natural gas used currently
to produce electricity.
Four) Trucks can easily be converted to CNG and end the use
of foreign oil for this transportation segment.
There are bills in the House of Representatives and the Senate which Pickens was influential in initiating before Congress that will make this transition possible. The Volt and other EVs will eventually eliminate the need for foreign oil to move our passenger vehicles but an equivalent program must exist for produce transportation if we are ever to end our addiction to foreign oil. What Pickens proposes is temporary: when battery technology or some other technology advances develop power trains for trucks, CNG will no longer be needed for this use. You can argue that natural gas is the only way to handle quick fluctuations in demand for electricity; I suggest that you look at:
http://www.altairnano.com/profiles/investor/fullpage.asp?f=1&BzID=546&to=cp&Nav=0&LangID=1&s=0&ID=11304
for a method to handle storage of renewable energy to solve power demand. Watch the entire video to see what technology exists today. There are other technologies that allow for storing alternate energy until demand spikes: these other methodologies are just as quick as NG driven turbans. We are no longer limited to what has been done in the past. The new technologies like the Volt are here today and only need to incorporated into the Smart Grid of the future.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (4:07 pm)nasaman,
*Clearly* you are one of those data points that reside wayyyy out in the tiny tail territory of the curve (hopefully on the plus side)(lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’* * * Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (4:20 pm)So, either the Volt has good CS-mode mpg and a small capacity tank, or it will have not-so-good CS-mode mpg and a larger capacity tank. At this moment, I don’t see anything new (except that 300 miles in CS-mode is a definite target). Whatever anyone thinks, we’ll have to wait and see.
I’m pulling for >= 50 mpg.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (4:22 pm)RE: Toyota woes:
I’ve heard a report on the radio today that Toyota has apparently not suffered any losses in sales over the recent recall news. If anything, more people are in the showrooms (hoping for a deal due to an expectation that sales volume will fall off), because they still trust the brand.
Remember: GM has to get it perfect just to get the time of day from the buying public, while Toyota can drop the ball badly and still get a pass. This is what GM, and all of us who are pulling for the Volt, are up against.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (4:34 pm)Sorry, LRGProVolt, -1 by accident.
(You were agreeing with the idea of grid storage, of all things).
+4
Feb 3rd, 2010 (4:43 pm)I know that Rashiid and nasaman are really upset about not being able to go 600 miles between fill ups, but I am not getting why it is such a big deal.
If I drive from home #1 in Youngstown, OH to home #2 in Boca Raton, FL, the distance is 1199 miles. So if the Volt’s range was 600 miles, I would fill up before I left, once on the road, and once when I arrived. If the Volt’s range was 300 miles, I would have to fill up two more times. If I didn’t have to pee, and didn’t want something to drink, we are talking about one minute to get off the Interstate, maybe three minutes to get 7 gallons of gas, and one minute to get back on the road. With two extra fill ups, that is a total of ten minutes added to the expected travel time of 19 HOURS!!! Unless you pack your car with food, you have to stop a few times to eat anyway! And if your schedule is that tight, I would suggest you try one of those new fangled jet type aereoplane thingeys, which for my example takes six hours door to door on a non stop flight…….
Aren’t we making more of a problem out of this than really will exist???
Now if it is an image thing, where you get to say “My car goes 600 miles between stops”, then that is a whole separate issue, which really has nothing to do with the practical driveability of the vehicle, IMHO.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (4:58 pm)#155
FWIW, I heard a report that Toyota sales in January were DOWN 16% year/year, while Ford was up something like 16% and GM 14%. Even so, I can only agree with your second paragraph.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:00 pm)“….if it is an image thing, where you get to say “My car goes 600 miles between stops”, then that is a whole separate issue, which really has nothing to do with the practical driveability of the vehicle, IMHO.”
You’re right! This ACTUALLY IS a major reason I want GM to provide a spare tank capacity on an optional basis …..not for MY image, but the VOLT’s! ……..I WANT THIS CAR TO SUCCEED!!!
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:01 pm)I have always been with the “use all sources of energy group” but had to do a balancing act just to get some to consider renewable energy sources. I must admit that I have learned a lot here especially about advances in the nuclear industry. I try to stay up on technological advances in nearly all areas. Just that my brain has near reached capacity.
