We are about four months from the date of the first Volt deliveries, and you can just feel the excitement mounting. GM remains quiet about the rollout process and pricing but we will soon know the truth.
Chevrolet dealers in the launch markets are starting to see a build-up of information and communciation from GM to get them prepared for Volt sales and servicing. Just this week dealers became able to download an early Volt Salesperson Reference Guide. It is attached here.
I had the chance to discuss dealer certification with Volt marketing director Tony DiSalle.
How will you go about getting the first cars to people? How can you find a fair method with all these years of demand out there. Who gets the first ones?
That’s another story we’ll have for you at some point when the time is right. That is something we’re thinking through.
All these things have potential negative backlash and you don’t want to have that?
Right. For sure. What’s really key is being able to manage customer expectations and being really clear with consumers in terms of the markets that are eligible. We’re going to be crystal clear as dealers go through the certification process as to which ones are authorized Volt dealers.
When do they have to start doing that, it’s getting close isn’t it?
Yes it is getting close for sure. That will be much of next month as a matter of fact.
So they’re going to start next month?
Yes.
Do they voluntary choose to sell the Volt or will you direct it to certain dealerships?
We will be communicating with all of the dealers in the launch markets very shortly.
Everyone gets communicated to and some will choose to sell Volts and some won’t?
Yes. Based on the standards. We’ll have very clear standards for the dealerships.
We should soon know all the answers to these things?
You will, and believe me we’d love to just go shout it outright now, but there’s a lot here to communicate and communcaite very well and very purposefully and there’s certinaly an order that we have to go through, and there’s still some decisions that have to be made yet quite honestly.
Considering the high demand and low planned volume, how do you plan to manage that discordance?
The key I believe is through creating some pretty strong relationships with these intenders, communicating with them on aconsistent basis. We have a plan to do that and were encouraging as many as possible to come to Chevrolet.com to register with us so that we can communicate with them and so that everything thast ready to go public, they now.
And in terms of the product but more importantly certainly as you are inferring, the go to market timing and pricing when we’re ready to make that annoucnemnt and those sorts of things. Really when we get the question today, there are two things that we tell cusomters. One is what I just mentioned, go to Chevrolet.com register with us. That’s not a wait list for a car or anything like that but it makes sure that your in the know when we come out with new news so that we can get that new news to you and then secondly is contact a Chevrolet dealer and express your interest to that Chevroelt dealer for the Volt, because dealers are starting to take their own waitlists for customers right now.
So you’re advocating dealers to do that?
Well yeah and they have good relationships with their customers. Its important for customers to get with a dealer and then we know the dealers are maintinging their lists for the new Volt.
Will dealers have to do special training to be able to sell the car, is it not the intention for every Chevrolet dealer to have Volts for sale?
That is correct, there wil be a certification process for delaers string with those dealers in the launch markets. But quite frankly will be to a great extent depending on the dealers willingness to meet the requirements. The certification requirement in order to be eligible to sell and service the Volt.
So you imagine 50 percent or 75 percent will actually be certified to be able to sell Volts at the end of the day?
My sense it will probably be more than that but I cant give you a specific number.
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:30 am)“Manage customer expectations”?.. what do you need to manage?.. if you dont plug it in you will have to buy gas more often
Sorry!, but its not all bad, the high demand and low quantities will generate lots of buzz and excitement and that is good.. people will understand and adapt.
I will love hearing about the high demand for Equinoxes, Volts and Enclaves.
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:33 am)It’s coming closer! I can feel the excitement building! For me, I came close to buying a FFH earlier this year but am now glad I waited. But the problem is knowing whether or not we, as regular Joes, will be able to get one during the first few months. Dealers here want between $1k-2.5k and one dealership is even non refundable! So tread carefully!
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:42 am)Regular Joe’s will be lucky to get one before 2013…
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:50 am)That Salesperson Reference Guide says:
After the charge in the battery is depleted, Volt automatically uses gas
to generate its own electricity. Enough to power it for up to 300 additional
miles until you can plug it in or fill up again.
That doesn’t bode well for regarding the CS MPG if this is accurate, along with the 9 gallon tank revelation.
Still want my Volt though.
+25
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:56 am)Anyone who owns a Chevy dealership and isn’t chomping at the bit to get certified to sell Volts is dumber than a box of rocks and just as useless. There. I said it.
+15
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:00 am)Great more “stay tuned”
Just tell us when your going to release the following info! I mean i’ve been here for 3 years and now we are 5 months away and i am just finding out things like gas tank size?
MPG in CS mode
MSRP
Apple just sold 1.7 million iphones in 3 days….. Maybe you should ask them how to roll it out.
Maybe somebody at GM needs to put away the 1987 marketing handbook & freshen up
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:03 am)I’ll make a prediction on dealer participation in Volt certification:
Not only will every Chevrolet dealer have to do it to stay in business, but every other manufacturer’s dealers will be screaming for a car with a battery powered “acceleration and mpg optimization unit”.
-15
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:08 am)(click to show comment)
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:09 am)This is something that Lyle does pay attention to. I have some personal experience with dealer’s and deposits, but things can change over time. And they will change as we get close to launch (and beyond, as true demand becomes known). I strongly suspect that this site will become more and more important for this kind of information as time goes by. Is it just me or is time becoming warped?
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:17 am)This is an interesting number, and subject to endless debate in the engineering forum.. but I am more interested how the different numbers would affect your purchase decision and why?
Note that there are many different ways to measure this number.. the one that would apply to me is the one at a constant 55mph on a flat hwy since its the way I drive.. but some people prefer a number at a steady 70mph, or even a mad 75mph on a hilly terrain with the AC on. Over at the engineering forum we use a CS number based on the EPA Hwy cycle (raw, unadjusted), but the EPA may never actually test for this.
So please specify your details, this will make the discussion easier to follow in the coming years.. and we will be talking about this for years.
+3
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:23 am)“Considering the high demand and low planned volume, how do you plan to manage that discordance?
The key I believe is through creating some pretty strong relationships with these intenders, communicating with them on aconsistent basis. We have a plan to do that and were encouraging as many as possible to come to Chevrolet.com to register with us so that we can communicate with them and so that everything thast ready to go public, they now.”
The solution to high demand and low volume???????
***** BUILD MORE VOLTS! ******
Everyone will be very happy! :+}
#6 JonP. “Apple just sold 1.7 million iphones in 3 days….. Maybe you should ask them how to roll it out.
Maybe somebody at GM needs to put away the 1987 marketing handbook & freshen up ”
***** Apple seems to know how to handle customer demand… They BUILD MORE PRODUCT! *****
+4
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:24 am)================================
No, time is not becoming warped.
We have just been waiting for so long that these last few months really seem to be taking a long time………….
Plus, GM is really keeping the game plan a big secret, and that does not seem right to us when they have been really open about the development of the Volt.
I guess it is time to stop by Sweeney Chevrolet again and have another talk, even though we still have no idea when the Volt will be available in Ohio.
IMHO, the rest of what was said above was corporate non-speak.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:46 am)I received that 2-page flyer last Tuesday. Since it contained no new information that I did not already know from GM-VOLT.com it did not seem important enough to mention.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:52 am)Wouldn’t it be a great incentive for dealers to get certified if Chevy published a list of which dealers signed up for Volt cert, are taking the Volt cert course, have completed certification?
+16
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:00 am)I wonder what the wonderful Apple company would do if they were producing a brand new revolutionary (not evolutionary) design and they were going to sell them initially at a loss. Do you think they would ramp up production so they could sell more at a loss to the company or would they have a limited roll out and work hard on a Version 2 design that had a chance at making a profit for them?
+8
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:02 am)That PDF is pretty light weight.
Funny thing: Chevylaunch.com.
What happened to C-h-e-v-r-o-l-e-t only? lol.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:05 am)You’re joking, no?
+3
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:06 am)Funny, I don’t think Apple reps email in to many Apple Iphone blogs and give continuous updates on their new products. They seem to keep things secret until they are ready to release the product.
I am waiting for a 4th generation IPOD that is due out before the Volt and I have not heard squat from Apple on this product. I can hardly find any info. Is it going to have a camera, etc??
GM has been more then forthcoming with Volt information. Far more than Apple. And if GM could stamp Volts out in some Asian Factory using low paid unskilled workers, I am sure they would mass produce the Volt too.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:31 am)Check with Malcolm Bricklin and John Zachary DeLorean on how this could turn out.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:40 am)Lyle: There are a lot of typos in your post today, but the message comes through loud and clear. Thanks for the update. I’ll have to stop in to my local Chevy dealer soon to get on their wait list.
As for breaking news about the Chevy Volt, GM-Volt.com is the place to be! Thanks for all your work. It’s fun reading your Q&A with the GM guys – trying to pry useful and timely information out of their wanting, but not willing, mouths.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:42 am)Apple did become one of the biggest companies in the world by building revolutionary products and not limiting volume.
They did it with items called the “Macintosh”, “iPod”, “iTunes”, “iPhone”, “iPad” etc.
So I would say at this point “wonderful Apple” is a pretty good company.
I have the same hope for GM. They remake themselves with one revolutionary product at a time.
The first one is the VOLT.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:46 am)That’s an excellent point about the GM-Volt web site: We can crowd source (is that the proper lingo?) information about what’s going on at the local dealer level in regards to wait lists, availability and pricing. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:50 am)OK, so I finally broke down and registered with Chevrolet to get email notifications about the Volt. I don’t expect Central Mississippi to get a Volt for well over a year, but I want to be ready when a dealer does get some. Good luck to all of you who are in the three locations to get the Volt this November.
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:50 am)Herm,
I just want to know mpg in CS mode because to me its a direct indication of how credible what GM has been telling us about the Volt is. Honestly it probably won’t effect my purchase desicion much at all since my total commute is 50 miles roundtrip.
Price makes all the difference to me as to if i purchase. With the production numbers GM is talking about demand is gonna drive the price through the roof… If the MSRP is 37,000 as i expect that puts the price after tax, doc fees, etc. At$40,500. Thats what it will cost me out the door without the dealer gouging me. Yes I’m aware of the tax credit but there has been no talk of being able to apply it to the purchase upfront from GM (Nissan is though).
To put this in context we new the price & MPG of the Cruze like 16 months ago…. To me the longer they wait, especially with all the waves Nissan has made, the more concerned i get. Add on the fact that i have seen the Volt on TV maybe 10 times ever, most of those being 5 second glimpses of it during larger GM commercials is getting very concerning.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:52 am)My point was that Apple too would be foolish to ramp up production on a product that they would have to sell at a loss. You were arguing that GM should just follow Apple and ramp up production, I am simply pointing out that if you sell truly revolutionary products that are still very expensive and must be sold at a loss to make them palatable, then you must be more careful in your initial production goals.
Tesla sells their toy for over 100K and it is a simpler design. Even at 100K+, Tesla is an overall losing proposition for the owner at this point. It apparently has sucked up a significant portion of his huge fortune.
GM cannot afford to lose too much money on Version 1.0 of the Volt. Especially since a Version 2.0 is in the works.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:53 am)This is a pretty important rollout. I remember when the Vega came to town. GM warned the dealers that a different kind of car buyer was going to be in the showroom. Be forewarned Chevy. You ain’t seen nothing yet.
Imagine the look on a salesman’s face after AnonymousP or PriusJohn# walk away!
Good luck guys (and gals).
It will be nice to find a salesman that knows the Volt, even nicer to find one that offers a fair price with no BS. Better still to have a service department that can deliver a Volt and not worry about me coming back.
Once we get the Volts on the road, then the real fun begins.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:00 am)How is that? if a dealership will get a maximum of what, 10 cars to sell for the entire year, it makes no sense to spend 10′s of thousands for specific training and possibly 100k’s for specialized tools for electronic testing just for this rare vehicles …
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:06 am)intersting…
http://blog.seattlepi.com/transportation/archives/212847.asp
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:07 am)And an awful lot of us are agreeing with you! +1!
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:33 am)Your post is WOT for the day, but here’s something interesting to accompany that.
http://www.cityofseattle.net/light/FuelMix/
How will it be changed in 20 years from now? Also, how does it compare to other regional power sources in the plan? How does it compare to the average power company in the US? Before and after the federal funding, how expensive would the electricity be as both a direct cost and an environmental cost if this plan were adopted nationwide?
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:33 am)I wonder how many early Volts will be for sale on Ebay? Could be like StubHub for a big game–”Hmmm, I’d like to go, but passing up an easy flip for big profit is hard to do, especially in this economy”. Could also be like an IPO, where the underwriters don’t want people flipping, so if you do, you might not get allocated any shares in the next IPO. But is the owner really sacrificing any oportunity profits then, i.e., when will the next easy vehicle flip come along? Hopefully often (e.g., Gen II), if GM has truly greatly improved. Wouldn’t THAT be refreshing?
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:33 am)More of your tax dollars at waste.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:36 am)ClarksonCote # 4
I agree. If the 9 gallon tank only give 300 additional miles that turns out to be only 33 miles/gallon. I have a Hyundai Sonata and it gets 30 mpg on the highway with a V6. If the Volt only gets 33 miles/gallon that rating will look bad to the general public. The general public will see it as Volt 33 mpg, Prius 50 mpg or the (whatever) 35 mpg.
I still plan on the Volt because my daily commute is about 25 miles. I sure hope this turn out to be a great quality product or this will be my last GM product. I bet once on a GM product and was very disappointed, but I am willing to give GM another chance because it is a new thing and hopefully puts Americans back to work.
-9
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:46 am)Don’t focus on credibility. Focus on merit.
Merit can easily be earned, simply by sharing real-world data.
Even if you don’t like the numbers, the reputation & intent will be strong by the fact that they were straight-forward about what will be available initially.
Let’s see some of the training information. For that matter, we’re still waiting to see prelimary testing information… for example, numbers showing how the 230 MPG was calculated. What the heck is the problem with sharing CS-mode test results? We all know they are subject to change when the official esimates are released in a few months anyway.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:56 am)JonP has a good point about the tax credit for the Volt. Few of us seem to have a problem with the idea that the federal government should subsidize the Volt, at least for a while. I wonder if a tax credit is the best way to do it, though. Why not a direct cash grant that could be applied instantly to the purchase price by anyone, regardless of whether they have a tax liability to which the credit might ultimately be apllied? I’ll bet the country would get more Volts on the road faster that way.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:57 am)Tesla (symbol:TSLA) IPO is moving HIGHER today. And this is against the wind as the S&P is DOWN 2.5%.
