GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

Just a few weeks ago California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, stood at a podium between Toyota CEO Aiko Toyoda and Tesla’s Elon Musk in California and announced a deal between the two companies to collaborate on the production and development of EVs at the NUMMI facility in Palo Alto.

It was further billed as also involving parts and engineering support, with engineers between Toyota and Tesla reportedly meeting together. At that time, speculation naturally jumped to the assumption that someday we would be seeing a joint effort between the two.

Since that media conference in late May, it has been a bumpy road for Tesla and its CEO. For starters, it turned out that Toyota’s 50 million dollar investment in the company had some strings…like being contingent on a successful IPO before the end of the year.

Then came news from court papers filed in Elon Musk’s highly publicized divorce, that his wife Justine wants a big chunk of the company, which was followed by a even bigger revelation, that Elon Musk himself was completely broke. “About four months ago, I ran out of cash,” Musk declared. “I had to obtain emergency loans from personal friends. These loans are the exclusive source of cash I have. If I did not take these loans, I would have no liquid assets left.”

And in between all of that Tesla announced it lost another 29.5 million dollars in the first quarter of 2010. One wonders how they retained a 465 million dollar loan facility from the Department of Energy while GM still has yet to qualify based on their ‘viability.’

It has become obvious that Tesla’s only path to stay in business is paved by government funding and good PR, rather than by actually building electric cars for a profit.

Now this week comes the news that there really is no collaboration between Toyota and Tesla to build electric vehicles. In fact there is no deal in place on synergies or sharing of technology. What had originally been billed as a partnership that would be great for Tesla to gain access to Toyota’s huge/low cost manufacturing base, and for Toyota to get its foot in the door making pure BEVs in North America, it seems has turned into purely a stock deal. Perhaps in part to Toyota not being interesting in being involved with Tesla Motors now that the circus has come to town of late.

At best, Toyota and Tesla may be putting out a one-off EV prototype at some point in 2011 if the deal goes through…just to show they the world they are co-existing, and to keep the PR train rolling for Toyota’s 50 million dollar investment in Tesla.

Tesla’s amended S-1 filing pretty much says it all:

“In May 2010, Tesla and Toyota Motor Corporation, or Toyota, announced their intention to cooperate on the development of electric vehicles, and for Tesla to receive Toyota’s support with sourcing parts and production and engineering expertise for the Model S. However, we have not entered into any agreements with Toyota for any such arrangements, including any purchase orders, and we may never do so.”

Through March of this year, Tesla has lost 290 million dollars while building 1,063 Roadsters (don’t do that math on that one). However they do predict a profit in 2013. /I predict they go bankrupt.

UPDATE: Tesla has just announced their IPO today. The company expects to sell 11.1 million shares as high as $16 a piece, raising almost 180 million dollars. After it closes, Toyota would then make their 50 million dollar investment in the company. You will be able to follow Tesla’s day to day market moves under the symbol TSLA. The company also issued a statement about profitability, “We will continue to incur operating and net losses each quarter until at least the time we begin significant deliveries of the Model S, which is not expected to occur until 2012, and may occur later.” /where do I sign up

Source (SEC)

Today I left my MINI E in my driveway, keys inside, from where it will taken back to BMW headquarters for the last time.

Its hard to believe a year has passed since I first took possession of the MINI E pure electric car.  After a lengthy application process, several months of waiting and a few emails to select BMW executives, I was finally told I had been chosen as a MINI E pioneer to participate in the MINI E field test.  I became one of 450 people nationwide, and one of the 100 in New York chosen to lease the car.

Although by then I had already test driven the Ford Focus Electric mule, the Tesla Roadster, the  Mitsubishi iMiEV, and even the Chevy Volt Cruze-mule, getting a pure elctric car as my daily driver, to live with for a year was a dream come true.  I drove off from that MINI dealer’s lot in White Plains in June 2009 like a kid in a candy shop.

At first I thought I’d be very scientific and log all my trips and how much effective range I got.  I did this for a few weeks, but got bored. Sorry not much data to share.