This website is dang near perfect; I’ve been looking at the source code and overall co-ordination of a website features. If Lyle did the programming, he has been hiding another talent beyond journalism, or he has one terrific programmer contact. There are few things I can recommend to him. Great job Lyle!
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:08 pm)Actually, there is a story about this up on the MSN news site right now. For is actually up over 20%, GM up 14% and Toyota DOWN 16%.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:28 pm)============================
nasaman:
I usually agree with your opinions, but I think you are missing the point on what sets the Volt apart from every other vehicle on the road:
It is the Volt’s ability to go 40 miles AER that will make it succeed, not how far it goes between fill ups in CS mode….
If it is the size of the gas tank that makes or breaks the vehicle, why not make the range 1000 miles, and advertise that it goes further than any vehicle on the road???? But if you do that, then why plug in at all, since you can just dirve it like any old gasoline powered car and what is it doing to help energy independence?
I hope we can agree to disagree on this issue!
JMHO
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:30 pm)Remember that New Orleans is in the Super Bowl in large part because of late hits on Brett Favre. Those late hits drew a couple of flags but did take Favre out of his game. Beating up on a 40 year old guy might not be popular but it proved effective.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:31 pm)The Volt was never intended for people who take frequent long trips. If you are in that category, you’d be much better off, financially, buying a high mpg ICE car (with a large gas tank). I see no reason why GM should put a large gas tank in the Volt.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:35 pm)Toyota was quoted in this morning’s NY Times as saying that they had lost 20K sales since announcing the recall on January 21st.
Ford and GM increases are mostly due to fleet sales so their numbers are not that exciting.
Yearly sales are at a rate of 10.7M, which is better than last year but not as high as the industry was hoping for. At 13M the car companies can make some money.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:46 pm)Alright, sorry if I missed this…but
The biggest case for larger gas tank is not really to do with range as -time-.
Once the EV mode in exhausted, the car will only run so long in terms of miles or time.
I’ve been stuck in snowstorms, or with no electricity and cold weather. I’ve also been stuck on Freeways due to accidents… sometimes for hours at a time. I’ve also been in situations where every gas pump for miles around is not working and its dark outside.
I never ever drive in Winter with less than 2 gallons of gas in my tank. Ever.
A 6 gallon gas tank might give me 300 miles of Summer Range.. but in Winter, that range might be as small as 250 miles, and as I have discussed, really only 160 miles between fill-ups for me.
This will make Winter very unpleasant, lower AER will mean I will use more gas. Small gas tank means running back and forth to the gas station more often. Maybe even more than my current 16 gallon gas tank car.
GM needs to understand this… and ensure that even at the end of 250 miles or so of gasoline range, the car still has enough gas to provide heat/electrical power for headlamps etc for at least 1 hour.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:54 pm)Watch Toyota collapse in real time, no time delay photography necessary. Dagwood, did you bring this upon Toyota with your bad Karma? Yep, you definitely contributed to it in the Buddhist sense. Do the honorable thing, Dagwood.
+2
Feb 3rd, 2010 (5:58 pm)Toyota lost 20,000 sales last week since they halted production.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/03/business/03auto.html?scp=1&sq=toyota%20sales&st=cse
That said, I agree that GM and Ford should not have tried to take advantage of Toyota’s problems with a special promotion. They’ll benefit anyway.
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:07 pm)One of my pet peeves…unadjusted for selling days results. Some use them-some don’t. /everybody should
Here is the rundown if your interested (with respective market shares):
GM 146,315 +23.6 21.0
Toyota 98,796 -8.7 14.2
Ford 112,156 +34.8 16.1
Honda 67,479 +2.9 9.7
Chrysler 57,143 -0.4 8.2
Nissan 62,572 +25.8 9.0
Hyundai 30,503 +34.8 4.4
Kia 22,123 +8.5 3.2
BMW 15,410 +16.6 2.2
Subaru 15,611 +38.7 2.2
Volkswagen 18,019 +53.2 2.6
Mazda 15,694 +10.3 2.3
Mercedes 15,158 +57.4 2.2
Audi 6,510 +49.4 0.9
Volvo 4,128 +53.7 0.6
Mitsubishi 4,170 -4.5 0.6
Suzuki 1,843 -45.3 0.3
Porsche 1,786 +16.7 0.3
Overall Industry +15.5%ish (a couple I’m missing)
As DonC alluded to before, a good bulk of the improvements for Ford and GM were of fleet variety (low to no margin), which were non-existant last year at this time. For GM about 30% of their total light vehicles sold (146,000) were fleet.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:10 pm)I’ve also driven five hours without stopping. And if it were an emergency, I could go longer. And I can’t be the only one who has family occasions that are 200 miles each way. Range matters to me.