Very good news for all electric car makers. What a surprise. Go Volt!
=D-Volt
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:18 am)OK, I’ve been saying over the past few days that the marketing plan (that we see) for the Volt just looks kind of lame. I don’t claim to know how it is supposed to be done. I tend not to trust salesmen. But it kind of seems like GM is keeping their sales people in the dark. Now, I’ll grant you that I expect that on or about Nov 15 that EVERYTHING will be out in the open and that the initial dealers will have cars (maybe only 1 or 2). It just does not feel like things are gearing up for that to happen. Based on things that I’ve read the past couple of days, one story is that individual dealers are not allowed to have wait lists. If you go to http://WWW.CHEVROLET.COM you will find NOTHING about a Volt. But if you go to http://WWW.CHEVROLET.COM/VOLT you WILL see Volt stuff. But the “sign up” list there is NOT a waiting list. Mixed messages. I’m really biting my tongue to keep from saying anything NASTY. Come on GM, get your act together.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:18 am)This misses the ever so critical point that the total number of unit sales determines unit cost. IOW make more and the price per copy drops. Make less and the price per copy goes up. Make few enough and the cost per copy goes way up. If Apple made 10,000 iPads it would be selling them at a loss because each one would probably cost $15K.
Nissan says it will make a profit on the Leaf at $32K. What’s the problem with GM? Why can’t it make a profit selling the Volt for under $40K? Simple enough. Nissan is counting on higher production.
GM is just following the first rule of group think, otherwise known as “Failure Rule #1″. This rule provides that loser management teams invariably fail to implement a good solution because they want to wait for a better one. Here it’s clear that the Volt is a good if not great solution. Is GM management jumping on it? No way. They want to wait, seemingly thinking that that if they wait a little longer there will magically be a better solution.
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:28 am)Sounds like a club motto. Wonder when your member list will be as long as Lyle’s (coerced name change) wish list. I for one certainly hope that the site does not become a summer long list of topics filed under, “Nissan has been there and done that already” for a car being introduced after the Volt.
OT; Tesla is nearing 10 million share sold at a 7% pop before 1 PM the first day. Hope it won’t fall hard and scare away GM’s IPO prospects.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:28 am)I think building Level 3 fast charge stations along a fed hwy is appropriate, putting the fast charges at a private house not so much.. Expect to see a bunch of BEV rallies every weekend along this corridor:
“WSDOT plans to create a network of seven to 10 Level 3 fast-charging stations along the I-5 corridor. The Level 3 stations are the type that can recharge an electric vehicle’s battery within 15 to 30 minutes.”
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:29 am)I’m gonna go out on a limb and say you have a blackberry…..
Apple doesn’t string out there customers for 3 years to the point of starting to question the sincerity. I do appreciate the transparency they have shown, alot more than any other car builder ever before. But at this point it seems like there has been a freeze on info… and were so close to launch.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:35 am)Neutron,
Did you know that for every volt they sell they can then sell like 10 Gas guzzeler suv/trucks. Well based on the cafe rules… they make a ton on those vehicles so profitability is a little more than production cost & MSRP
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:35 am)I’m Canadian..not my tax $$, although I certainly have enough here anyway..
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:37 am)Absolutely, judge the Volt on real world merit. I have no doubt that the Volt will return Prius like fuel economy numbers in one type of driving or another, just not the full range. Maybe.
GM credibility hangs on the engineering crew giving us the development news, not the marketing guys. 230 mpg came from old school marketing guys.
Unfortunately we can only speculate on the Volt. Educated speculation it is, though.
The Prius has a big advantage of actually being in production to the point that it is in the third generation of evolution on the road today. So here comes the Volt. Nearly 20 years of development and not one mass produced car for us to buy. So what are we going to get?
We are going to get an automotive engineering masterpiece right out of the box. The sweat equity in this car is tremendous. The car doesn’t just have a battery, it has a thermally conditioned battery. It doesn’t just have tires, it has Goodyear low rolling resistance, high performance rubber. It doesn’t just have and electric motor, it has a gas one too! Every subsystem of the Volt from the 53kw generator to the center console, is integrated into a single production vehicle that we can all just hop in to drive and say, “nice car, what did you say this is?”
It’s amazing that this car even exists.
I just hope the UAW is on board too and can figure out how to screw them together better than Honda can. If the car actually weighs 3,800 lbs as CR reports, then I have serious doubts about 50 mpg. The second or third generation Volt will, no doubt, make significant inroads in weight reduction. ICE fuel economy will improve with that, nevermind using, perhaps, an Atkinson cycle or diesel powerplant.
So, let’s get them on the road and judge the car fairly.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:40 am)(and also the other “What about Apple” posts):
Part of Apple’s success is their ability to identify products which will be purchased in high volume, while adding to the panache of a company that comes up with new, ‘must-have’ innovations.
IOW, I don’t think that Apple would ever sell a product at a loss, even initially.
Nor would they sell something they consider to be of questionable value. IF THEY DID, it wouldn’t matter, because of the company’s reputation. Stick a lower-case “i” in front of just about anything you can think of, and the first run would be snapped up within a week; even the iNosePicker. Of course, that might not be true for the next item to follow the iNosePicker, which brings me back to the theme that Apple is conscious of what to push in volume which will add to their company’s mystique.
The Volt could be that product for GM, but GM has a definite panache problem.
Did Apple get it’s “must-have,” “sell-out” reputation overnight? The first step for Apple was an innovative product called the LISA, the first computer available with a GUI-based operating system; but which was a flop (due mainly to it’s high price).
I seem to recall that the Apple computer sold pretty well, but the more open IBM-clone is what exploded, making Microsoft the de-facto business standard (for better or worse). The MacIntosh sold better, but people weren’t lining up the night before to support the kind of volumes that we see today with i[Whatever]; with sales numbers that are reported on news programs. GM has a lot of years of battling ahead if it hopes to emulate this kind of performance (FWIW, the Volt was first known internally as the “iCar,” so you know GM was thinking in these terms).
The first step for GM is to start down that path with a revolutionary, innovative product (which they are doing). Making sure it’s priced and manufactured so that everyone can get one (and GM can make money doing it) is somewhere closer to step three.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:40 am)It’s just following the rule that the largest subsidies go to least practical solutions. Just keep in mind that this rule enjoys bi-partisan support. The subsidies for corn ethanol are enormous and the dumbest thing you could do, yet Democrats have had a hard time pushing into the line of supporters because of all the Republicans how have beaten them to it.
Doesn’t hurt that the first presidential primary is in Iowa either.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:44 am)Thanks for your help Lyle. I signed up on this list over 30 months ago. Not sure when they started signing people up on the official GM website. Regardless that means nothing now. The buyers need to find out what dealerships will be selling the Volt then get on their waitlist. I like personally like Nissan’s approach better. The 1st person to sign up on the LEAF website was the first person to receive a LEAF.
Well good luck you all in getting one. I hope they at the least put Lyle on the top of the list.
Though I am not happy with the rollout I do like the Volt and I will be excited to see them on the road. Go EV’s….
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:48 am)Maybe they’re putting the finishing touches on the firmware that controls the ICE, battery, and induction electric motor. This low level software can have a big impact on performance, efficiency, etc.
In other words, GM may not know the final specs until the production firmware is frozen, and that may not happen for a month or two.
-4
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:48 am)If you step back and think about it you may decide that the entire idea of putting Level 3 charges along an interstate is ridiculous. I certainly do.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:48 am)Nuclearboy,
Not to mention Bob Lutz doesn’t seem to agree with you. He knew GM would have to sell them at a loss in order to get production up and force cost down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SUEIDvy168
Check out this link skip forward to 1:50.
ps thats me asking the question.
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:50 am)Dave,
Customers are supposed to be driving off the lot in Volt’s in like 5 months. If they haven’t finished the software code they should push the launch back.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:58 am)Ok, Let’s buy an iVolt.
First you can only plug into an iPlug, then you can check the charge status only with your iPad or your iMac. Bluetooth will only work with your iPhone and you can only play iTunes. The roof solar panel will only work with the iSun app and the doors will only open if you say “iOpen”.
How can you actually compare the production of a PDA with that of an automobile. An Apple product no less.
Ridiculous.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:59 am)The Detroit Free Press has an article about GM today.
http://www.freep.com/article/20100629/BUSINESS01/100629023/1318/Whitacre-GM-has-sharp-focus
The Execs are noting how GM is building cars more efficiently to realize profits on lower volume.
“While Mark Reuss, GM’s North American president, would not say specifically how many fewer vehicles the company needs to produce to be profitable compared to a year ago, he boasted that it is significantly lower.”
“We are (selling new vehicles) at about $3,000 more per vehicle than a year ago,” Reuss said. “Incentives are about $1,200 lower than a year ago. Inventories are about 400,000 units, about half of what they were a year ago.”
It will be very interesting to see how the cost of building the VOLT fits into this mix.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:59 am)In my opinion, the lack of CS-info has much more to do with timing (IPO, and the roll-out plan) than it does with anything else. If the news is good, they’re saving it for the moment of maximum advantage. If the news is bad, they’re delaying it as long as possible (for the moment of minimum damage). We really will have to wait.
It isn’t just you.
-2
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:03 pm)This is one of our big problems. We cannot contiue to waste tax dollars. If we ever want to change things we need to be against spending even on things we personaly like. We can not just be against Government spending that helps others. We need to governmnet to do less a lot less for all of us. We are short 1.6 trillion this year, we need to cut stop spending.
But yes governmnet paying for home chargers is a joke.
-2
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:06 pm)LOL Sorry “Our tax dollars at waste”
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:11 pm)In #45, above; please substitute
for this:
Thank you.
My central point in the comment is to show that GM and Apple are not only in different businesses, making different kinds of products, but they are not in the same position. Nor was Apple an instant miracle. They had a bumpy start, and may not have done as well initially (with the LISA) as GM is likely to do with the Volt.
GM does have a perception problem. The first step is offering an innovative product; and the sweating out of perfection for the Volt shows their consciousness of that fact.
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:12 pm)Facts are facts. No one party has lock on stupidy. Both Ds and Rs love corn ethanol, very dumb.
This is why it is time to vote them all out. We may get other crooks but at least they will be new crooks.
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:15 pm)Apple has had its share of losers — in addition to the Lisa you’ve mentioned there is the Newton and Apple TV. As to whether any of these or any other Apple product was initially sold at a loss, the answer would be that “it depends”. First you’d have to know how many Apple committed to buying. If you go to a supplier the first question is “how many do you want?”. If you say 10K then you get one price. If you say 100K you get a very different price. And if you say 1M then you get a different price again.
Second you have to know, as an accounting matter, the run over which your fixed costs are apportioned. Developing a new product is expensive, and that expense has to be amortized over the number of units sold. Thus the “cost” of initial units is based on an estimated run. If you assign all those costs to the first few thousand units then they will all be sold at a loss. If you assume you’ll sell 20M then the first few thousand units can be profitable.
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:19 pm)… and at this point, it is perhaps instructive to look at Ghosn’s LEAF claims again. If he doesn’t get the kind of volume he’s promoting, Nissan may be in for a boondoggle.
Thanks for the post. The idea that Apple can do no wrong is unrealistic.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:22 pm)One difference between us is that I don’t think politicians are crooks. They may even be more honest than average. In any event, we’re talking about bad decisions, and certainly being dumb doesn’t mean you’re dishonest.
I just think politicians do what furthers their own interests. If those interests line up with good policy you get good policy. If they don’t then you you don’t get good policiy. The bottom line is that unless you change the incentives electing new faces is just putting old wine in new bottles.
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:26 pm)Or you can rule the market with a proprietary MP3 player.
Before the iPod, Apple had graphic artists as a core demographic. Without them Apple would have been gone long ago. It could not have absorbed the losses you have outlined. The iPod has made the company what it is today. It got lucky.
If the Volt were the design of a company that were not on the ropes, I doubt that it would have come to market. The Volt development came not from bankruptcy but from exasperation. GM already dumped Oldsmobile, sold off Subaru, and integrated Saturn to cut their losses.
GM has lucked onto the Volt, much the same as Apple came up with the iPod. (despite my earlier post)
We will all benifit for it.
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:32 pm)… and we can all use a little luck, lol.
Someone once said that it’s better to be lucky than smart.
Here’s hoping that GM has good luck, but also that it’s smart enough to capitalize on it.
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:33 pm)Oh yes, at a minimum Carlos has bet a good bit of the ranch. This is a big gamble for Nissan. In addition to all the money being poured into the Leaf, you can’t overestimate all the time and attention which, because of the Leaf, is not being directed to other development projects.
I suspect what makes it somewhat easier is that, with the invasion of automakers from India, China, and Korea, it’s not clear that Nissan could survive by just continuing with business as usual. Betting the ranch may be easier if you think you’ll lose it to foreclosure anyway.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:33 pm)They better add a hotel there as well.
Imagine if we had gas stations at about every 300 or so miles we travel. Not much room for error there in case of unexpected problems, either with the car or the chargers…. which, BTW (to some pie-in-the-sky people here), DO happen.
+3
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:35 pm)I have no response for this because it is absurd. Car batteries are a little tougher to get and mass produce right now than chips and tiny LCD screens for handheld toys. DonC, you seem unable to be happy with GM and their great Volt Project. I hope you are not so downbeat with the rest of your life.
The facts are.. GM is producing a great car at numbers higher than the initial PRIUS runs and with a wider intial distribution. GM is taking a smart approach in producing a large enough quantity to gain great experience but not too large to cause a major problem if the relatively untested Volt 1.0 does not live up to expectations. All the while, GM is working on a Version 2.0 reportedly for 2013 that will build upon this Volt to be a better car with a lower manufacturing cost. We are on the brink of an EV wave and GM is surfing right at the front of it. Whats not to love? Be happy.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:36 pm)They better patent the hell out of it too!!!
-6
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:43 pm)Back then, the use of automotive traction motors & batteries was a new frontier. That’s not true anymore.
GM already has extensive experience built up; they are not starting from scratch.
The need for the technology is also far more important now.
How many times must “too little, too slowly” be stated before it is finally taking seriously?
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:45 pm)Here’s a blog from smartplanet after interviewing Britta Gross.
http://www.smartplanet.com/business/blog/smart-takes/gms-britta-gross-8-ways-cities-can-encourage-electric-vehicles/8047/
I personally had the pleasure of speaking with her in New York when the Volt was there. She offered the most common sense answers of anyone I had spoken with that day. Her interview here is a pretty good reflection of her knowledge of the purpose of EV’s for the foreseeable future.