Overall, the experience has been absolutely fantastic.  I absolutely love driving an electric car, no doubt about it.  I love the smoothness, quick torque, and near silence.  I love plugging it in each night and coming out each morning to a fully-charged battery (though I forgot a few times).  Most of all I love the ever-present awareness I am driving without the use of gasoline, without imported oil, on pure homegrown US electricity.

I chose not to adorn my MINI E with the large glaring door decals, mine is the more subtle type of personality.  As a result I was not once stopped by a stranger who noticed the car was electric.  Of course I shared the experience with several friends and colleagues and let a bunch of people drive it (even a GM exec who shall remain nameless).

BMW asked for the study participants to engage in nine separate online tasks over the year, which would provide them data and feedback.  Unfortunately I didn’t do any of them.  I figured my constant daily effort on this blog and elsewhere was enough to advance the cause of electrification of the  automobile, plus I just didnt have the time.  Sorry BMW.

In the end I logged just about 15,000 miles of driving (14,914 to be exact).  Four times the car broke down, all away from home and twice while engaged in driving, due to various power-electronic module failures, the cost of driving a non-production car.

A couple of months ago BMW offered me and others the chance to lease the car for a second year.  Instead of charging $850 per month as it had in the first year, the second would only be $600.  After that I could take possession of BMWs next electric car, the Active E BMW 1-series.  The  MINI E is really an aftermarket conversion of a standard MINI E with the rear seat removed and replaced by a 600 pound 35 kwh E-one Moli air-cooled lithium ion battery pack and an AC Propulsion drivetrain.  The Active E is a little bit more of a ground up electric car with advanced driver interface and thermally managed pack.  After that BMW will use all of its learning to launch its pure electric MegaCity car in 2013, that will be built using lightweight carbon fiber composites.

Along with 50% of the other lessees, sadly I had to decline this second year option.  Why you might ask?  Because the Volt will be out in a few short months.  Although I do not live in one of the three Volt launch markets, and don’t have my name on any list except my own, I have one very good reason to believe and hope I will get possession of an early Volt.  Ed Whitacre, the CEO of General Motors told me so in a surprise personal call.  Yes, Im holding him to it!

I can say the MINI E performed very well as a commuter car for me, and I was able to use it for about 90% of my driving needs.  Occasionally I needed to drive further than its range allowed either to go to a distant destination or multiple distant stops in one day.  In those cases I drove a back-up gas car (having continuous access to one was a requirement of the program).

My daily commute is roughly 30 miles each way.  I would leave each morning with a full battery and then trickle charge at 120 V in my parking spot at work.  I had my parking garage management company install an outlet for me (I paid half).  The home 240V/32 amp charger recharged the car from empty in about 4 hours, at 120V/8amp it takes about 33 hours.

Overall I would say my effective range was roughly 75 to 80 miles.  I never once ran out of charge.  My commute is 90% high speed (65mph+) highway driving which is why my range was so low.  This was also quite weather-dependent.  At one point when the temperatures dipped inot the 20s during the winter, range was about 50-55 miles and I found the needle below zero a couple of times (it still kept driving though).

Unfortunately I now must switch to my gas-hybrid that I have been using as a back-up car full time, until I can get my hands on a Volt.

Thanks MINI E, its been a real pleasure, and thanks BMW for a great experience.  BMW has acknowledged the 2-seat MINI E is not a widely applicable car and won’t be putting one into production.  The Active E and Mega City EV will both have rear seats and the latter will be design-optimized for an electric drivetrain.

For a me a 100 mile range pure electric car can be used for 90% of my drives.  Driving the Volt and charging at work, I will drive 95% of my miles without the use of gas, but still be able to use the car on those additional 5% of occasions.

At the time the Volt concept was first unveiled GM was experiencing a lot of bad publicity with respect to their cancellation of the EV-1 program.  Over these years and post bankrputcy, they seemed to have obtained a bit more positive media treatment.  However, since Nissan began its LEAF PR, the anti-GM rhetoric seems to have stepped up a notch again.

Case in point.  A new opinion piece written and published by recognized automotive writer Michael Kanellos and Sam Jaffe, who is an energy reaserch manager with IDC Energy Insights.

The authors explain what a halo car is, and give the Prius credit for first birthing the term; an eco-friendly vehicle that lifts the company’s image in the public eyes.  Many have called the Volt GM’s halo car, but Kanellos and Jaffe don’t believe that’s the case, instead calling it a helium car.