I’m willing to give it up in order to use less gasoline. But it would be nice if I could have my cake and eat it too….
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:11 pm)A month ago GM engineering said that the Volt is 75% complete. A week ago the CEO said something like, “Pretty much complete”.
If the gm volt dot com topic of tomorrow is, “Volt Gets 43 in CS, 360 Miles Total Range”. How would this aid or detract from the Volt or anything else? What is the point of secrecy just months before availability?
There are gasoline cars on the market that achieve 40 mpg. And diesel cars that get a little more. If the Volt CS is anywhere near 50mpg. It should be announced this week. 50 is a high enough number to cause a good percent of car buyers to wait for the Volt. If the number is 40. So what? Either a person wants a plug-in with all time electric drive. Or they don’t.
=D~
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:19 pm)#163
I saw it, and it was brutal. And effective. As an older person sometimes still trying to act like an athlete, it hurt me every time they knocked him down. Still, I’m not sure that it’s directly analogous to corporate image building/repair.
I wonder if they will be able to do the same thing to Peyton Manning? Or if the Colts will be able to do it to the NO Qback? Payback is a b***h, which also sort of relates to what I was saying, IMHO.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:20 pm)#167
Yeah, the lads have been a bit quiet the last few days, haven’t they? +1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:23 pm)#169
Thanks. Very informative, as always. +1 These numbers really are squishy aren’t they, depending on whose spin is at work?
Best regards.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:23 pm)I don’t believe this is true. How can wind supply unpredictable spikes in grid demand? Wind itself is unpredictable.
Maybe you missed my main point. Natural gas is the only fuel source that is capable of increasing or decreasing electrical power output quickly, and that’s necessary to fill the gaps when electrical demand spikes.
Think of it like this. Right now, coal and nuclear are like the bricks, and natural gas is like the mortar that fills in the cracks. If you take away the mortar, the wall becomes unstable, and falls down.
Similarly, our grid requires a certain number of natural gas power plants to fill the gaps when electrical demand spikes unexpectedly. Take these away, and the grid will no longer function properly.
Since natural gas power plants provide this critical function for the grid, I don’t see how you can replace them with wind turbines.
I suspect the power companies already know all this, but they’re playing along with Pickens because the subsidized windmills end up being cheaper than coal…
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:24 pm)#168
Thanks. +1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:29 pm)Did you read what the fix is? I read it and saw pics. But I still don’t getit.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:31 pm)#175
I thought that I had seen that Pickens had folded. Something to do with Texas not giving him the right of way to connect the wind farms to the existing grid or some such. Did anybody else hear that? Or maybe the subsidies just aren’t big enough yet.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:35 pm)#177
Me neither. Some kind of a little washer or shim they put on in 30 minutes according to what I heard on the radio today. Lotsa luck.
If it was one of my cars, I’d just spray a little WD-40 on the linkage and maybe add another return spring, LOL. But I guess that doesn’t work on “fly by wire”.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:36 pm)Look, if you want more than 300 miles between fill-ups, The Volt isn’t for you. Stop whining about making the Volt something that it cannot be.
If you want a 600 mile range, buy a Ford F-150 pickup truck with a spare 40 gallon auxilliary tank. You will be happy, since saving gas is obviously NOT your main concern. AND STOP YOUR CRYBABY WHINING !
Oh wait… I get it now. You signed up for the Volt, and now you’re getting cold feet, looking at that price tag in November. So now you are all looking for an excuse to weasle out of buying a Volt.
The tanks too big
The tanks too small
The CS mode isn’t good enough
I can’t charge it at work
I can’t charge it at the hotel on trips
It doesn’t come in diesel
Whaaaa, whaaaa, whaaaaaa – what a bunch of babies.
Just forget the Volt. Don’t buy it. Buy a used Surburban instead. I don’t care, just stop your snot-nosed, asinine, stupid comments.