Her interview is also in line with the Columbia University EV conference.
GM is “lucky” to have her.
What a marked contrast to that Nissan guy.
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:47 pm)I don’t know. How long are you likely to keep saying it?
If, in 3 years, Voltech volumes increase as we’ve been told, will you still be saying it?
Maybe I’ve been all wrong about you. Maybe you’re just terribly, terribly impatient.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:51 pm)If its all so darn easy, why are our European brethren not flush with these types of vehicles. They make much more sense over there anyway. Truth is, they don’t make direct economic sense for joe public in the US with our cheap gas. Over there, they make economic sense in addition to the oil dependency argument (and Europe has more global warmists also). Where is BMW, Mercedes, VW, Audi, Peugeut, Subaru, etc. etc. etc… Are they putting out electrics in a few months? Do they have an E-REV?
If GM is going too slowly then these other players are truly retarded (i.e. slowed down in their production plans).
The fact is, GM is out in front and we should be proud of them for this. This is a GM fan site. Most of us are here because we are excited about the Volt project. At the same time, many of us also get tired of hearing from the “Debbie Downer” types who mostly nag and complain.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:52 pm)The corollary to the rule that the least realistic solutions get the highest subsidies is that the least important spending is invariably singled out as the reason for the budget deficit. Yes we have a big budget deficit this year. But this is not the time to be worrying about deficits. We should have been doing that five years ago. Now, for the first time in 75 years we need deficit spending. Spend more save later is good policy. If you want to see what happens if you actually cut spending in the face of a financial meltdown all you need do is look at Ireland. The Irish took all the proscriptions for closing the deficit to heart, and have been assiduously decreasing government expenditures. How has that worked? Well, they seem well on their way to abject poverty. The more they cut the more the economy tanks, and the more the economy tanks the more government revenue declines. Repeat cycle. Repeat cycle. No thanks.
Secondly, I think Level 3 charges along interstates are completely ridiculous for all kinds of reasons and a waste of government money. But I don’t think for a moment that the expenditures actually matter if you’re looking at the budget. They don’t. The only three things that matter for the deficit, in descending order of importance, are: (1) Medicare and related entitlements; (2) Social Security; and (3) Defense. Everything else is more or less a rounding error, and expenditures like the one for these Level 3 chargers aren’t even a rounding error. There’s nothing wrong with stopping the expenditure and redirecting them to something that might actually work, but focusing on them as if they matter simply diverts attention from the real problems and from fashioning real solutions. In personal terms, it’s like trying to solve the problem of a $10,000/month mortgage payment you can’t make by focusing on which brand of salt is cheapest.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (12:56 pm)Apple did not have to limit production for items like the original Macintosh and similar era items because the price was high enough that there was not a great demand for them.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:04 pm)I’m tired of hearing that shibboleth. Yes, much will be wasted. What about private investment and the initial Internet boom in the late ’90′s. Much was wasted. Why don’t we hear continually harped by the same free-market people about private investment being constantly wasted? I mean, we can point out instances such as this where private investment was wasted. This is why: Because it doesn’t suit their real agenda which is to let the giant capital interests in this country do anything they want at any time completely unimpeded, such as send all of our manufacturing to Asia for the sake of labor arbitrage.
Much is wasted in any big technical transition such as this. It’s inevitable. No one knows for sure which direction will turn out to be the most efficient, so we have to try many. Most will eventually be abandoned. Think of the crazy rigs you’ve read about that were tried at the beginning of the original auto revolution. “Wastes”, every one.
There’s a lot of infrastructure that it makes sense for government to lead the investment in. Some will be wasted. So, what is the alternative you propose? There’s a lot of important investment and directions that it would be wise to head in that doesn’t get done at all if left to the whim of private investment.
You, sir, are behaving as a corporate stooge, IMO, when you repeat that misdirecting Reagan-”Revolution” shibboleth. It’s caused a lot of damage to this country in the past 30 years, but it’s made some very wealthy people a lot wealthier. I hope you’re one because at least you’ll be getting something out of repeating it.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:08 pm)The best solution for electric vehicle infrastructure is to let the EVs appear, and provide an opportunity for entrepreneurs to provide for their needs. The expense of government-enabled “electric roads” (and their scarcity) shows how inefficient this approach is.
In fact, the market would favor a car which can use both the current infrastructure (oil-derived fuels), and any new infrastructure that appears. The Volt fits this description. It is more practical and less expensive than the BEV alternative, for all but a few. So which approach does the government seem to prefer? You can argue all day about the Volt’s role in the saving of GM, but what foreign company was unambiguously given US taxpayer money to manufacture BEVs for the US market?
Seems to me that in a more ideal world, we would have seen cars like the Volt first, with opportunity slow-rate charging made available by businesses or enterprising individuals as vehicle numbers increase. Level two charging would appear as a business case sometime later. Ultimately, the electric-only infrastructure would be robust enough to make a BEV a paying proposition. Where it might go from there is anyone’s guess (level 3?); but it would follow the decisions of individual consumers, not self-serving politicians perpetually thinking about that next election. For one thing, it would be possible to produce a market-driven infrastructure wherever can be supported; and not only where some politician needs a favor.
The public programs emphasizing infrastructure first are exactly backwards; and we’re all going to pay the price for them.
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:11 pm)How many would they sell at 40,000. And this isn’t quite Iphone 1.0 either.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:16 pm)Oops, comments that cross, lol.
Is there anything wrong with trying to hold waste to a minimum?
Or is your outburst motivated by purely political biases?
(Wikipedia)
Ya’ll quit.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:18 pm)Please support your POV with some kind of argument.
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:19 pm)Volume of 13 million shares so far!!!! Does that mean every share will be resold or are a few day traders slinging the same shares back and forth over and over?
Any news on GM’s IPO conference call yet?
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:19 pm)As far as having higher initial runs than Toyota did with the Prius, the fact you’re omitting is that this is 2010 not 2000. What was appropriate ten years ago isn’t going to cut it today. For starters, in 2000 you didn’t have Korean and Chinese and Indian competition in the wings. You hadn’t had September 11th. Global warming wasn’t on the radar. As far as GM adopting a “smart approach”, that’s yet to be seen. Clearly GM is taking an approach where little is ventured in order to shorten the down side. Whether this is a “smart approach” seems unlikely given how fast GM is going to have to move to stay in place.
There are always two types of risk. You can lose a lot by making bad bets; you can lose by not making large enough bets. By choosing not to move aggressively on production GM is opening the door to more competition and ceding the first mover advantage to Nissan. If you don’t see this you don’t see it. Seems obvious to me that if you don’t fill an ecological niche someone else will fill it for you.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:26 pm)Apple has ruined the music business and the market for selling CD’s at stores like my step dads mom and pop store. Thank goodness he has older patrons. I don’t blame apple though. And I certainly won’t blame GM for ruining the retail gasoline business.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:28 pm)This is the real problem people don’t get it. Everything matters maybe not as much as say over paying governmnet workers by 40%. But the only way out is to understand that every penny matters.
We need only look at ourselfs to show that government waste is no help. Obama himself said if we passed the trillion dollar waste bill we would not go over 8% unemployment and if we didn’t pass his BS waste we would see 10% unemployment. How did that work out???
I hear some now say “Oh but things would have been even worse” So they admit they were incompentent or lieing then. So why would we trust them now???
The waste spending did nothing exciept extend the downturn.
Someone on CNBC said it best “Government spending is like candy, it feels good, it gives you a sugar high, but then it leads to another let down”
I think of it another way, they are trying to fix a down turn that at least in part was caused by too much private debit, By reinflating the bubble with government debit. It will not work.
Government waste will never = Stimulus
Sorry to far off subject again. I am done ranting for today.
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:30 pm)I don’t care if the Volt gets 28 mpg in extended mode on the highway, I still want one. Anyone expecting it to get above 40 is fooling themselves. In the city in extended mode, 45 would be nice.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:32 pm)I’ve observed this before, but given the recent turn in the thread, it bears repeating:
It is possible that cash-strapped GM really cannot produce Volts any faster than the announced production run for Gen I. (Gen II and Gen III are too far in the future to make judgments about, and numbers for these haven’t even been guesstimated). It’s not as though you can go to Pep Boys and get a stack of Prismatic Li/Ion cells at a reasonable price. Something this new doesn’t emerge from a vacuum; the entire chain of supply has to ramp up with it.
We all know that Nissan is using resources offshore to claim (what seems to us today) a huge production volume for it’s electric vehicles. However, it is possible that this approach won’t work quite as well as Ghosn anticipates. Could Nissan be in damage control mode at the very moment GM can put Voltec production to the firewall?
We’re all sooo ready for real news (myself included) that it’s hard to try and look back from a future vantage point and see what could be true. Remember, it wasn’t the Hare that won that famous race …
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:33 pm)I was trying to avoid being a disciple of the obvious. First, EVs at this point have little range. Interstate driving will have the shortest range. Stopping every fifty miles or seventy-five miles for thirty minutes so you can charge your car may be a good way to read War and Peace but not to get anywhere. Second, what fool would risk counting on these stations being operational? States have trouble keeping rest rooms open much less charging stations. And if the station isn’t operational what are you going to do? Wait for 24 hours while you charge from a 120 V line? Third, what fool would think there won’t be a line? If there are three people in front of you a thirty minute charge may take over two hours. If you want to see how ineffective these charging stations will be just look at how successful the CNG charging stations have been. While CNG vehicles have much greater range than EVs, which is a huge advantage, the problems with the filling stations has resulted in everyone filling at home (with the exception of Utah).
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:37 pm)IMHO, I think you’re in for a shock.
I meant to do that.
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:39 pm)I hope so, but since GM has never published these numbers I’m trying to keep my expectations low and lower others unrealistic ones.
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:39 pm)I agree completley DonC. In short, the argument that GM would be silly to lose money on more volume in the short term seems more short sighted. In the long run, it seems likely that it will cost GM much more money than they would otherwise lose by increasing supply on the more expensive (presumably) Gen1.
Sadly, the US is notoriously short sighted in these kinds of financial dilemmas. Seems like that’s partly why we sell our business to foreign companies for short term profit (Anheuser Busch) and rack up record debt ($10+ trillion anyone?)… Short-sightedness is the American way.
join thE REVolution
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:41 pm)Good catch.
I gave you a positive by the way. Not sure why people would give you a negative for collecting two stats and saying that you still want a Volt anyways. How dare you!
Heck, you were even nice enough not to point out that 9 gallons + up to 300 miles range = Up to 33.3 MPG.
I’m also amazed that only one person bothered to comment on your post. For how many years have people come here daily speculating on the ICE MPG and now they have the answer and…. no comment?
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:46 pm)The first thing that would be helpful would be to stop listening to commentators on CNBC. They’re not exactly economic wizards. In fact, if I remember correctly, CNBC commentators were adamant about how fairly valued or under valued stocks were in 2000 and 2008. Or maybe you’re referring to James Cramer. He’s the guy who said that Al Dunlop was a great manager, that Lenny Dykstra was a great investor, and that Microsoft was undervalued at $120/share. CNBC commentators are just entertainers who rarely offer anything of value (This doesn’t apply to qualified smart journalists like David Faber — but he’s not a commentator).
Secondly, we know that deficit spending is an antidote to a failure of aggregate demand. We also know that we’re experiencing a failure of aggregate demand. Deficit spending has worked many times before in this situation. IOW if you lose a trillion dollars of demand your economy will shrink unless you deficit spend. It doesn’t have to be prolonged. What’s so complex?
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:46 pm)We can be so sure that a marketing manual is the final, definite answer? I’m guessing it was printed before the 9 gallon revelation.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:49 pm)I’m a little surprised too GXT (at the lack of comments regarding the potential MPG realization). Regarding the negative votes, I guess I do find myself sounding more pessimistic these days, but I think it’s just being realistic given the information that’s been forthcoming on the Volt lately.
I very much want the Volt to succeed, and I very much want one ASAP. The thought of not having to use gasoline for most of my driving while having limitless range is way too alluring. I just hope GM captures as much market potential as they can, hence my critiquing of the information.
join thE REVolution
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:49 pm)No doubt some people will get over 100 miles. It would BTW be much easier if GM had a setting which allowed you to turn off regen completely (freewheel).
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:50 pm)We’ll take the high road, and you take the low road
And we’ll get to Voltech befo-o-ore ye …
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:55 pm)What’s bothersome to me is that, if their goal was to “underpromse and overdeliver” as was speculated with the 9-gallon announcement, you would expect that to be reflected in what they’re telling the salespeople in the 11th hour. If you look back at all the gasoline tank size discussions, GM consistently favored making the tank smaller despite resulting in less range than they initially touted. To now all of a sudden make it a 9 gallon tank just doesn’t seem to add up, unless the MPG didn’t meet expectations.
Of course, I’m more than happy to be wrong on this one.
join thE REVolution
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (1:58 pm)This..
While Nuclearboy was responding to one person, it aplies to anyone saying GM is too slow…EV’s do NOT make sense, or they would be all over Europe.
(love the “then everyone else is retarded..” comment BTW)
Bet too little, or bet too much…there is a 3rd option..playing it smart…sure the payoff may not be as big initially, but winning one hand, does not get youthte WPT crown…
playing it smart does…
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:09 pm)I sit in the camp that GM is approaching the roll out about right. Most economists are predicting if not a double dip recession, then a long, slow recovery. Read this:
http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/29/markets/thebuzz/index.htm
So with many people in the nation with their wallets pinched shut, an attitude of overall thriftiness, a crazy stock market, relatively cheap gas, high un-employment… Based on the economic conditions alone, maybe GM is in the ball park with their roll-out plans. Furthermore, you seem absolutely convinced that GM can not and will not ever ramp up production if duty calls. And that there is a whole slew of EV companies with product ready to go the day after the Volt hits the market. The only competitor I can see that’s in the same league is the Leaf, and that won’t be available until around Christmas. What else will be hear in November of this year? Just give me a name???
So much of these discussions these days seem to be sounding like paranoia more than anything else. Can’t we find some happiness and satisfaction that a great milestone is coming to pass?
-8
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:18 pm)It is common dum dum to do and pretend not to see what is there. To not see truth.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:24 pm)The equivalent to freewheeling in an EV is to hold the ‘gas pedal’ at a setting that doesn’t accelerate or decelerate from the vehicle’s current momentum. You wouldn’t want to turn regen off for safety and energy recovery reasons. Regen is designed as part of the braking system.