They say GM is building the Volt not to help get the world off of oil, or to lift their image, but specifically for the purpose of inflating GM’s total average fuel economy (CAFE) so that they can be in compliance with new legislation and still be able to sell high volumes of gas-guzzling SUVs.

They argue GM’s known plans to build only up to 50,000 to 60,000 Volts annually and possibly selling them at a high price support their helium hypothesis.

GM wouldn’t have to build the Volt on the mass market scale of hundreds of thousands, as Nissan is the LEAF, to obtain a favorable total CAFE rating, they write.  If GM sold only a few thousand Volts and each were certified over 100 MPG then for each Volt they sold they could sell “a half dozen Silverados.”  They say Nissan’s plan to sell hundreds of thousands of LEAFs is in contrast because they are selling the car at an exceptionally low price point.  This low pricing favors mass market acceptance.

The authors acknowledge GM hasn’t yet priced the Volt and promise to eat their “radiator hose” if GM prices it $1000 more than the LEAF, or $33,500, but don’t believe they will.

The Volt, they argue, if sold at a high premium would simply be “a way to build more SUVs and con a few thousand eco-conscious buyers out of their money by charging a premium.”

They consider this possibility to be ” a tremendous shame” becaue in 2007 GM had the chance to reinvent the automobile and the company and may now turn that “golden apple” into a trick that plays on the sensiblities of the “gullable treehuggers” forcing them to feed their eco-smugness while at the same time subsidizing those vehicles they hate the most, SUVs.  And in the end, GM would still be the same old seller of gas guzzlers after all.

Strong words indeed.  Do you believe them?

Source (GreenTechMedia)

As someone who has spent the last year driving a pure electric MINI E across wide temperature and speed variations, I can tell you real world electric range varies considerably.

Like the MINI E, the LEAF too has an air-cooled battery, only it has 24 kwh (19.2 kwh usable) of energy as opposed to the MINI E’s 35 kwh (28 kwh usable).

Up to this point in the PR cycle, Nissan has simply said one could expect 100 miles of range on a fully charged battery while driving a leisurely LA4 cycle. However, this week the company has opened up media test drives of pre production prototypes in Japan. Along with releasing to the world the pedestrian alert sounds the car will make at low speeds, Nissan has also briefed journalists in some detail what real-world ranges drivers could expect to achieve in several scenarios.

Forbes reports this information as follows:

1. At perfect 68 degree Fahrenheit temperature and steady-state flat-course 38 mph, the car could achieve 138 miles of range.

2. Moderate temperature at 24 mph suburban driving, 105 miles of range.

3. Dense inner city traffic and 86 degrees F, only 47 miles of range

4. Highway driving at 55 mph in 95 degree heat with A/C on, 70 miles

5. Cold weather (14 degrees F) city driving, 62 miles of range

It was added that Nissan claims other power demanding devices such as the radio, the windshield wipers, and the heated seats will have negligible effect on range.

The scenario not included here is my typical commute, which is 65 mph+ highway driving in winter below freezing. With the MINI E my range in that scenario was about 50 to 55 miles. I’d suspect similar performance for the LEAF. Though the battery is smaller presumably the car is more aerodynamic.  The MINI E weighs 3230 pounds, and the LEAF is believed to weigh 3500 pounds.  The MINI E does 0 to 60 in about 8 seconds, the LEAF will likely be slower.

It is known three key factors most significantly affect electric car range; terrain, temperature, and driving technique.

Source (Forbes)

Starting on Friday Nissan began allowing the first test drives of its new pure electric LEAF in Oppama Japan.

Nissan is letting 500 people to get behind the wheels of early LEAF prototypes. This group will include “media, Nissan shareholders, government officials, analysts and some of the first customers to place reservations for Nissan LEAF,” Nissan said in statement (I was not invited).

In addition to allowing test drives, the company has also unveiled its new “Approaching Vehicle Sound for Pedestrians.” This sound is required as part of pending US federal regulation for electric cars.

Nissan says “the system makes it easy for those outside to hear the vehicle approaching, but the sounds do not distract the driver and passengers inside.”