Either say good things about the Volt, or don’t say anything at all. Go to USATODAY.com, and do your griping there, so we don’t have to read over 150 pieces of your garbage. Oh, and have a nice day.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (6:47 pm)That’s the one biggie I don’t get. The fix looks like a mechanical thing not electrical “fly by wire”.
Maybe it’s just me……lol
/jus tryin 2 understand.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:03 pm)Yep, I’ll say it again. Iron Man!
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:05 pm)I heard a report today that (they?) have changed directions and think it may be electronic in nature????????
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:07 pm)…not just wants to succeed.
It needs to succeed.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:11 pm)Jim I, it is not just the 40 miles AER that will make this car succeed.
It is the whole package. GM is sucking wind in perception. It needs a real winner here. The entire car needs to be a winner. Quality, range, reliability, cabin technology, etc. If the Ford Fusion can get 700 miles, what is the big deal with the Volt getting 600? I am happy to pay for the extra gas tank.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:12 pm)Electromagnetic interference I think.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:14 pm)Zen, a bit crabby today, huh?
So if we have a different opinion than you, you resort to whining and name calling. Interesting tact.
Stay well, my friend. Breathe in, Breathe out. All is good when we can all trade ideas and opinions here on gm-volt.com
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:18 pm)Your going to be sorry you asked, but here it is (credit to Roxer@TTAC):
http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/02/Tech-Instructions-Preliminary-Posting-BIL.pdf
/enjoy
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:22 pm)Conspiracy guy says:
What you’re seeing is the “machine” at work (the great big industrial machine that pays all your news sources hundreds of millions a year to advertise their products).
IMO the real fix (which isn’t actually a fix but an emergency override) is the one that they (the MSM and Toyota) don’t talk about — Toyota is updating the software for the ECU to include a brake override.
Toyota Recall: Debuts Brake Override Tech for Unintended Acceleration Prevention
http://rumors.automobilemag.com/6610472/news/toyota-recall-debuts-brake-override-tech-for-unintended-acceleration-prevention/index.html
/”Floor mats and metal shims” are simple things that the simple public can grasp (even though they weren’t really the problem (or much of the problem) to start with)). Pat Q. Public can then continue home (or to their Toyota showroom) with a warm feeling that everything has been taken care of now, nothing to worry about.
Conspiracy guy out.
/It’s more than a little odd how much detail the MSM will go into on the floor mat and metal shim fix, but they WON’T EVEN MENTION the brake override!
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:24 pm)Stopped by the local Chevy Caddy dealer this afternoon. Starting to feel like if you’re buying US cars (GM, Ford) you’re on the cutting edge. Just like the newspapers say, the salesman said they are selling a lot of Camaros and Equinoxes.
Said in the past week no inquiries abot the Volt but as a reflex said he could trade mine for an Equinox. Must be the easiest path they have to a sale because when I said I want a Volt he replied, “Oh yeah” as I left. Said they sold a Camaro SS yesterday.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:26 pm)I’m bummed. For our frequent Long Trip I was hoping to make it from Silicon Valley to Los Angeles without having to stop for GAS. Sure, I have to stop as soon as the little barbarians wake up. Generally somewhere around Harris Ranch, because the barbarians must be fed and/or get wiggly after a few hours. But I don’t want to get gas there because it’s about a buck more a gallon than at either end of the trip!
Google says it’s 344 miles, so there’s no way I could make it in a Volt (at the speed I drive
The other alternative is to make a stop at Lost Hills for gas but there’s only a couple fast food joints there (I don’t know why, but Lost Hills has really cheap gas). Or just buy a couple gallons to make it a little farther.
In any case, I think there’s a big difference between having to stop and having to stop for gas.
I guess can’t complain too much because my sports cars won’t go any farther than that, either. So, it’s not like that range would prevent you from driving anywhere. But I’ve been spoiled by the current family car which can easily make it there and still have hundreds more miles left over. It is rather nice.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:27 pm)#181
Check out jeffhre’s comment at #183 and Rashiid’s at #186. I too thought that it was mechanical. The fix I have heard about is mechanical. But there is a lot of buzz about “fly by wire” today, evidently some of it out of NHTSA. There is also a LOT more buzz about the 2010 Prius brakes. I’m pretty sure that the Prius is “fly by wire”. So maybe we and/or the news guys are getting the FBY Prius confused with the conventional Corolla/Camry/et al. I dunno, it really is confusing.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:29 pm)AND….
