It’s really no surprise that the 230 MPG rating GM once promoted the Volt as acheiving will not be officially approved by the EPA.
This efficiency was determined based on a draft methodology that has since been changed. The final method called J1711 was just recently approved by the SAE and will be used to determine the Volts’ mileage rating. The method continues to take into account the effect of nightly charging for a plug-in hybrid, and thus to some extent the average fuel economy over time, though has not yet been made public.
At yesterday’s conference when GM announced the Volt’s battery pack would be fully warrantied to 8 years or 100,000 miles, journalists asked what the Volt’s final overall mileage estimate will be.
“We just don’t know right now,” said Micky Bly, GMs director of EVs and hybrids .
In an exit interview with GM-Volt, former GM vice chair Bob Lutz said “the one thing we are reasonably sure about it whatever label we get will be triple digits,” admitting GM had jumped the gun on the 230 announcement.
Even with the new method, the debate rages and will go on between GM and the EPA right up until the point of sale in November said GM vice chairman Tom Stephens.
“We’ve been working collaboratively with the EPA and the industry to come up with a number that gives our customers something they can feel comfortable with,” Stephens said.
It may not be as simple as displaying miles-per-charge in charge-depleting and miles-per-gallon in charge-sustaining mode. People who charge twice per day or almost always drive less than 40 miles per day may burn gas so extremely rarely that generator mode fuel economy will become exceedingly unimportant for them.
In fact, according to Stephens, the EPA is considering for the Volt replacing the standard city and highway sticker with a fuel economy table illustrating expected fuel economy in several different driving distances or scenarios.
And for those who havent seen it, GM rolled out the first public version of a Victory Red Chevrolet Volt, captured by our friend Sam Abuelsamid of Autoblog who was lucky enough to attend the battery conference in Michigan. See photos above and below.
Source (USA Today) and (Autoblog)
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:28 am)Size-wise, the Volt looks to be bigger than a Prius but smaller than a Malibu – is that impression about right?
+28
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:29 am)I still hope the E.P.A. can deliver a number of over 100 mpg.
The Volt rightly deserves to be at the top of any list when the category is highest mpg automobiles.
To not see the Volt head and shoulders above the Prius on a list like that would be a tremendous shame.
Let people see a high number and then learn through inquiry what it really means.
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:33 am)I get the same impression based on being around a bunch of Chevy Cruze models a few weeks back. Not quite the malibu size but appearing to be bigger than the prius.
Size can be deceptive, however, and the ergonomics inside the car make a big difference. I have not driven either so I can’t comment on that. I personally find even the Malibu to be a little cramped inside with its large center console design.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:39 am)“In fact, according to Stephens, the EPA is considering for the Volt replacing the standard city and highway sticker with a fuel economy table illustrating expected fuel economy in several different driving distances or scenarios.”
I like this. Define 3 driving scenarios that span the habits of 95% of the drivers. (a typical, and two outliers in opposite directions). Give the ratings for each and a little note that your mileage will probably fall into this range somewhere depending on driving habits.
This sticker needs to be simple and easy to compare to other cars. A single number is not good, a range is always better. We just don’t want some engineering nerd at the EPA to develop a large graph with 47 curves that requires interpolation and a slide rule (calculator) to get your mileage for comparison.
+7
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:44 am)Whoa! Victory red! That’s not the Cadillac crystal red tintcoat that had been announced. To heck with the mileage announcement. This is news! It’s Christmas morning haha!
+11
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:47 am)Can’t give you enough ++ for that. An official 3 digit MPG on the sticker will get Volt some well deserved attention from an otherwise commonly ignored number. All it will take is a hurricane to shut down a few gasoline refineries for a few months, and a standard question on job applications will be: “Do you have access to a plug-in EREV to get to work with?”
+14
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:51 am)“It may not be as simple as displaying miles-per-charge in charge-depleting and miles-per-gallon in charge-sustaining mode. People who charge twice per day or almost always drive less than 40 miles per day may burn gas so extremely rarely that generator mode fuel economy will become exceedingly unimportant for them.”
Ummm, those people can then use the miles-per-charge in charge-depleting value. Honestly, posting those two core values makes allot more sense than any other option. If generator mode fuel economy isn’t important to them, then they don’t have to look at it
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:52 am)Nice color, I am sure it will be a popular choice. I am still leaning toward the Jewel Green.
Yes, as several of us said at the time, the 230 MPG assertion was a mistake. Making it sound like the vast majority of drivers would get what only a small segment of drivers would get, but Fritz paid the price for that and some other errors.
What I expect will be on the EPA sticker will be the AER using the USO6 driving cycle, and the CS mode mileage for city and highway. Time will tell.
+5
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:53 am)Funny item on the headlines today. US spent $20 Million to put up extra signs at construction sites to alert the public that this construction is part of the stimulus package. Your government is helping you and here is the sign to prove it.
The $20 Million could have been used to give each of the first year (10,000 Volt buyers) an immediate $2000 dollar rebate off the price of the car or it could have been used to purchase an additional 500 Volts for Govt fleet usage.