BTW, you really shouldn’t freewheel (put the transmission in neutral) on any other vehicle either. Hypermiler techniques are dangerous if other traffic is around.
Didn’t I read somewhere where Volt *does* have an ‘N’ on it’s shifter? (PRNDL)
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:24 pm)Finally some good discussion here, it’s been awhile.
I agree with DonC on this one. Putting chargers along the interstate every 70 or so miles is ridiculous. Talk about a critical supply chain.
If any of these things go down, ANY of them, EVERYONE with a BEV stops instantly on that road. Not to mention the lines of people waiting. Imagine if gas stations were only available every 300 miles or so. And it takes only a few minutes to fill up.
I have nothing against BEV’s. They have their place, but it’s not on the interstates.
EREV’s would not have this problem. The gov’t would not have to waste money on charging stations on the interstate. Hope everyone sees that.
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:29 pm)Ummm… See yesterdays thread
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:30 pm)In honor of our experiences on this website, the Volt’s shifter will say PDNFTT.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:32 pm)Apparently not all of us.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:33 pm)Good to see that the talks & rumors are now becoming official!!
Charging up the I-5!!! Some rest stops have been getting transformer upgrades of late…
GO EV!!!!
-8
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:40 pm)Stupid dum dum. There is gas stations every 100 miles already for all freeway. Now just need charge statuon because every station already have lectricity. Volt use gas and dirty. Bev better.
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:49 pm)GM can’t say what the CS MPG is until they have an official EPA number. That number must be computed using official EPA methodology. They probably know exactly what the MPG will be but have to wait until all the Ts are dotted and the Is are crossed. I don’t know what the number(s) will be but GM can’t just fling about unofficial numbers. Now, they may very will already have those numbers but they are planning a big roll out for them. Remember the dog and pony show they did for their 230MPG announcement?
The important questions are “How many gallons of gas will I have burned at the end of the year or 15,000 miles? How much electricity to recharge?” I do know that if I were currently driving a Volt, I would have used less than one gallon of gas during the whole month of June and I average about 1000 miles a month.
Jun 29th, 2010 (2:57 pm)obviously you are not aware that 80% of the electricity generated in the USA is from COAL fired plants, far dirtier than gas, even with the great improvements in their cleanliness…
But then if you look at the satelite imagery of the earth where the greatest pollution is, china is worst…
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:01 pm)Shhhh!! Don’t bring up anything that remotely resembles a fact to these guys.
Their heads might explode from the stress. Then we wouldn’t have the comedy to laugh at all day……
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:04 pm)lol
+3
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:05 pm)The last time someone called me a dum dum, I was just finishing changing his diaper.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:17 pm)Please no more comparisons between Apple and other companies (i.e. GM etc).
The only thing you have to remember is this:
APPLE DOES NOT MAKE JUNK ! (Stop comparing Apples to Oranges people !)
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:21 pm)WOT
Holy crap. Tesla opened at $19 and closed at $23.89. A couple minutes before close, they hit $25.
Meanwhile, the rest of Nasdaq tanked.
I was wrong. The TSLA guy was right. Daytraders coulda made a few bux today.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:23 pm)What can we deduce when a new American Car company that only makes and sells one model car, which has sold less than 2,000 cars, and has not turned a profit, IPO’s for $17 /share and hits a same day high of at $25 per share?
Tesla Motors – TSLA
NPNS!
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:33 pm)You might change your mind once GM turns the hybrid Volt into an EV and drops the ICE. It will happen. Soon or later GM will be forced to join the rest of the EV world.
Your statements are silly and show a closed mind. Get a clue you pinhead.
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:35 pm)That which is deduced depends entirely on what happens next. Will a good day on the stock market translate into material success at making and selling EVs?
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:38 pm)SHOW ME THE MONEY !!!
Yep a lot of people are getting rich today. Shares at Tesla are far exceeding expectations ! Nobody could have predicted this.
It’s a great day for America.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:54 pm)Any automaker with a serious commitment to electrification will eventually be forced to develop an EREV. Once the True Believers are satisfied, automakers will find a pressing need to sell cars to everyone else. Furthermore, many of the “True Believers” may have a crisis of faith once they live with the electric leash for awhile; many will not want to return to an ICE, or mere hybrid. It would be foolish to let their business slip away.
It is the makers of the first Battery-Only vehicles which will be forced to join GM in the real world — if they can.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:54 pm)Wow Tesla market cap blew past the $2 BILLION mark today !
Elon Musk scored big, he even sold 1 million of his own personal shares in the IPO. Good move Mr. Musk.
Add this huge influx of cash to the $783 million they raised even before the IPO and you get the picture.
Congratulations to everybody associated with Mr. Musk and Telsa, you guys deserve it.
Reminder to all you Volt fans:
Without Elon Musk and his company their would be no Volt today !
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (3:54 pm)YUP!!! Made about 4K today – put that in the Volt fund…. Tommorrow I am going to short sell TSLA as i do not see todays activity as anything more than speculators speculating. When people actually look at the companies financials they will dump their stock fast.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:01 pm)I just hope that GM gets the PRICING right. If they can price it around $27,000 or less, there’s going to be a TON of people who will want to buy Volts in 2011. Especially if Volt owners get all sorts of extra privileges because they are early adopters who are “going electric”.
The states should offer their own tax credits, HOV lane access, free charging, free parking, more convenient parking spaces close to buildings, NO fees for tag renewal, etc. All of these things will make buying a Volt really attractive. Who doesn’t like getting special privileges that other people don’t get? America as a society has a major goal that needs to be accomplished in the next 20 years … ENERGY INDEPENDENCE. SAVING MONEY is a huge benefit since you only have to pay 2 cents a mile or so for the electricity for your Volt vs. the 20 cents a mile for typical vehicles people drive right now.
LESS POLLUTION is a great side benefit. It’s already been proven that there will be LESS AIR POLLUTION overall even if you live in an area that gets 75% of its electricity from coal plants. Besides, by the time 80% of the public is driving electric cars in 10-20 years, America will probably already have switched to cleaner electric plants like natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind, etc. That means a LOT less air pollution in the next 20 years or so.
We might be driving fuel cell cars in 20 years anyway. Fuel cells cars are expensive now, but if they go way down in price they are the ULTIMATE green cars as far as emissions go. We might be able to generate our own hydrogen in our garages just like with electricity. Honda plans to sell these in the next few years for their Clarity fuel cell car.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:06 pm)CS mode has nothing to do with EPA numbers except as a composite with the electric drive.
GM can reveal their test results independently of the EPA. GM will not reveal these test results, however, as they are IP (intellectual property).
Why would GM state what pure CS mode MPG is when it is irrelevant to the true operation of the vehicle? Blended driving with both grid power and gasoline will always be well above the 50 MPG CS design goal. All three EPA numbers (city, highway, and combined) will be above 50 MPG because the EPA drive cycles INCLUDE 40 miles AER.
I predict that we will not know what the CS mode MPG is until someone gets a Volt and tests it. Even then, the test results will reflect the test parameters.
Normal drivers will be able to easily exceed the EPA estimates by recharging whenever possible. GM internal users have, in fact, reported over 400mpg during their weekend driving routine.
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:13 pm)Traders are betting on the future. I suspect many traders already know the financials…. You are correct there is a bump today and the stock will probably go down for a short time.
The real bet maybe what will Toyota do with their involvement with Tesla.
All of this might impact on the VOLT …. but I suspect it will be the reverse. When the VOLT takes off and GMs stock is offered and well received then Tesla will see a jump.
It should be a win win for both.
I believe the future is electric for cars and these two companies have exciting vehicles right now. Then what ever Toyota does will help. VOLT – Tesla – Prius are the first real EV game changers. And, yes, Ford is poised to make an impact … but more in the future.
It will be worth looking at Tesla stock for awhile and buy on the drop… if it does … good luck on your short options.
-10
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:14 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:19 pm)PLEASE tell me you didn’t actually write this, here!!!
Hydrogen is not an energy source, it’s an energy carrier. You need energy to liberate hydrogen from the compounds which contain it. What will you be making the hydrogen from in your garage? Electricity and water? You’ll get greater efficiency by using your electricity to charge a battery. Natural Gas? The energy here is chemical; you’ll remove the hydrogen from CH4 and water vapor, releasing CO2. If you store the hydrogen on board in pressurized tanks, you’ll spend more energy to do the compressing. Liquid hydrogen — you just don’t want to go there.
Given that there is a cabal of dedicated fuel cell researchers at GM who have placed themselves in opposition to Voltec, and that the Oil companies are all for it (you can liberate H2 from all sorts of hydrocarbons), there is no reason to support the technology here.
Once Fusion or something similar takes over energy production in the US, it may not matter if production of Hydrogen is inefficient; but that would take far longer than 20 years, even if there were a working fusion reactor design in hand.
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:28 pm)I don’t care about any of that. I just want a Volt and a GenI Volt would be sweet!
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:28 pm)If you really want EV to gain a foothold on American soil I would invite you to call your broker or get online and purchase some Tesla stock (TSLA) ASAP! As soon as tomorrow if possible. It is imperative that we all come together for this wonderful cause.
If you truly believe that the Volt will change the world I would urge you to show your true convictions by purchasing some Tesla stock to keep the EV momentum going strong.
We can do this Volt fans, lets band together and order up some Telsa to show our support for all things electric. Let us rid ourselves of foreign oil dependency and what better way to do this than to open up your checkbook with a nice investment into TSLA today !
Thank you and have a nice day.
NPNS
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:31 pm)It’s the kind that makes your McCrotch Ech.
+3
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:35 pm)I just got an e-mail update from Nissan on my LEAF order. They send me an e-mail update every 2-3 weeks since I put the $99 deposit down. That is customer service and it shows that they want the EV to suceed. Once again there is a reason why GM is buildign the EV Spark for India but will not bring it to US soil……
-4
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:37 pm)You get emails every week from sellers of Viagra. What does that prove?
-7
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:38 pm)That’s what the Volt causes…..lol
GM seems to want to LIE to everyone and try and say you run on electric all the time. Seems right, they have to lie to sell this nasty polluting piece of crap. 33.3 MPG from the 9 gallon tank and everyone keeps saying it’s a leapfrog over the Prius? What joke!
GM lies to sell a product means GM sells garbage.
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:41 pm)#120 “We might be driving fuel cell cars in 20 years anyway. Fuel cells cars are expensive now, but if they go way down in price they are the ULTIMATE green cars as far as emissions go.”
I agree!!!! Fuel Cells are not going to be practical for at least 20 years as noted above.
Electricity is now…. and will the major way to reduce emissions. The VOLT has the best solution for an all around EV in the current time frame.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:42 pm)-2
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:43 pm)An American company that turns it’s back on Americans. Brilliant!
Save the company so they can turn their backs on US.
NO EV FOR YOU!
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:43 pm)Nice to see some charging stations going up on our interstates. It about time.
I hope some have a FAST high speed charging plugs compatible with Nissan LEAF.
Remember that the Volt only has a single (aka standard) charging port while the Nissan has two ports, one standard and the other high voltage high speed that can charge in minutes instead of the hours it takes a Volt to recharge.
Nissan leading by example. (Charging done right)
Unfortunately the Chevy Volt cannot be rapidly charged, sorry but this is very bad news.
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:50 pm)Rapid charging for an EREV is irrelevant. You refill in a couple of minutes instead of fast charging for 30. It’s like complaining that a horseless carriage has no place to hitch up a horse in front. The purpose of the Volt is to allow routine daily driving to be done on electricity without the expensive, State-sponsored charger, and use gasoline for longer trips.
You’ll find it difficult to saturate America with the level three chargers you’d need to stem the growth of ER-EV.
And by the way, Carlos (may I call you Carlos?), you might want to provide a ready means of hitching a horse to the front of the LEAF for use when the battery goes flat on a trip to the country …
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:51 pm)Very true. Though the next problem is, you are competing to over throw one hundred years of scientific, engineering, entrepreneurial and customer convenience refinement for the ICE universe. People are comfortable in their investment and life style from the status quo – ICE vehicles and filling stations. Most are not prepared to be early adopters.
Let the market handle it sounds good, but 100 years of marketing and service infrastructure for ICE’s, combined with government support and subsidies for the existing “petroleum based highways” likely means we see the popular conversion to electric cars after we are dead, so to speak.
The early adopters you, will be examples that spread EV and ER-EV adoption. People will need to see you driving around before the next group of customers is willing to try it. With a few demonstration chargers there will be stories of people taking trips to recreational areas along corridors like I 5 and the next group of consumers will think, why don’t we have that.
If the chargers are owned and run by government they will fall apart from minuscule maintenance budgets, like the rest of the roads bridges and highways. Though a study in Japan showed EV drivers were using their EV’s more and driving farther just knowing fast chargers were available. But like DonC said, they still were charging at home, just more confidently. Yes, the public chargers were rarely used, but they did lead to more EV utilization…ironic? Wasteful? Necessary to create the critical mass needed for the ICE to EV and ER-EV change over?
Once entrepreneurs see niches where chargers can make money, they will be installed quickly and properly maintained. Niches rhymes with riches
But what came first the chicken or the egg?
Some smart entrepreneurs will look at the studies of public chargers and laugh at the assumptions, wasted effort and lack of ability to see the real needs and opportunities. Some large organizations will laugh and say what cute little mom and pop scale dollars are actually on the table. And at some point some entrepreneurs will take the risks and build the key elements of our new transport systems. But it all has to start somewhere.
We have the chance to do what is required so that a handful of sheiks, political strong men and dictators are no longer laughing all the way to the bank, while funding those that hate us. If it takes a tiny tiny fraction of our GDP to build up the experience, anecdotes, hopes, and aspirations that will evolve around mass adoption of EV’s ER-EV’s, then some scattered charging stations and whatever limited or experimental infrastructure it takes, to do it then do it, I will not begrudge it.
We have the most creative and dynamic economy on the planet. Sometimes being creative can just be defined as just trying stuff that that no one before you was dumb enough to waste their time on. How much waste and lost effort do you think it took to reach the moon, or win World War II. Should the efforts have been called off because of it?
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:52 pm)I keep reminding GM to rollout the Voltecs here in Seattle. What more do we have to do to get a larger-scale distribution?!
In my mind Seattle/Tacoma/Bellevue is the number one market opportunity!