It smells like Cow sh|t all the time there. Ever be there right after the first rain on the piles? Don’t get me wrong, their food is top notch and the best beef I have tasted.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:38 pm)Pickens “folded” his Texas Windfarm because he was unable to aquire sufficent financing to build his transmission lines.
I have always found him to be somewhat… unbelievable.
I am fairly sure he was given preferential treatment in right-of-way for the Tranmission Lines.
The Texas Government approved in 2007/2008 timeframe a 5 Billion Dollar Fund specifically for lending for Tranmission lines to Wind/Solar projects.
I would be curious if he happens to run… say… a Natural Gas Pipeline where the Transmission Lines were supposed to go for the Wind Farm.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:42 pm)#191
Try Santa Nella. It’s usually about the same as Lost Hills, or maybe even a couple of cents cheaper. We can’t make it going north with the big trailer though. I ran out of gas trying last year on the way to Portland. Don’t tell my wife though, or she’ll laugh me out of town.
There is a Dennys in Lost Hills and also a Loves, which is pretty decent. We turn off there on the 46 on the way to Laguna Seca. We could make it to Paso, but our rig won’t fit into any of the gas stations there. I’ve also learned to stop there if I’m going on up the 5. See above, LOL.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:44 pm)#193
Got that right, LOL! +1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:47 pm)#194
A very generous assessment, IMHO. +1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:54 pm)It’s the ultimate commodity he’s after: water.
There Will Be Water
T. Boone Pickens thinks water is the new oil—and he’s betting $100 million that he’s right
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_25/b4089040017753.htm
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:56 pm)#189
So, looking at the documentation statik supplied, it looks like the output of the throttle thingie is the electrical connector on top. I don’t seem to see that there is any mechanical connection to a linkage to activate the actual throttle. So, if it is sending an electrical signal to some sort of servo to activate the throttle, possibly via the ECU, is that “fly by wire”. And does that lend credence to the “electromagnetic interference” reports relayed by Rashiid at #186?
I have sort of been cautioning GM not to make fools of themselves criticizing Toyota, but the plot does seem to thicken, doesn’t it.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (7:58 pm)#186
Maybe Bob Lutz is up in the jet jamming the freqs.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:13 pm)#198
Oh man, I could have gone all day without reading that. The evil scheme on the surface is camouflage for the real one lying below. Kind of like the Wizard behind the screen. God forbid!
Great find. +1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:13 pm)I don’t understand that one. Is it ethics, image in the public eye or something else?
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:20 pm)300 miles is only half what the concept car had. This is OK for driving around town, recharging every night after 10-50 miles of driving.
But, I’d like to take my Volt on road trips, and enjoy the electric drive at my destination. 300 mi range means stopping at gas stations every 200 miles, not even 3 hours of driving. This needs improvement.
GSP
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:22 pm)“Electronic Throttle Control” is correct. A large portion of today’s automobiles have no mechanical connection from the footfeet to the “throttle” (ecu).
The safety story of “Drive by Wire” is one that will continue to play out for years in the future (imo).
The safety story of “Fly by Wire” is a story that has for years been playing out in the battle of Airbus vs Boeing. Airbus is “fly by wire” while Boeing has traditionally relied on mechanical backups. There have been several flight control and dual engine failure crashes on the airbus that are most likely due to “queertrons” in the system. Once a bad queertron event happens, the pilots are along for the ride, just like the passengers.
Watch for more fun if “steer by wire” becomes mainstream.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive-by-wire
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:24 pm)I’ve met him several times. He’s human. (as far as I could tell)
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:25 pm)The gentleman seemed at one time to have been able to make dollars in five ways till Sunday. It’s been posited that not just with water and wind but that since he has some friends upstream that would like to place nuclear, and other developers will place even more wind, he could have made a killing with the added transmission capacity alone (but that was before the credit crisis).
The pipelines and even gas rights and their pipelines could be motivating factors too. I wouldn’t even be surprised if all this would have substantially increased his ability to raise and sell beef as well, if all had gone according to plan. Though there was such an uprising that he has since publicly sworn off any intent to exploit water rights.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:29 pm)#205
A lot of people are “human” whose lives are driven by greed, or the lust for power, and couldn’t care less about the consequences for the world or their fellow humans. Don’t get me started on the list.