Oh well, I guess we can pay someone to recycle the metal in those signs.
+5
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:55 am)In 5 years when there are over 200,000 of these on the roads and the next generation is hopefully down around 30 grand pre-rebate I don’t think this will even matter. Anyone who is remotely interested in the Volt or a car like it will already understand it’s benefits.
I think information about this car will spread grassroots style far greater than it did with hybrids. Most people who own it will say to their friends. I got 750 miles per gallon last month. I used 2 gallons of gas and drove 1,500 miles.
I can’t wait for the Volt to just be another car sitting there on the lot.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:57 am)I’m glad to see them walking away from the 230 rating. I just hope with whatever rating they go with is straight forward and easy for the average person to assimilate.
Side: RED is very flattering on that Volt! Good pics.
+4
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:58 am)Yes, that red car looks good. Probably hot in the sun though, but I guess the air conditioner is up to it. Really the only Volts that have not looked great were the ones that were not painted in anything other than primer. Even those did not look bad.
-17
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:58 am)(click to show comment)
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:58 am)The solution has always been simple and obvious… X miles range / Y mpg City / Z mpg Highway. From there, anyone with a high school education can figure out their fuel consumption.
GM has, for some reason, never been in favor of the simple and obvious solution.
Why?
Jul 15th, 2010 (6:58 am)In number #6 I should have said a commonly understood number. Only early adopters will even come close to understanding anything else, especially to influence a buying decision. Who in the World is going to say “wow, look at that watt/mile rating, that’s so much better than the piece of junk I’m driving now?”
+6
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:05 am)I agree. Andrew Farah, the Volt’s chief engineer, sums the issue up by saying that “what the EPA decides could be key to how consumers accept the vehicle, and that whatever the EPA concludes, (consumers) also have to know what they’re getting”.
And on another matter of interior size, I was very pleasantly surprised at the “elbow room” (and leg room) in the passenger area when I drove a Volt this March —and even more surprising was the huge —no CAVERNOUS— carrying capacity under the hatchback as shown in this photo from the NYC test drive:
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:07 am)I believe honesty the best policy, simplicity a good practice.
If daily miles driven is less than
50 miles per day 200 mpg
(or whatever gas you calculate will burn on auto battery maintenance)
100 miles per day 100 mpg
150 miles per day 50 mpg
this are estimates and your mpg will vary according to your particular driving habits.
whatever the calculations are just like today, it’s all calculations
the gm volt is in a class of it’s own just strut your stuff GM Volt.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:09 am)Magazine or Billboard ad: -EPA rates Volt 230 MPG- Got questions? See your local Chevrolet Dealer.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:09 am)I think GM is in favor but it is the EPA’s decision not GM’s.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:12 am)Clearly the colors that were previously announced are no longer valid. Previous colors, for reference, were:
Black
Silver Ice Metallic
Cyber Gray Metallic
Crystal Red Metallic
White Diamond Tri-Coat
So when can we expect a revised list of colors? I’m really hoping for some more exciting colors — my current car is yellow, and half the reason I bought it is that it stands out. Black, Dark Gray, Light Gray, White and Red is just not that exciting. Viridian Joule is the only color I’m currently considering, and even that I’m not too jazzed up about.
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:14 am)That’s what I thought. Does this signal that the previously announced colors may not be the Gen I colors in November? For those of you who didn’t hear about it, I heard they were adding light blue and bright yellow. I still think the White Diamond Tri-coat will be our first choice.
+27
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:34 am)Just calculated my Annual Volt Fuel economy.
Days Per Yr—-Miles ————-Total Miles—-Fuel Consumption
260———-32 (Daily Commute)——8320 ———-0
10———–200 (Family Visits 5 trips)-2000 ———-4.71
40———–80 (Snowboard Hill)——3200 ———-1.29
2————500 (Vacation)———-1000 ———-13.29
53———–75 (Weekends/other)—–3975 ———-1.14
———————————————————365——————————18495———–20.42
Assumptions – Start each trip with 35 miles EV Range, 35MPG in RE Mode.
This also does not factor in opportunity charging at Family visits, which will increase economy. This is also worst case senario, I do not drive 365 days per year this assumes I do. This also assumes that I drive 18,500 miles per year (I typically do about 14,000)
Final Fuel Economy – 927 Miles Per Gallon ( 18,945 / 20.42 )
I pay extra on my electric bill for green energy, so my EV miles will (hypothetically) be wind powered.
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:43 am)Nice Red!
I wonder if there’ll be a Jolt Blue?
NPNS!
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (7:56 am)Van, I hope this is what they display as well. EV range, and then the normal city / highway numbers in charge sustaining mode – close to what people are familiar with and simple.
Sasparillastream
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:00 am)If Volts were only available in brown with yellow trim, 230 MPG would still get my attention.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:00 am)Or gm could make another 20,000 in the first year, which would bring gm another $1B, approximately. Even for gm, $1B additional income is significant.
/ Victory red looks nice.