See link: http://blog.seattlepi.com/transportation/archives/212847.asp
I-5 is the major interstate N-S from the Canadian border through the entire state of California. Washington’s governer has committed to stage 3 quick charging stations all along the corridor in our state, at least every 80 miles! Add to that class 2 charging stations and home charging units to the number of 2,500 and counting….plus the ones that are already there , such as many EV slots at Seattle/Tacoma Airport.
Right now as we speak, many California Costco locations have three or four EV charging stalls located near their auto bays – as do a couple of Wal-Mart stores back East. Several EV fan sites have posted photos of these parking slots with shopping carts stacked in them, or with regular ICE powered cars filling them up.
The infrastructure is here, GM, we just need the cars!
If you read the link above, you can see my city is arguably number one in EV infrastructure, or surely will be by November. My city has purchased more GM hybrid electric metro buses than any other, and as mentioned in the above link, almost all of our electricity here is cleanly produced hydropower or wind. What a perfect place to introduce electric transportation – as I’ve shared before, the Priuses here line the roads like weeds, and our largest public power utility has committed to a purchase of 2,500 LEAFs.
It shows that infrastructure buildup of charging stations happens in a natural progression and rather quickly, if only the cars would be distributed to those areas where local governments are completely on board, and the customers ( like me ) are just waiting….and waiting…..and……
Come on GM – is anybody listening?
I want my Volt in Transformer Blue, please. Don’t make me buy a plug-in Prius.
RECHARGE!
James
-4
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:55 pm)The increase in an EV infrastructure comes with an increase in coal fired publicly traded energy company profitability.
So, Carlos, how’s your energy stock portfolio doing? Too many of them taking a dive? More coal is needed to fire up the new plants needed to feed the infrastructure needed to sell more Leafs, huh.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (4:56 pm)We have a pact to not comment on stupid shit, but, I have a little time today…
1. You drive your ICE car until the tank is completely empty? yikes! Hope your AAA is paid up.
2. That’s 340 miles. You forgot the 40 miles AER.
3. The ‘up to 300′ miles is from one source and the 9 gallon tank is from another (non GM) source. You actually believe that you can do this crazy math problem and have it make sense?
4. During this 340 miles.. how much electricity was recovered during regen?
5. How many times did you recharge during this week of driving? It takes 78% of people more than 8 days to go that far.
n. etc. etc. etc.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:02 pm)Different horseless carriages for different functional needs? My former supervisor has seven kids, your ER-EV won’t do much good for him. My neighbor across the street has a Prius that has rarely if ever been more than 40 miles from home, Carlos’ car would work perfectly for them.
Trying to tear down valid ways of reducing oil consumption is counter productive.
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:03 pm)See what happens when you stay away, Tagamet? You have to keep us all in line.
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:05 pm)Well it looks like my ship finally came in. I was lucky enough to purchase a nice block of stock in Tesla today, well before it broke $25. I only own a small amount of the 99 million shares of TSLA but it is more than enough to meet my needs. Finally I can actually buy one of those EV that Tesla makes. Actually I am now looking at buying the “other” EREV vehicle from Fiskar since I think it looks a lot better than the Volt.
Anyway just wanted to thank this site (gm-volt.com) for peeking my interest in EV and leading me to eventually purchase the Tesla stock. Hopefully it will go higher in the coming weeks and I can purchase some other EV goodies and invest in some retirement options. Yes I am now thinking about retiring after this windfall. God Bless America.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:05 pm)You’re absolutely right about Seatle.
88% from dams
6% nuclear
3% wind and only
2% coal and natural gas.
And you’re still paying about 10 cents/kw to do so.
The stress on the grid in the near future is negligible. The time to plan for your area to bump up the power is now.
Quebec is another excellent area to go EV.
The rest of us aren’t so lucky.
-3
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:06 pm)I think the tax rebates and any rebates for that matter should be restricted to only what is the “useable” battery capacity not just the size of the pack. This ensures that poor inefficient cars like the Volt don’t benefit. Why waste tax funds on helping everyone carry around 50% more battery capacity but not use the full available depth? It’s a waste of energy lugging around 50% more storage dead weight you can’t use.
Only offer the rebate to cars that use either the 70% to 80% full depth of discharge for the entire pack.
Volt = “EoDEV” (Extended oil Dependence Electric Vehicle)
-2
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:06 pm)It will not be long before EREV describes more than the Chevy Volt. Your friend with seven kids may yet find himself driving one. A big one. I hope it’s made by GM.
In the larger sense, you’re correct; but I was getting sick of all these Tesla IPO and LEAF trolls.
What do you mean taking away my fun like that?
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:10 pm)I am starting to get angry.
Do not make me turn on Caps Lock.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:12 pm)Perhaps. Though the largest share of new power generating installations for the last few years has been wind, followed by NG. By a wide margin.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:15 pm)Me thinks some not-so-bright stockbroker or Tesla investor has decided flooding Facebook, Twitter and EV fansites is a way to market Tesla stock.
( groan )
RECHARGE!
James
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:23 pm)And this is a step in the right direction. Peak charging doesn’t make sense in areas powering most of us. As much as I would love to pick up a nice little EV, smart money only charges at night and relegates the car to the little stuff and second car status.
Fostering daytime charging in a coal fired area turns a lot of people into hypocrites.
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:27 pm)From: http://www.awea.org/faq/wwt_statistics.html
This is good, but 6% isn’t a lot. This also illustrates the need of more than one strategy for energy independence.
Furthermore, the greater the energy coming from natural sources, the greater the need for grid-connected energy storage. I strongly believe that this should take the form of professionally run storage technologies separate from those used to power automobiles. Dealing with the increased limitations of driving an EV (and/or the greater expense of purchasing one) is daunting enough without having to take into account the needs of a utility which can’t or won’t buy it’s own batteries.
-4
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:27 pm)You’re right, it will be described as a dirty polluter, Gas burner, dependent on foreign oil….the list goes on.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:27 pm)Hi, Jackson – This is the “original” James. Hey bud, for God’s sakes man, please go to yesterday’s article and read my post #150. We want to get rid of these nuts. Giving in to their provocation is only playing into their game —- and ruining the site, esp. for later in the day posters.
Cheers,
RECHARGE!
James
P.S. – Sage Advice Dept. – Grandma always said, “Pick Your Battles, Don’t Let The Battles Pick You”
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:36 pm)+1
Couldn’t have said it better.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:37 pm)Actually even in areas that have no coal-fired plants does NOT mean your energy is coming locally since most are tied to some regional grid. Lots of hyporcrites for sure.
BTW, there is no such thing as a national grid. Here in Texas we are the leading producer of wind generated power in the entire World and Texas is NOT connected to any regional grid. In fact Texas has its own totally independent grid. So anytime you here talk of some nationwide grid you can dismiss the commenter as a loon.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:48 pm)If this is true, I think it would be a proper role for the national government to establish one. At the risk of sounding like someone I don’t like very much, you could call it “The Electricity Superhighway.” Like the Interstate system, it would allow something funded totally by the Government to have long-lasting benefits for everyone from Aunt Emily in Eastaboga to every major industry in the nation.
Perhaps it could include research into establishing large-scale superconducting technology. There is something elegant to the idea that solar collectors out West would still be in daylight powering East Coast cities after dark. If alternate energy is to really take off, there needs to be a realistic way to get the power from where it can be made to the places where it is used.
This would be a far better use for public funds than putting EV chargers on a short stretch of Interstate Highway somewhere.
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:51 pm)Wind is really a problematic source because it’s very unpredictable. As for energy independence, keep in mind that we have two energy systems. One is related to the electrical grid. The second is related to transportation. If the primary problem is oil, both for environmental and national security reasons, wind doesn’t help much because, since we don’t use oil to produce electricity, adding wind to the electrical grid doesn’t displace any oil (this wasn’t true originally since we earlier did use oil to produce electricity). Also, even if we could produce all the oil we need from NA sources, that still wouldn’t solve the security or the environmental problems because oil would still be used throughout the rest of the world and would still be a strategic commodity. The problem is oil. Not foreign oil. Just oil.
FWIW it seems pretty clear that rather than spending bundles on somewhat exotic renewables such as wind or solar we’d be better off spending a lot less switching coal plants to natural gas. It’s nice to say that we should implement all alternatives but what that means in practice is that the government provides large subsidies for the least practical options rather than subsidizing those things that give you the most bang for the buck.
-4
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:53 pm)I prefer Grandpa’s advice:
“You can pick your friends, and you can pick your nose, but you can’t pick your friend’s nose.”
I suppose you don’t let people in your household talk back to TV commercials, either.
You know, if you would do some negative voting, I wouldn’t see the Troll drivel to battle against. Just saying …
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:57 pm)No. Only if it truly does come to pass
For GM talk is cheap. Videos are cheap. Websites are cheap. Concept cars are cheap. Even a 3 year testing and engineering excercise that is flaunted before Americans and their government – is cheap. ——-
Cheaper, evidently, than introducing an end product of all this green advertising for sale in all 50 ( or even 25 ) states in numbers greater than enough to say “we did it”.
Don’t call talk from those of us on the wait-and-see side pessimists – we’re realists who yearn for GM to do something good, but don’t have rose-colored glasses. We use the measuring stick of what GM has always done in it’s long past.
Today I read an interesting letter to Motor Trend that won it’s Letter Of The Month. We all remember what Big Auto did to Tucker back in the ’40s. But this was new information to me. One of the great American auto companies was Packard. We all recognize the stately chromed wonderbeasts in vintage auto shows – the cars of stars and the well to do. It was the class leader during the ’30s and after the Great Depression. Charles Wilson, GM president, took a leave of absence to become the U.S. Secretary of Defense in January 1953. He cancelled $329 million worth of defense contracts held by Packard and Studebaker. This denied the merged companies the profitable military business S-P needed to adequately finance it’s car development projects. As a result, Packard production was terminated.
So when some on here say “hey, isn’t GM worthy of our praise based purely on the premise that they even produced a few EV-2s (Volts) since it’s a tech milestone?” I say -
To me, GM has a lot to prove to all of us. And we can’t find happiness in the weak commitment to production that they have indicated to date. True happiness will come if …..and I say if…..GM finally decides to build them and sell them where and in numbers we can all buy and drive.
A true milestone, to me, would be a car that actually was driven by many to help reduce our dependence on oil and foreign oil, and helped clean our air so future generations can breathe.
RECHARGE!
James
-11
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:58 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (5:59 pm)A recent study shows that it is in the nature of wind to be blowing in another place nearby if it isn’t blowing where you are. The trick for utilities would be in distributing the towers widely enough within a region such that enough are being powered at any given time to meet a set demand.
Even at this, the comment you’re quoting also has a lot to say about grid-tied storage, and not by accident. We need a grid which can take some of that variability out of electricity sources. In addition, large plants with constant 24/7 outputs (such as Nuclear) could supply more of their energy at peak times if it could be stored at night. If this storage capacity is distributed enough, it could even allow existing lines to carry double the energy by running at full capacity 24/7 (with the expectation that some of the energy delivered closer to load will be stored for peak use). There is a lot of win in this idea, and not just for wind. How could there not be? You would essentially be turning the entire electricity grid into a Volt.
Isn’t the goal we’re working toward the replacement of the transportation energy system by a larger, more efficient electrical grid (at least to a large extent)? We cannot look at the EV separately from the electrical network which powers them.
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:00 pm)I usually have the latest National Geographic on my coffee table. The July issue is relevant here. It references your situation in Texas too.
There is a contribution written by Joel Achenbach and with it is an interactive illustration. (pictures are fun for the kids here!)The article gives a pretty good overview of our sources of electricity. Here’s the link to an interactive map.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/07/power-grid/grid-interactive
The article reads better from the magazine itself.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:01 pm)GM Volt Fan said:
We might be driving fuel cell cars in 20 years anyway.
Now I know why I wouldn’t like a Fuel Cell Volt, you can’t connect a Fuel Cell to the wheels with a clutch. You know, for Pinks night at the local drag-strip. Now that’s a good use of $1 worth of grid power.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:02 pm)First Auto IPO since Ford way back in the fifties.
IPO lead by Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank, THESE ARE THE HEAVY HITTERS.
Selling like gangbusters. woot.
Model S…….coming soon
IT”S ALL GOOD.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:03 pm)That you need a better spam filter!
-7
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:04 pm)The Volt is just CARB credits so GM can sell the Taho/Suburban SUV’s. They’ll sell only enough to keep selling SUV’s. No desire to be green, just “Greenwashed”.
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:17 pm)Well, if you won’t go back to yesterday’s post I’ll give you a refresher.
I’m Irish, and I grew up in a family that liked to argue. That got old though because most of us learn that nothing comes of arguments – it’s merely ego vs. ego – “I’m right and you’re wrong”.
So wisdom goes with what works. Here’s what works online:
I had a civilized chat room back in the day. We noticed a rise in interlopers when someone in our group argued with them, or got sucked in when they were provoked. Why do they provoke? Well, it takes all kinds, and our site could have been considered controversial , by some. If they’d wanted to discuss, intellectually question, or offer sound discussion they would’ve been welcomed with open arms, but these were people who evidently did not get enough love growing up. They’re all the same – they use sophomoric screennames like Crotch Breath, and they only come in to stir up trouble. Most of us finally learned that completely ignoring them – which entails not calling them names ( “trolls” ) or giving them negative votes or even acknowledging they were even there — was the trick. In fact, they all just disappeared into the vapor when we used discipline and didn’t let them get under our skin – something they try very hard to do. You see, it is only by attention that they can invade and even sometimes take over a thread or site.
Some people ( whether they had a bad day, or just couldn’t control the urge to debate idiots ) just couldn’t learn that simple online lesson. So when someone would resort to name-calling or votes or, arguing…..it only fed the dork on the other end, and on it went…..Until we could sufficiently convince that person to just pretend that person was invisible. When they don’t get the attention they so dearly, evidently need – like children – they just miraculously vanish in time.
The neg votes, the pictures, the arguing with dolts doesn’t enhance gm-volt. There is not one person here who finds it entertaining or enlightening in the least. It only takes over the thread and believe me, that’s not good. Agree?
Please, Jackson — Please realize this truth and stop feeding the insects.
RECHARGE!
James
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:18 pm)This is a great mis-statement. It would be more accurate to say the debate is about how strong the recovery will be. Predictions about a double dip are on the fringe, which doesn’t necessarily mean they’re wrong. But definitely not mainstream.