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:30 pm)When GM opened the Best Car Win web page where people could vote for their car of choice. It was a given that the car with the best IMAGE would win the poll.
Road test magazines have been Japan and Germany leaning for many years now. We saw how the Saturn Sky was nit picked. It’s really a decent car and relatively inexpensive for it’s class. But it was the problem blind spot and the hard to use cup holders that got the spot light.
Look what has happened. The “R” word has made it’s way to Japan. Maybe Old West Cowboy confidence is a good thing after all?
=D~
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:35 pm)OTOH we could start the financial debate again also.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:42 pm)I would like to see the buyer have the option of a larger tank, for long distance driving, like 500-600 miles per day,
Feb 3rd, 2010 (8:59 pm)Ethics. Image. People don’t like it when one company tries to take advantage of a competitor’s weaknesses. They all do it, of course. But the less obvious they are about it, the better. At least IMHO. And the last thing GM needs is more bad PR.
But most of all, GM (and Ford for that matter) need to try to sell their cars on their own merits. They need to build up their own brand image. By all reports (including consumer reports), their own line up is the most competitive its been in decades. And they need to find a way to convince the general public of that.
If they bash Toyota to try to win sales, all they’ll do is reinforce in the public’s mind that their cars are really not as good as Toyota’s. Or their other competition. It might be successful in the short run. But in the long run, it will have the same brand dilution effect of the 0% financing post 9/11 promotions.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:07 pm)Gotta like that boom, boom, POW…
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:14 pm)Thanks. I think seeing differing opinions expressed makes reading the comments more interesting, but that view is not in style now.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:31 pm)They could just say “Our pedals work”.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:34 pm)GM (and Ford for that matter) need to try to sell their cars on their own merits.
Touché
Oh… the drama
=D~
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:49 pm)Not to mention that incentive money comes from their bottom line. If they are going to get a lot of these sales anyway becuase of the overwhelming bad press then they are just given money away. Add to the tackiness of this compaign and I agree it is an overall negative for GM.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:51 pm)It’s not a question of how big or small the fuel tank is. It’s more about how well the pedals work.
=D~
Feb 3rd, 2010 (9:52 pm)Tank Range, whatever. I am sure it will be adequate…
I am bummed, I just bought a Toyota. I do not think this will help resale value.
So when do I see a red Volt???
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:09 pm)I hear you Red HHR. Would seriously look at an Equinox if my truck needed replacing. After investing 2 years following Volt news and development. My next car (or truck) will be Voltec. Friends both male and female are asking, “You still getting that Volt Dave?.
=D~
+3
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:10 pm)219 blogs over of all things….
THE SIZE OF A FLIPPN’ GAS TANK!
Some of us, me included, really need to get a life!
-1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:37 pm)Apparently you didn’t view the video by Altairnano!?! It explained everything. If you had looked at the website, you should have seen this link:
http://b2icontent.irpass.cc/546%2F101771.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=1Y51NDPSZK99KT3F8VG2&Expires=1265260448&Signature=5QN3tWUTA67doDkLCjiW0INfd%2Bc%3D
“Reno, Nevada-based Altair Nanotechnologies (Altairnano)
has developed a Lithium-Titanate energy storage system
to mitigate some of these ancillary services difficulties. The
Altairnano Energy Storage System (ALTI-ESS) provides
frequency regulation on a 1-second dispatch basis, as
needed.” This technology is “idea for Smart Grid applications”.
Your reasoning about them going along with Pickens is incorrect; he has met with Congress and explained how we can end using foreign oil and giving 100′s of billion of dollars to foreign countries for their petroleum. No one else has or had such a plan, and he brought the issue of what we could do with those $billions. If implemented his plan could be accomplished in five years. At the height of the last petroleum price spike we were spending around $700 billion a year for foreign oil. Even at the current price of petroleum, we are wasting $billions on foreign oil.
T. Boone Pickens has been one of the outstanding benefactors of the last decade. Read about what he has accomplished with his donations at this Wikipedia link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._Boone_Pickens#Donations_to_Oklahoma_State_University
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:47 pm)It seems as if everyone on this thread is avoiding the central issue here.
: Does size really matter?:
Feb 3rd, 2010 (10:49 pm)Hi LauraM #211 …
The game of automotive innovation and product delivery is played on a very competitive field. We often see huge signs in front of dealers stating: “We’re #1!” and “We beat our competitors best in a head to head study”.