The sound is actually a set of sounds developed in concert with cognitive and acoustic psychologists specifically designed to “ensure a positive experience for drivers, passengers and pedestrians alike.”

The sounds are sine wave patterns that sweep across a band from 2.5 kHz at the high end to a low of 600Hz, and specifically avoids the 1000 Hz window at which conversation and most environmental noise occurs.

Nissan describes its operation as follows:

Depending on the speed and status (accelerating or decelerating) of Nissan LEAF, the sound system will make sweeping, high-low sounds. For instance, when Nissan LEAF is started, the sound will be louder, so a visually impaired person would be aware that a nearby car was beginning operations. And when a car is in reverse, the system will generate an intermittent sound. The sound system ceases operation when Nissan LEAF tops 30km/h and enters a sound range where regular road noise is high. It engages again as Nissan LEAF slows to under 25km/h.

The system is controlled through a computer and synthesizer in the dash panel, and the sound is delivered through a speaker in the engine compartment. A switch inside the vehicle can turn off sounds temporarily. The system automatically resets to “On” at the next ignition cycle.

You can hear the sounds in the videos below:

Forward:

Reverse:

Combined with early test reports out of Japan indicating LEAF ranges of as low as 47 miles in some tough driving conditions, will the additional presence of these wacky sounds hinder Nissan’s quest to sell 500,000 LEAFs globally?

You be the judge.

Source (Nissan)

After three and a half years of calling our favorite car the Chevy Volt, and decades of using the word Chevy apparently GM has decided the time has come to stop doing so.

The company issued an official memo to employees to stop referring to the brand as Chevy.  Citing the need for consistency to help build the brand and produce a singular message, from now on all members have been told to only use the word Chevrolet.

This new idea also coincides with GM firing the Campbell-Ewald marketing agency the company has used for 90 years and switching to Goodby and Co.

The memo is as follows:

We wanted to write you a quick note requesting your support of our Chevrolet Brand. When you look at the most recognized brands throughout the world, such as Coke or Apple for instance, one of the things they all focus on is the consistency of their branding. Why is this consistency so important? The more consistent a brand becomes, the more prominent and recognizable it is with the consumer. This is a big opportunity for us
moving forward.

As you know, we are investing substantially to improve the consistency of our retail facilities through the EBE process. Aside from the facilities aspect of our branding, there are many other ways in which we can demonstrate this consistency. One way to achieve this is with the use of Chevrolet vs. Chevy. We’d ask that whether you’re talking to a dealer, reviewing dealer advertising or speaking with friends and family, that you communicate our brand as Chevrolet moving forward.

We have a proud heritage behind us and a fantastic future ahead of us … speaking to the success of this brand in one consistent manner will ensure Chevrolet becomes even more prominent and recognizable than it already is.

Thank you for your support of this effort!

Not being a real member of the Chevrolet team, I of course did not receive this memo.  I was all ready to support the cause if it was for the greater good when GM issued a press release as follows:

Today’s emotional debate over a poorly worded memo on our use of the Chevrolet brand is a good reminder of how passionately people feel about Chevrolet.  It is a passion we share and one we do not take for granted.

We love Chevy.  In no way are we discouraging customers or fans from using the name.  We deeply appreciate the emotional connections that millions of people have for Chevrolet and its products.

In global markets, we are establishing a significant presence for Chevrolet, and need to move toward a consistent brand name for advertising and marketing purposes.  The memo in question was one step in that process.

I had reached out to Klaus-Peter Martin of GM corporate communications.  He explained the situation to me the following way:

The Chevrolet vs. Chevy question is simply about how we communicate the brand going forward in advertising and other external communications. We love when people call us by our nickname “Chevy”. But Chevy is not our official brand name – it is Chevrolet. In the US Chevrolet and Chevy stands for the same thing and is understood as such, but Chevrolet is also one of the fastest growing automotive brands globally. In many of these countries we are just about to establish brand awareness for Chevrolet, so by calling us consistently Chevrolet helps to expand our reach. This process will take time and will not happen over night.

Finally, John Hughes, marketing manager for the Chevy Volt summed it up this way:

I will refer to it as the Chevrolet Volt.  You can call it what you like as long as you keep talking about it.

And that I shall.

Source (New York Times)