As for how this will affect car sales, GM is predicting SAR in 2010 to be between 11.5M-12M. Nothing dire about those numbers. Moreover, the issue isn’t production in 2010 or even 2011 for that matter. The issue is GM’s seemingly complete lack of confidence in the best new product it has had in the last hundred years, and the fact that this great product won’t be revolutionary if GM doesn’t make any of them. Spend a billion developing a product and then make 40K of them a year because “they cost so much”? You have got to be kidding.
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:21 pm)Same year!
Time to book the appointment for the home charger!!!
GO EV!!!
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:23 pm)Nissan says it will make 250,000 battery packs a year at its plant in Smyrna and that it will happily sell some of those packs (up to 125,000) to other car manufacturers. Problem solved?
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:29 pm)Everyone will be very happy? Not the buyers who got a Volt pushed at high volume through an immature production process. My first-year-of-production 1982 Trans Am came from the factory missing the bolts for one end of the radiator cross brace. The transmission failed after six months. The rear sway bar attachment hardware fell off after a couple of years. Washing the car shorted out the windshield wiper. The cruise control could never be fixed to maintain speed. Topping off the tank would flood the evaporative emissions filter. Much of the T/A’s problems were design flaws. Several were from rushed production. This is how GM used to work. They don’t work this way any more.
So get used to the fact that you won’t be seeing a lot of Volts in the first year while they learn how to make them exactly right, and they find all the design flaws that they didn’t catch during the extensive pre-production testing. “It’s hard to make something foolproof because fools are so darned ingeneous”.
PS: So Apple produced lots of iPhones. Big deal. In 1998, Coke was producing 606 million bottles a day. Producing a bottle of Coke has about as much in common with producing a Volt as the iPhone’s production does.
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:29 pm)No, the square peg won’t fit in the round hole.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3csfLkMJT4&feature=related
-7
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:35 pm)Yes, the truth is the Volt runs/sucks on “Drivel” slop of the Arab Sheiks and Prince. It is by design that it burns nasty gas all so GM can earn credits to continue to sell more polluting SUV’s then pretend they are going to “End Dependence” on foreign oil. Yeah right, end dependence with a gas burner. More like keep the US hooked.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (6:37 pm)Yes – time to schedule the Fast charger. Although I do believe that I can get by with the onboard standard 110/120V charger. The 220V will be nice luxury to have…
+3
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:08 pm)Nobody commented on the post because you guys don’t get it. You will never get it. And we know it.
The VOLT is not about ‘maximum miles per tank’ of gas. It is about using American-made electricity MOST of the time. I’m getting a VOLT for my wife who drives about 10 miles each way to and from work. On the weekends, maybe 30 to 60 miles in one day… tops.
So, Monday through Friday, NO GAS! Just plug in each night. On the weekends, ‘maybe’ she will use 1 gallon of gas. This is the wole point of the VOLT. Maybe it’s not for you, but it is for us. If all you can think about is MPG’s per tank, then you really need to go back to school and get a real education.
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:16 pm)This makes no sense, Don.
Why would you switch from coal to ng? Both are fossil fuels and both are locally sourced. The only upside is a little less pollution. The downside is the massive expense to switch over.
We need to get off of ALL fossil fuels eventually. Any move to renewable sources such as wind, solar, hydro, wave, and even nuclear (fusion, not fission) are better.
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:36 pm)Super regional, national, or internationally based grids will vastly limit the need for grid tied storage at the same time smarter grids the proliferation of aging propulsion batteries inspires entrepreneurs to set up relatively cheap storage systems. ie, the wind is always blowing somewhere in NA and 10 year old Volt batteries will still have 70% or more of their capacity, but it will require a smarter grid to make use of these factors.
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:37 pm)Well….If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…….
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:42 pm)So, how do you define a crook? Seems that your second statement contradicts your first. Crooks don’t have to actually pick your pocket. Performing something just because it furthers their own interest, without any consideration to how it impacts others, would be one of my definitions of a crook.
-8
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:50 pm)ER-EV = Energy Retarded EV
What the hell are you thinkin GM. And what with the 9 gallons of gasoline in every Volt ??
What the hell are you making GM ?
What the hell ?
Just build an EV dag nabbit !
Get your other foot out of the ME Oil hole you freggin Government Motor morons. what dat you smokin in da detroit ghettos .
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:51 pm)If you look at recent statistics it is happening already. Using NG means fewer pristine mountains and forests are removed. And tons of sulfur and mercury will not be released into the air. Though when coal plants are decommissioned the issue of what to do with hundreds tons of toxic slag built up over the years still must be decided.
Yet more wind has actually been installed for the last two or three years than NG. The first 3 to 5 years wind seems relatively expensive. For the next 25 years no fuel will be required to spin those turbines, eventually saving bundles of cash.
-3
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:56 pm)I almost blew my head gasket when I saw that every new Chevy Volt comes with 9 gallons of Middle East gasoline.
Stand back I think she’s a gonna blow for sure this time.
Mind boggling…is that a bottle in front of me….or did i just get a frontal labotomy ?
-2
Jun 29th, 2010 (7:57 pm)DonC said:
Nissan says it will make 250,000 battery packs a year at its plant in Smyrna and that it will happily sell some of those packs (up to 125,000) to other car manufacturers.
Are you talking about the summertime seat warmers, that Leaf will have?
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:09 pm)There are a lot of competing interests. Pick one that makes sense for your wallet and has good lobbyists, or one that doesn’t and has good lobbyists. How do you convince a politician to do the right thing when every one says their way is the only way to do the right thing?
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:11 pm)Some people (read most people) are going to have to balance their desire to use less gas along with their desire to stay solvent in the process.
There’s plug-in competition out there ….Plug-in-Prius and Leaf to name just two. Many more to follow.
MPG in CS mode won’t be THE most critical spec on the Volt. But it’s an important one, none the less.
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:28 pm)Yeah, I got a little hot politically there. Sorry, all.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:38 pm)I challenge that assertion. Nothing we do will have the slightest effect on john1701a, for example (this is why I’ve cooled so much on his case recently — it simply doesn’t do any good; and neither does ignoring him).
The other side of your view is that those who protest are the cause of Trolls, and this is simply not the case.
Finally, paid squads of Trolls have put this site in their sights many times (not hard to figure out why). The one I called “No-Name” yesterday was a regular for over a year.
If Trolls are a fact of Internet forums, the most you can hope for is to use them, if only for comedic value (but at best, as a nucleus for getting out some useful information).
We can try it your way if you like; but the most it will accomplish is to reduce the number of posts each troll makes; not the number of trolls. This isn’t your board back in the day. A lot of parties have vested interests (or a predisposition to hope) in GM to fail. Don’t believe me? Stay Tuned.
Jun 29th, 2010 (8:57 pm)This whole affair is so much better then politics. Instead of having to convince people, Volt will be able to show people.
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:02 pm)I gave you a +1 for hoping.
-4
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:11 pm)Volt = “EoDEV” (Extended oil Dependence Electric Vehicle)
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:16 pm)Frankly, if you’re got enough money to spend more than $25,000 on a car, and you’re not paying any income tax, then I think you are already cheating the rest of us who are paying taxes. I don’t want you to get a dime out of the government.
-3
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:21 pm)The “CS Mode” on a Nissan LEAF is the generator running on the AAA Tow Truck that shows up every time you run out of charge. So, please give it up. There is no comparison.
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:26 pm)There are downsides to NG production as well. Aquifers are being devastated by the fracking to crack out NG from shale. In Texas, NG drilling has been related to toxins in the water and increased earthquake activity. Once a water table is contaminated it is pretty much impossible to un-contaminate. (Really bad carcinogens, like dioxin. Remember Love Canal? Ever heard of Erin Brockovich?)
Yeah, coal is not that great and NG is slightly better, but, I maintain that switching from coal to NG is like switching trees when it’s raining. You’re still gonna get wet.
BOTH coal and NG are better than continuing to import massive amounts of crude for the short term. Long term we need to use renewable and sustainable energy sources.
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:30 pm)I think the tax rebates and any rebates for that matter should be restricted to only what is the “useable” battery capacity not just the size of the pack. This ensures that poor inefficient cars like the Volt don’t benefit. Why waste tax funds on helping everyone carry around 50% more battery capacity but not use the full available depth. It’s a waste of energy lugging around 50% more storage dead weight you can’t use.
Only offer the rebate to cars that use either the 70% to 80% depth of discharge for the entire pack.
Volt = “EoDEV” (Extended oil Dependence Electric Vehicle)
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:36 pm)You’re correct amigo. The LEAF will use only 100Electricity and the Volt will consume petroleum just as every GM car. Old technology and they claim this and treat it as new technology.
No comparison at all.
LEAF = Green 100% gas free
Volt = Old technology gas consumer
Volt loses hands down.
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:37 pm)We have lots of natural gas and a lot of other countries have lots of natural gas. All that has to happen is that the drilling companies have to start disclosing what they’re using for fracking.
Natural gas eliminates all pollutants. The only thing it doesn’t eliminate is CO2, but it does eliminate almost half of that. It can be almost 70% efficient. It’s not intermittent. It is also a point source so you have a decent shot at carbon sequestration. Plus it’s cheap. If you spend $100 on wind you displace a fraction of the coal generation you displace with the same $100 spent on NG, so you get a much bigger bang for the buck if you want to reduce pollutants and emissions. It’s great that wind or solar are “perfect” from an emissions standpoint, but if these sources only account for 1% of the electrical generation, which is about what they can do, they are more or less irrelevant.
Basically you don’t want to make the perfect the enemy of the good. Do what makes sense now — which is NG — and let technology come up with better solutions over time. It will if the research funds are made available. But until we have storage systems which measure in gigawatt-years rather than kilowatt-hours intermittent sources like wind or solar aren’t going to clean up our electrical generation.
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:41 pm)Has anyone read some of the articles that indicate going to Natural Gas over Coal does NOT change the pollution level at all? It was from some “green” publication but can not remember where it was seen.
If that is true…. But a bigger issue is COAL does LEAVE A MONSTER AMOUNT of ash and CRUD.. I remember that big pile ash that broke lose last year in a big flood
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:44 pm)The problem as I mention above is that the drilling companies won’t disclose what chemicals they are using for fracking. Not only does this make the risks unknowable, it makes it impossible to set standards or to establish clean up procedures. All those big bad dumb bureaucrats need to start acting like big bad bureaucrats rather than the captive do-nothings they are and start requiring that the drillers shape up (or ship out). This is really a fairly trivial problem to solve.
BTW, the oil companies add all kinds of toxins to your gas, which is deemed OK because vehicles are “mobile”, as if that mattered. No other industry would get away with using this stuff in their manufacturing processes.
+7
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:50 pm)I agree. GM should price the first GEN VOLTS at $57,495. Cal residents get them for around $45K, not sure about Michigan. And the people in Was DC can afford them a lot higher than that. GM can easily sell the first generation. That will eliminate scalping on EBay. The middle income people (like me) can wait for 3-4 years after GM has recouped some development cost, got a handle on manufacturing cost, and increased the technology. Maybe boost battery to 65 miles EV and up to 40mpg CS mode. Let the rich buy their toys and fund the future technology for the first 3-4 years. And then we can plunder the spoils after that!
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:52 pm)I guess someone can say just about anything but natural gas is pretty clean. Basically it’s methane — CO2 and water. Pretty much what you get if you exhale. I can’t remember the exact numbers but NG has about 1 part particulates whereas coal has about 2500 or 2600. Not a small difference. Coal also has a lot of radioactive material. Really nothing is worse than coal, which is why Steven Chu has called coal “everyone’s worst nightmare”.
+2
Jun 29th, 2010 (9:57 pm)Do you run out of energy and drown in the middle of the lake while swimming or do you understand the limits and stay within your limited range ?
Only idiots will run out of power – what with all the information Leaf will show about your available range along with the “limp mode” when you are down to last 4 kwh.
AAA tow truck = FUD.
Just as
Volt recalled and crushed = FUD.
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:07 pm)Wind turbines (and solar systems) are not without maintenance problems. For example:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jan/13/damaging-blow/
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:23 pm)Until some unknown new numbers come to light NG is still an order of magnitude cleaner than coal. Fracking however is being treated by drillers as a license to defecate where you drink, bathe and sleep. Poorly done it is a permanent destruction of aquifers. With no ability for the watershed to refresh or remove the expanding plumes of toxins from the ground water or the wells that communities depend on.
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:25 pm)Got it. Park, Drive, Neutral, Forward, Taylor, Tagamet.
Sounds like a great idea to me. Sort of a constant reminder not to offer a jump-charge to people standing forlornly beside fishy-looking cars.
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:26 pm)Thanks for the info. :+} Yes, coal has many problems.
-2
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:42 pm)All bark.
No bite.
In other words, try actually doing something other than just posting.
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:49 pm)A little old but, with the automobile as old as it is, people STILL run out of gas.
http://green.autoblog.com/2008/06/02/wishing-for-higher-mpg-more-people-are-running-out-of-gas/
What’s their excuse? They knew the range limitations, they knew the mpg of their car, they KNEW!
So what’s the difference. You can scream “Range Anxiety” all you want but the truth is it’s all a matter of knowing your limitations.
I still see people on the side of the freeway with a gas can. AAA trucks pouring gas into the car. What’s their excuse? What’s your excuse? there isn’t one. It’s all fake in your mind, FUD that you created.
Volt, the car to fuel the next generation of automobile’s with GAS!
-2
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:51 pm)His only purpose is to post self portraits of itself.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (10:52 pm)First, it was the auto task-force that made that assessment. When GM is no longer owned by tax payers and Volt makes a profit, the task will be complete.
Second, tells me what “volumes increase” actually means. How many?
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:00 pm)Can you explain your rationale there? Coal, along with nuclear, provide steady-state baseloads, since you can’t throttle them or fire them up or shut them down cheaply. So the daytime electrical mix normally is lower (by percentage) in coal than the nighttime. Solar (not that it accounts for much yet) is of course only daytime. Hydro (where available) and natural gas are used to fill the extra daytime load. Hydro is essentially pollution free and CO2 free. Natural gas is far cleaner than coal, and pumps less CO2 into the atmosphere.
So it almost sounds as if you would be doing Mother Earth a favor by charging in the daytime.
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:11 pm)So, you don’t think electricity is important to reducing the role of oil in the transportation energy system? What in the world are you doing on this site in that case?
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:24 pm)Let’s legislate something a little more practical to foster real world EV transportation.