Here at gm volt dot com we routinely see dealers of Japanese cars undercutting the virtues of the Volt. They are not popular. But this is an open forum and we understand. Need to give credit to Lyle for his support of freedom of speech.
In this years NFL playoffs. An inspired Vikings team soundly defeated the red hot Cowboys. And toward the end of the game a Cowboys player stormed to the Vikings bench warning of revenge for next year. This didn’t come across very well in the public eye. Especially with the recent steroids scandals and history of Nancy Kerrigan type events in sports.
Competition is what it is. Will the American auto makers taking advantage of a stumbling foreign car provider harm their image? We’ll need to watch the sales numbers for the verdict.
The important thing right now is we’re just months away from a huge shift in the way people travel around town. 40 miles for just $1.
And maybe a few less of our 20 year old men will need to be sent overseas to guard a sun baked pipeline.
=D~
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:12 pm)Actually, I think the incentives are aimed more at Honda and Hyundai than at Toyota. I think that they view a lot of Toyota’s customers as newly up for grabs. And they want to steer as many as possible their way.
I still think it’s a mistake though….Once it’s started all the other automakers really have to join in. Which is why Hyundai and Chrysler have now matched GM and Ford’s incentives for Toyota owners.And now everyone is spending money to gain customers they probably would have had anyway.
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100129/AUTO01/1290431/1148/rss25
Notice Honda’s staying out of it…
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:36 pm)I figure it’s going to be a lot more difficult to determine than that. Satisfaction surveys, brand esteem, repeat customers planned repeaters, reason for switching. You’d be looking for something a lot more complicated than sales metrics, IMO. Who knows what customers will even remember, take offense to etc.
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:36 pm)AMEN!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’* * * Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Feb 3rd, 2010 (11:55 pm)Last, but not least:
“It’s not the size of your gas tank that matters. It’s how you use it.”
Feb 4th, 2010 (12:20 am)I agree that it’s a competitive business. But there’s a difference between saying “we’re number one,” or even “we beat all competitors” and saying “Toyota’s a loser.” The first two are about how great their own product is. And the other is bashing the competition.
That said, I doubt that these incentives will matter much, one way or the other, in terms of public perception. It’s not like GM launched an ad campaign with a “look at Toyota now” message. Unless I’ve missed something.
As far as our local trolls, I doubt they’re Toyota dealers or on Toyota’s payroll. They’re too obvious. It’s not like anyone would think less of the Volt or more of Toyota because of any of their posts. My guess is that we’ve attracted a bunch of pre-teens with too much time on their hands, who think that they’re being funny.
Feb 4th, 2010 (7:23 am)moot point. When I rip out the ICE to install the nuclear reactor, the gas tank comes out as well.
Feb 4th, 2010 (8:42 am)I suggest googling Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries (LiFeK). The way they store the oxygen atoms is completely different to a standard Lithium cell and inherently very stable. I assume the Volt is using these type of batteies? Valence.com used to have a good demonstration of what happens in thermal runaway in a “normal” lithium battery vs. their LiFeK batteries. The standard ones act like flamethrowers when they’re abused = shot at!
Feb 4th, 2010 (10:01 am)I guess we have another joe but with a capitol letter. I wished this could be avoided.
Feb 4th, 2010 (11:23 am)#202
Yes.
Feb 5th, 2010 (10:53 am)I thought it was common knowledge, but the Volt will use lithium-manganese batteries, not LiFe. Most of the hobby lithium batteries (I have 50+) are lithium-cobalt, and will burst into flames if punctured. Lithium-manganese are far safer. I have some LiMns, but unfortunately they are no longer available, at least not as the Apogee Magnum brand. Their video of a LiMn being drilled is still up though:
http://www.pfmdistribution.com/Apogee_Puncture_Test.wmv
Don’t try this with a regular LiPo!! (lithium-cobalt) So the Volt should be fairly safe in a crash, although the addition of gasoline onto a smoldering battery could be a concern.
Back to the range subject, I don’t like long trips but just did a 1000-mile round trip last weekend, so it suddenly seems more important. I still say the CS mode mileage will be worse than the similar Cruze’s highway mileage, probably low 30′s. That’s unless GM finds a way to break some laws of physics and thermodynamics.