75% of Americans drive less than 40 miles each day. Give a 40 mile EV a 75% rebate. 90% of Americans travel 70 miles or less each day so a 70 mile EV gets a 90% rebate. (the leaf gets 100 miles? yeah, right!)
Of course there are qualifications.
If this EV is the only car you own you get the full qualifying rebate.
If the EV is one of two cars you own then your rebate is reduced by the EV range of the second vehicle. A gasoline only additional car reduces the rebate by 30%. A 40 mile EREV or 20 mile plugin reduces the rebate by only 7.5% and 15%. If the second car is a BEV then you get the full qualifying rebate and one attaboy.
Also,
EV range will need to be qualified by temperature region. There will be regional qualifications for regional renewable power sources. Furthermore, if the battery needs to be retired from automotive use in less than 10 years or 150,000 miles, there will be a surcharge for the amount prorated by the extent of the early replacement. If the battery is a quick change battery you will receive the full rebate. Battery life will then be monitored by the quick change battery station and early end of life penalties will be assessed to the battery manufacturer. Also there will be a domestic content qualification, content recovery qualification, and ambient temperature isolation qualification.
There will be used EV rebates too.
If the usable range of the used EV still has a significant amount of usable cells, then there will be a “continued in service” rebate. The same qualifications apply but will be prorated against the original rebate amount for the miles driven and the amount of electricity needed to retain a charge suitable for automotive use.
You will not receive any credit for towing expenses but you will be given a mass transit schedule and an EV driver discount. But only if the bus is a hybrid or if the train is electrified.
There.
Now that’s fair.
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:37 pm)Be advised that Tesla was up more than 40 percent today.
It is now a 2.2 billion dollar company and growing !
No truth to rumor that it is losing money. The Roadster business has always been profitable. The loss on balance sheet comes from initial startup cost for Model S and nothing more. Most investors understand this.
Note: Tesla is NOT GM. We make a profit on each and every vehicle we make and we back all our vehicles with superior engineering. The Model S will be no different. Once again it is very important to realize that we are not Government Motors, we are a publicly traded corporation that leads the EV industry by example.
Please do not confuse us with GM. We do NOT make hybrid cars (like the Volt or Prius). Hybrids are not in our genes. We only make pure Electric Vehicles (EV).
Looking for even more growth tomorrow.
Remember we are a public company, you can join our team and be a part of our growing business, we welcome your participation. Remember we are not GM, we will not waste valuable tax dollars. Consider this an honest pledge (something missing from today’s big corporations).
Life is good.
+1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:37 pm)lol…..I gave you a +1 just because you took the time to post that, especially this late in the thread/night.
Sir, you missed your calling. You should be a politician.
-1
Jun 29th, 2010 (11:51 pm)3 or 4 months of so-called “training” ain’t gonna cut it GM. I would not have very much confidence these guys could actually fix any problem with that little amount of training. Seems like they started training a little too late. It is not like the specs on the 1st gen Volt has changed any in the last 6 months or so. This delay just no make any sense. Customer gonna get screwed big time if there is any major recall. Better keep fingers crossed. Remember this is GM and quality track record is not the best. This is most definitely NOT a Tesla Roadster where they will come to your doorstep and fix any problem.
GM -1
+1
Jun 30th, 2010 (12:01 am)Yes, that one gets cited quite often. There have been other failures on a smaller scale. Call them learning opportunities for an evolving technology. Your numbers are old though. If wind power installed has been increasing from 30% or more and at times to times nearly 50% then it wouldn’t be at stay at 1% of installed capacity any longer. If it took 30 years to get to 1% and only 4 more to get to beyond 3%, wind deployment is rapidly accelerating.
Here is something from that could be cited just as easily from AWEA:
Texas once again installed the largest amount of new
capacity in 2008— 2,671 MW — moving it into a league of
its own. More new wind capacity was added in Texas during
the year than in any country except China and the U.S. If
Texas were a country, it would rank sixth in the world, behind
Germany, the rest of the U.S., Spain, China, and India.
Iowa surged into second place in the U.S., behind only
Texas. California, once the location of practically all the wind
power activity in the U.S., now ranks third for wind project
capacity.
Oregon moved into the club of states with more than 1,000
MW installed, which now numbers seven: Texas, Iowa,
California, Minnesota, Washington, Colorado, and Oregon.
2009 and 2010 have seen similar gains with much more planned.
Wind turbines have never been maintenance free. Though the availability of electric cars and trucks could reduce their maintenance costs
Millions in ongoing R&D is making industrial scale turbines statistically more reliable.
From the European wind energy association.
Surveying and elucidating wind cost trends, Sawyer takes note of other factors that have been at work. During the peak growth years when global demand was straining capacity, a sellers’ market contributed to cost escalation. Then too, in some cases, the best wind sites were getting exhausted and new turbines were having to be installed in more challenging circumstances, This has been true for example of Gemany, which is having to go off-shore and build larger windmills.
Even so, the European Wind Energy Association did a study last spring in which wind was found to be cost-competitive with all other electricity generating sources, in the current range of carbon prices, at wind speeds of 7 meters per second or higher onshore and 8.25 m/s offshore. As Sawyer sees it, offshore wind is about where onshore was ten or fifteen years ago in terms of technology and economics; it’s time now for offshore wind “to grow up.”
Looking ahead, Sawyer is confident wind will continue to grow at robust rates. He says that in systems containing a large wind fraction, the wind reduces demand for expensive peaking power and therefore cuts total system costs. He believes that standard economics methodology have underestimated those savings, and that once this is recognized and fixed, wind will look better than ever.
+1
Jun 30th, 2010 (12:29 am)What I reeeeeally want to know, Mr. Schmeltz – is what part of GM’s sordid history don’t you understand? I mean, I don’t know your age, but you should have full access to research the great GM, Phillips Petroleum, Firestone Tire scandal of the 1930′s followed by the same participants flooding newspapers years later with a “hey I know we got you out of your electric streetcar systems to ride GM diesel buses with Firestone tires and Phillips petroleum products coarsing through, but now you need more convenience so go buy a personal automobile” scandal Part II. Could be you missed GM’s part in destroying the Tucker. Maybe the whole story about GM’s CEO taking a year off to become Secretary of Defense in 1953 and cancelling hundreds of millions in Packard-Studebaker defense contracts thus jabbing a dagger into and killing Packard just doesn’t seem significant to you. Maybe, just maybe you missed the entire eighties and nineties and/or worked for GM as they were passing off sheer crap onto American consumers. You could just have a vested interest ( stock? employment? ) with GM and this is why you’re one blind mouse. I live in Seattle, and our Seahawks sadly first round drafted our old buddy ( failed football meathead, failed action movie hero ) Brian Bosworth in the ’80s, former steroid-pumped college superstar for the Oklahoma Sooners. Turns out, Brian did a stint for a summer job in a GM assembly plant where he told Sports Illustrated they used to attach small bolts hanging from wires to the insides of Chevy Citations going down the assembly line just for kicks as some future owner would be perplexed at the annoying rattle he had in some deep dark recess of his new car that they just couldn’t find….. Now there’s quality control for ya.And the EV-1, now there’s a warm, comfy, rosey American “milestone” for ya!
So yes, GM being a failed business propped up by U.S. citizen’s like you and me – they do owe us.
THEY OWE US BIG .
I’m no hater, pessimist or ranting nutball without his facts straight.
You, on the other hand – seem unfathomably positive about a hoped-for, promised vehicle which seems farther and farther from the common American today than perhaps any time in history except during the Volt I show car concept stage – in which, GM may have been the most honest. That it was an exercise that eventually became a carrot for which to obtain a bailout – not something you and I will be able to fight Prius with – which was what Bob Lutz said was the whole idea in the first place.
You know GM’s history, yet you say we should all be praising GM and waiting away for gen II or III perhaps someday down the line – hey maybe five years from now!
I just respectively think that sounds like completely stinkin’ thinkin’.
RECHARGE!
James
Jun 30th, 2010 (12:50 am)The worst thing for a power company to have is a varying energy source. Steady state generators, such as coal and nuclear, are the backbone of a multiple source grid. Demand fluctuations are balanced by all sources but for the most part demand is predictable, renewable supply generators are not.
There’s a reason that renewable energy sources only contribute 3% of our generated electricity.
We can’t just say that Boston gets a brownout today because the Cape Cod windmills are off line, can we? Not every power generation plant is sharing. Just ask GE from post 154 how Texas shares the wind.
Power companies use what’s cheap and reliable. When demand peaks, auxiliary generators are cranked up. Steam generators, turbines or diesel generators, not Moses, are what get used. And they are not very efficient.
If the power supply and transmission in your area are up to date and have an overcapacity just to meet peak demand, then you have no worries.
It’s not true for most of us.
Jun 30th, 2010 (1:04 am)You keep posting your version, so I thought I might try a filibuster kind of non-stop nonsense too!
And yes, it’s late, good night!
Jun 30th, 2010 (1:14 am)That is no longer true. Trucks and SUVs now go into their own category and upping the car efficiency doesn’t let them sell more large vehicles (unless they considerably improve the large vehicle efficiency).
Jun 30th, 2010 (1:46 am)Texas is not synchronized with the eastern or western interconnection, but there are asynchronous interconnections to both of the other interconnections by DC links that allow the import and export of power.
There are also DC links between the eastern and western interconnections, so power can flow from any point in the US to another place in the US.
Jun 30th, 2010 (1:50 am)There are still those few days a year where the wind stops over most of the continent in late summer. Without massive storage or another backup source, wind can’t be the prime source of electricity.
+1
Jun 30th, 2010 (1:55 am)I find your position on Trolls particularly strange, considering that about half of your posts recently teeter on the verge of Trolldom. You are a self-professed “Who Killed The Electric Car” Troll converted by a Volt ride. Better check that conversion, it might be starting to come unglued.
Jun 30th, 2010 (1:59 am)I’d like to address this comment to my silent adversary; the one which negs each and every post I make, regardless of content.
Try saying something. It’s one thing to leave a -1 after midnight, and another to challenge in the light of day.
If you’re john1701a, never mind. You have enough brass for a bell factory.
Jun 30th, 2010 (2:04 am)… which is why I am for massive storage. Backup? Not so much. There’s a point of view which claims a coal plant must be kept on “hot standby” for every MW of Wind capacity out there, which utterly negates it’s usefulness. I expect this is looking at the worst possible case, but it still points out that wind energy needs to be capable of standing on it’s own, even if it will never be more than a minority component of total electrical supply (the most optimistic projection puts wind power at 20% of US electricity by 2030).
The storage capacity to bridge any conceivable wind calm isn’t necessary. Just enough to allow alternate sources of energy time to spool up for the difference.
Jun 30th, 2010 (2:07 am)Just a little nitpick.
Supercritical steam coal fire plants can’t be cycled daily. If the steam pressure is reduced at the expense of efficiency they can cycle daily to follow load.
Nuclear cycles very effectively. The operators just don’t want to since about 96% of the cost is fixed whether the plant runs or not. France produces 70% of their electricity from nuclear, and they run their plants as load followers.
Jun 30th, 2010 (2:14 am)As do I.
Pumped storage is a proven technology. We should be building massive projects right now. We need to do it in a environmentally sensitive way by piggybacking on existing hydro.
-1
Jun 30th, 2010 (2:23 am)Pumped Hydro is a limited resource (geographically as well as in capacity), but it should certainly be “maxed out.” Other forms of storage need to be brought on line as well. I harp on grid-tied batteries because they can be distributed more widely than just about any other storage technology. What if every substation in the country had at least a couple of tractor-trailer size Sodium Sulfur batteries, for example? (Actual chemistry could vary, but it needs to be something which is inexpensive enough when deployed in this form factor, and on this scale). Energy could be delivered over existing lines at night which will not be needed until maximum load the following day. They would allow the utility to take advantage of it’s own off-peak capacity.
Buying up old EV batteries which still have 70% of their capacity left is a good idea, but there won’t be an appreciable supply of these for a decade.
If the utility won’t do it, Ceramatec in Utah (to name one) has a vision of low-temperature Sodium Sulfur (at a relatively freezing 200 degrees Fahrenheit) to buffer energy for individual homes.
I just don’t want to see V2G depended upon; it puts too much responsibility onto too many parties to be practical, in my opinion.
Jun 30th, 2010 (5:35 am)James said:
he told Sports Illustrated they used to attach small bolts hanging from wires to the insides of Chevy Citations going down the assembly line just for kicks as some future owner would be perplexed at the annoying rattle
The industrial engineers must have been pretty lousy if somebody had the time for that kind of foolishness. I owned a Citation once, it was a nice hatchback, only automatic car I’ve ever owned.
-1
Jun 30th, 2010 (6:42 am)wrong on all levels here.
1. Your rant demonstrates you to be a hater and pessimist and possibly a ranting nutball. We may need a phyciatrist to verify that last one.
2. There is no reason not to be positive about the Volt at this point. That is unless you fall into the category of #1 above.
Jun 30th, 2010 (6:52 am)Would like to see an update on T battery testing. Each quarterly report has been 100% positive.
=D-Volt
Jun 30th, 2010 (6:54 am)Your comment qualifies you as a:
1) blind insider. Or a…
2) blind insider.
If you deny or somehow disagree with my commentary on GM’s history, then say it, and back it up with some facts, opinions and/or refute.
Calling names shows everyone who you are.
RECHARGE!
( maybe you, nuclear boy , should NOT recharge )
Jun 30th, 2010 (6:54 am)I guess you told me!
+2
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:05 am)Sorry Jackson, I never “self confessed” to being a troll, and I’ve never driven a Volt. So I don’t know what you’re drinkin’. You have me mixed up for someone else, or an amalgam of ‘em.
I didn’t reach out and try to get you to stop arguing with interlopers for my own good, but for the good of the site. And no, I am not your “secret adversary” either.
I suppose I am bordering on “trolldom” in your mind, and “ranting” in others here if I am realistic about GM’s history. As I said before, if what I shared is incorrect – correct me. If not, think twice about calling me a “troll” buddy!
I used to enjoy your posts quite a bit here, I’m very sorry you were layed off, and I pray you find work again very quickly, but I’ve noticed, Jackson, that you’ve taken off on a very negative bent on your own lately – and again I’ll say – arguing with your garden trolls only brings down the site.
Earlier in the day when it’s only people voicing their opinions in a semi-civilized way, is the site still what it once was. I believe Tag is very much missed by all – He seemed to be able to calm the arguing, bickering and name-calling.
Chill out guys – If you think GM has changed it’s stripes, that’s fine and dandy. But instead of name-calling people who will wait and see on Volt, why don’t you come out with some facts supporting GM? If you can’t admit GM has a shady past – you are in denial. Period.
Geez!
I’ve oft stated my admiration for Volt’s technology. But if it never materializes in numbers to challenge other more practical solutions – seriously – WHO CARES?! You guys are gushing about a ghost.
RECHARGE!
James
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:06 am)Jackson said:
Buying up old EV batteries which still have 70% of their capacity left is a good idea, but there won’t be an appreciable supply of these for a decade.
So you think it’ll be that long before Volts are mainstream huh?
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:14 am)OK, so they can sell a lot more high profit Corvettes and CTS-V’s.
My ideal garage: A Volt, a CTS-V coupe, and my SV-650. Oh nuts. I only have a one-car garage. OK, a Volt.
+1
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:21 am)Dude… “Stay away from the Brown Acid”. We all know that Musk hoodwinked the U.S. government out of a “loan”. That’s right, Tesla owes me (tax payer) too, just like GM. Bottom line is that TESLA will be one of those little niche companies that make expensive cars for the very wealthy eco-crits. The majority of the investors got taken for a ride yesterday, Tesla is not google or PayPal for that matter. They will bleed cash for years, become worthless in about 6-8 years and the small amount of technology they have will be taken by Toyota and incorporated in one of their platforms. (BTW if you don’t understand the opening quote you are too young!
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:21 am)Seriously, Schmeltz, do you feel the EV-1 was a “milestone”? Do you feel it was a big positive in automotive history? In your opinion, how do you feel GM handled the whole thing? And lastly, do you believe GM’s line about how nobody wanted one? Did you miss the big check former Volt leaseholders held up outside GM offices to buy back their EV-1s, or how GM wouldn’t talk to them?
You gonna trade in your old EV-1 for your gen I, or gen II or gen III Volt?
Just wondering, buddy.
Now may I ask you – How is the Volt story panning out to be different? EV-1 rolled out in a couple states – on a very tight leash. GM insisted it was too expensive and rolled ‘em back in. Everything you can say about Volt is pure speculation, nothing more. Do tell me why GM will not repeat all it’s past mechanizations. Some here have stated if GM does an EV-2 with Volt it will “bring down the company”. I have to remind that they already went under, and also, that there is not much of a likelihood short of another Arab oil embargo that the mainstream public would crucify GM over EV-2. Only those “early adopters” they love mentioning often will cry foul.
RECHARGE!
James
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:22 am)James, The point is a US company is leading the world in the development and manufacturer of an E-REV. This is a vehicle that gives us a way towards energy independece. This site is generally a fan site of those who love the technology and want to see GM succeed.
You play the roll of troll here lately. I am just looking at facts. Bringing up what GM did 30 or 40 years ago is meaningless. This kind of crap can be dug up on many major corporations and governments. Especially the Japanese. The point is, GM is in the process of developing a great drive train for transporation and you apparently cannot be satisfied. I’m no insider. I am just a proud american and see GM as a corporation of my brothers and collegues in engineering. I see their success as beneficial to my country.
Given your views, I suggest you form a site called gmsucks.com as an outlet for your opinions.
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:24 am)I don’t know how much time I’ll have since I have to hit a meeting, but I wanted to say “thanks” for not lowering to name calling and pettiness like that in your post.
I like to give credit where I think credit is due. And I think GM deserves credit for the Volt–plain and simple. I’m not a blind optimist that thinks GM can do no wrong. I know they as a company shipped a lot of crap over the years and made a lot of bad decisions. That said, the Volt was one of the best decisions they made and it is looking more and more like the smart play every day.
You may call me “unfathomably opitimistic” if you want to. I’ve been called worse, friend.
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:24 am)OT
Lutz may go to Lotus:
http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2010/06/reports_former_gm_exec_bob_lut.html
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:30 am)What is the life expectancy of the Volt battery pack – 10 year/150,000 miles? If so, then even if we had significant numbers of Volts on the road today you would not expect to see used battery packs in any numbers for a decade.
-2
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:34 am)James, we have gone over this 100 times. GM is not a boutique electric car maker. These people who wanted the EV1 could have had an electric car built at any time if they wanted one. My cousin Larry can throw these things together in no time if people are willing to pay for them. GM, however, is a major manufacturer of cars for the masses produced in quantities that have 5 or 6 digits. There were not that many people willing to buy the EV1.
In spite of being forced to build the EV1, GM took the job seriously and built a wonderful car. For this, we should be proud of GMs engineering. They did this while the European car makers passed on building electrics and the Japanese efforts were not as great.
I like how people focus on minutia surrounding GM to declare that GM killed the electric car. The big picture clearly shows that electrics were a bad idea at the time. Especially in the US where gas was really really cheap. However, some still refuse to see the big picture and assume that electrics should have been built anyway and that GM singlehandedly screwed this up.
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:38 am)And what EV are you using to go 350 miles???
+1
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:39 am)You know even though i’d like to punch this guy in the face……..
I have to admit in the back of my mind i’m wondering the same exact thing.
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:40 am)pK103 said:
What is the life expectancy of the Volt battery pack – 10 year/150,000 miles? If so, then even if we had significant numbers of Volts on the road today you would not expect to see used battery packs in any numbers for a decade.
I was referring to the availability of traded in Leafs, when Volt becomes mainstream.
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:44 am)OK, Schmeltz, we will just have to ( I’ll use this descriptive again, in case you missed it ) respectively disagree with everything you’ve just stated.
It’s as if you’ve missed the forest for all the trees. As a “car guy” who lived through the EV-1 story, I can tell you all the magazine spreads GM had for EV-1 touting it’s tech. I also saw with my own eyes the Geneva, and Paris and New York auto show extravaganzas GM rolled out with EV-1 platforms on every side with gas turbines, different battery types and even a mock fuel cell! This is expensive stuff. A “boutique car company” could not spend that kind of PR money because they don’t have it. You see this pattern of GM coming up with a very complex, premeditated way of dealing with governmental mandates, and then, from the inside – with bribes, what have you… working the “problem” from both ends. GM worked the California legislature and worked the public and never worked at making a practical EV-1 that seated more than 2. If you feel that when gas is cheap, mankind does not need an EV, I will soundly disagree. See the Gulf lately? Perhaps you live in the country where the air is fresh and you don’t have to hold your breath as you walk through a large parking lot. Maybe you feel your lungs thrive on carbon monoxide…I don’t know…. Some people do feel we were and are in Iraq to spread democracy…..do you?
Your cousin Larry must be some whiz guy! Can we get him started on curing cancer this afternoon?
L
L
TAKE CARE, and RECHARGE!
James
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:46 am)Bob Lutz is basically the reason this car is here and he didn’t do it to be green, he did it because he knew it’d help their image as both greener and the most technologically advanced car company. Who cares why it’s being built anyways, as long as it can be bought. They are a company who’s main intent is to make money, who can blame them if they make way more money off big trucks than small cars. We can only blame ourselves.
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:48 am)plus their good when you had a day wher everyone you deal with seems as stupid as they are..you can blow off steam, and have fun…no one gets hurt…
Jun 30th, 2010 (7:58 am)Gosh what a punk, I’ll never see another one of his movies. I only hope some German or Japanese punk did the same thing.
Jun 30th, 2010 (8:05 am)Nuclearboy,
It’s incredibly early here , 5:50am – why am I up at this ungawdly hour? Don’t ask. Sorry if I failed to mention the earlier post was directed towards you.
Admiring the engineering of EV-1 is completely normal, and being a fan of Voltecs like we both are, is totally appropriate, IMO.
That said, we know Bob Lutz, John Laukner and others stated Volt was their idea of a car that could “out Prius” Prius. It will not even come close. Now Volt has become, like EV-1, a big PR excercise. All GM had to do was build a hybrid-specific car like Prius with similar or better stats. They could’ve added a plug and lithium batteries and had it out by now, trumping the Prius with a plug by a year or more. But getting off of gasoline has never ( obviously ) been a priority for GM. I believe I’ve pointed out more than a few similarities between Volt and EV-1, and I’m not happy to remind others, but I feel it has to be done.
How can some call Volt a “milestone” and a “game changer” if it never enters the game? Said another way, how can we laud GM for something that was really meant to get their proverbial asses out of a sling?
Once again I’ll say – GM prove me wrong – I want to be wrong for the sake of us all. All GM has to do to prove me wrong is sell the Volt for under $40,000 in every state, making it in available numbers for more than a privelaged few. That’s it. Next step would logically be to fine tune it, perhaps lower cost batteries or less of them, and add seating and useability in models even more Americans and Canadians can wrap their head around.
GM CEO Whitacre being on the Exxon/Mobile board says it all. Don’t expect mass produced Voltec anythings unless they’re forced into it when competitors take the baton and move us forward.
There is no hating coming from this side of my keyboard. I own a 1957 Chevy truck, and it’s great. Every single thing GM has done is not bad. Only about 75% of it. Mankind holds history important as it keeps us from repeating the horrors of the past. If we forget history we go on making the same mistakes over and over – human nature, and what Albert Einstein called “true insanity”. This is why we cannot forget what GM has done. Of course we can hope for zebras to change their stripes , “hope and change” and all that….but we cannot just believe something until it’s proven to be a serious gesture. That would be like believing Castro, Hugo Chavez or Ahmeninejad will just change someday and stop being whackjobs.
Calling me a “rantor” or a “GM hater” would be like calling every single person from Missouri, the “Show Me State” the same.
GM SHOW ME – is all I’ve stated – over and over. There’s a method to my madness. My hope is some GM people will read this and think about it.
RECHARGE!
James
Jun 30th, 2010 (8:13 am)
Jun 30th, 2010 (8:30 am)James,
The point is that GM is not in the business of saving the planet and none of the other car makers are either. This is where you leave the reservation. You hold them to too high of a standard. Your criticism of them should be directed at all car makers, not just GM. I can get on a high horse and find fault in just about anyone if I get to make up the rules of how they should live or do business to suit my needs or some pet peave that I have.
If GM bribed anyone, then those public officials should be held responsible (were they?). They are the real crooks who actually make the decisions and are supposed to represent us. GM does not represent us. If lawmakers are swayed by some lobbying, then they are the problem. Lobbying goes both ways. It was lobbying that created the mandate for electrics in the beginning. It was always a two way argument. Our dear leaders ended up deciding that it was not time for electrics. Believe me, they heard from all sides and should have known all the issues.
There are many things that mankind needs. It is not GMs problem.
As for your snooty comment about Larry, he is a car guy and can put any engine in any vehicle. This is not rocket science. There are thousands of Americans with machining equipment who do this type of thing. There have always been guys putting together electric cars. Its really not a big deal. Just a hobby. (I am not saying they make things as refined as the Volt or Leaf but they are electric cars that are street legal). For those complaining about the EV1, did they go out and get an electric car. They have always been out their at a price.
Jun 30th, 2010 (8:45 am)What’s further and further away about it? The somewhat deliberate, cautious rollout? I grant you, one could make a paranoid case that GM doesn’t plan to support Volt fully. This case seems stronger if you ignore the significant resources GM has put into Volt. Otherwise Volt appears to be quite on schedule. Patience, Grasshopper! You’re freaking out without anywhere near enough cause. Brian Bosworth’s (!?!) experience has no bearing here.
Jun 30th, 2010 (10:07 am)What a great addition to the Chevrolet family, we can’t wait to have them on our lot! http://www.londoff.com
+1
Jun 30th, 2010 (10:10 am)We can highlight companys who have made a difference. GM has not made a diffference – and that is a huge understatement. To the contrary, GM has dangled technology and it’s power to patent and show off it’s engineer’s prowess only to pull it back. In fact, that is worse than never building such machines in the first place.
Tesla has made a huge impact for such a tiny company. Granted Tesla may or may not “take off” , sorry for the Space X pun…..And many can debate Elon Musk or the idea that lithium plug in power was best showcased in a $123,000 sports car. I say it worked, it made everyone in the huge worldwide auto industry stand up and take notice. If only for that, Tesla should be highly praised. If by some miracle the Model S, and then the proposed middle-class $25,000 four door ever reaches production – so much the more.
Toyota deserves many kudos and the Prius ( although I’m now earning -1s from all the Prius haters who live here ) is most definately a “game changer” and a milestone. Over two million Prius are in action today, rolling around on less gas and 70% less tailpipe emissions than two of it’s V-6 five seat competitors travelling the same routes. I think that is mega significant. Yes, it was mandates and the global focus on Al Gore and global warming that hatched Hybrid Synergy Drive from Japan. Yet from Prius’ success was borne Honda’s IMA, and many hybrid offshoots. Each customer that buys a hybrid uses less fuel and pollutes the earth less. Commendable, no? Go on and counter with facts such as Toyota’s manufacturing of the Tundra and Sequoia, go ahead – I’ve heard it all…. It would seem Toyota blew it’s green cred by forging ahead to win over the American market with big ICE vehicles that sell well from American brands. I’m not so sure the carbon footprint of Tundras and Sequoias overshadows those 2.3 million drivers worldwide in Prius and many thousands of others in hybrid Camrys, Highlanders, Lexus, Altima hybrids, Civic hybrids, Insights, CR-Zs and more.
Larry must be a standup guy. It wasn’t apparent in your post if he was an actual person or a charicature used to make a point. May I point out the big LOL after my – Larry should cure cancer – joke? Yes it was sarcasm, but it in no way was purposed to be “snooty”…. And in no way on offense to your apparently real cousin. Wish him my best. Maybe I should call him to build my 2003 Insight lithium BEV – a dream project I wish I had the expertise and courage to undertake.
Cheers, have a good day mate!
RECHARGE!
James
Jun 30th, 2010 (11:19 am)An excellent point: If folks disdain dealers from charging over MSRP on hot new models; what do folks think of individuals who make a habit of buying the latest hot intro models only to turn around and post them for sale on eBay?
If GM is serious about trying to limit or curtail dealer mark-up, then they should be just as serious about requiring early VOLT buyers to own their car for at least a year or two. The only real way to do this would be to lease all the early vehicles with a fixed purchase option so that GM could hold the titles and prevent early buy and flip sales.
Jun 30th, 2010 (11:40 am)NO, I think it will be a decade before there are ten year old batteries.
Think, people! Think!
Jul 26th, 2010 (12:06 pm)As a new pet owner I welcome all the guidance here. I really want my puppy to get properly trained and have a healthy environment to live in. Thanks for the information.