+5
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:03 am)1. It will not make the Volt stand out from the crowd as a new technology. This is why GM is not behind it.
2. I believe few people (early adopters that are thinking about it being the exception) know how much they travel in a normal day. Because of this, people will only compare the city/highway numbers and refer back to point 1.
This is also why I don’t think BEV’s will catch on quite as quickly once the first wave has been satisfied… 100 miles does not sound like that long a distance when ICE vehicles are touting 500 miles on a tank of gas.
I personally like the idea as being the most fair and simple comparison, I’m just not sure it would benefit the Volt in terms of sales.
Sidebar: I think a number displayed on the back of the vehicle next to the brake light with lifetime fuel milage (like someone said earlier, 1500 miles/2 gallons fuel) would do the trick.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:06 am)Answer; if Y = 230 then find a new CEO, then get new y approved without being fired or demoted.
Once again showing word problems are always harder than basic math
+7
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:06 am)There is, though, a big difference between spending money on something with lasting value, such as a much-needed road, as compared to something of only transient value, or no value at all. Most of the criticism of the stimulus has been about the money going to pointless expenditures.
-2
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:06 am)One of the mileage stats should be a “road trip” number, meaning if you fill up the tank and fully charge the battery, then drive 500 miles to go on vacation, what kind of gas mileage do you get then.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:16 am)The purpose of the EPA rating is to INFORM people; it is not the EPA’s job to do GM’s marketing. EV Range / City / Highway allows anyone to figure out what his fuel consumption would be under any circumstance.
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:18 am)Well, I would have said it much more politely (no need for name calling), but you are absolutely right. Most likely the steel came from an American mill, the paint from an American factory, the sign fabrication happened in an American plant, and the sign erection was by American workers. In other words, that was $20,000,000 that was pumped straight into the US economy which, or course, is the whole point of government stimulus.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:19 am)2 thoughts here:
Raul(#17) had a good simplistic idea(and addresses the ‘range’ issue raised in other posts), except I would think marketing folk would want to put MPG first, as in–
200 MPG if you drive 50 miles a day
100 MPG if you drive 100 miles a day
50 MPG if you drive 150 miles a day
However, if I were EPA, the advent of pure BEVs suggests a standard that leaves MPG behind(since no gallons are involved in all-electrics) yet would still apply to Volt.
To wit,
“In electric mode, this vehicle delivers XX MPKh. Based on a national average Kh cost of 12 cents, your estimated annual charging bill for driving 24,000 miles per year is $XXX.”
In Volt’s case, both such advisories might be appropriate.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:20 am)The engineer in me says there should be 2 numbers each for highway and city.
Electric Range
CS MPG
and also list the battery capacity in kWh
Electric
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:22 am)I’m curious about the EPA testing and how the numbers will be valid to compare powertrains. Putting EV variations on the road will show us just how many variations of semantics we can come up with for energy economy. Something tells me that the EPA window sticker info will change within 2 years as each manufacturer cries about how their cars look like comparative dinosaurs.
I drive about 30 miles each way and get 38 mpg getting to work. I fit in that extra 10% mileage category above the average driver. Sooner or later a Volt will be handling that drive and I don’t expect the regen mileage to be much different that what I get now.
A couple of things will happen. My electric bill will go up by about $25 per month and my fuel bill will go down by about $60 per month. Charging up at work for free would be a no brainer but peak charging in my area is not a green thing.
I’d consider a solar panel and maybe an eggbeater on the roof even though I couldn’t justify the expense on the balance sheet. As soon as smart meters come around to my area I have no doubt that my daytime rates will increase significantly and make renewable electricity on the roof somewhat viable.
I really like the idea of having a BEV instead of a Volt but the Leaf wouldn’t give me a year round reliable range in the weather I have. Plus a Leaf is too ugly, too heavy, it’s not domestic, and if the e-Focus has a temp controlled battery, there will be better choices.
Right now the Volt conjectures are soon to all be answered, I want to hear from the engineers to see what’s in the pipeline.
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:22 am)With regards to road signs; one man’s pointless expenditure is another man’s steel mill output. (is my Pennsylvania bias showing?)
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:25 am)You forgot a step – multiply the fuel consumed per type of trip by the number of those types of trips taken. You’ll get about 185 gallons of fuel/year.
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:27 am)The engineer in me says there should be 2 numbers each for highway and city, Electric Only range, and MPG in Gas only mode. Plus the usable battery capacity.
Example:
_____________________________________
_________|_Electric_Range__|_Gas_Only
Highway__|_38.8_miles_____|_51.5 mpg
City______|_42.5_miles_____|_59.5 mpg
Usable battery capacity: 8.8kWh
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:38 am)Good Catch! Still considerably awesome mileage considering that is my WORST case scenario.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:52 am)The Volt will never be “just another car sitting on there on the lot”. IMO
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:57 am)Reminds me of the early network operating system days with Novell Engineers/administrators saying I have not rebooted my server for 2 years and they would show the up time.
I think we will see the same thing with the volt, I have only used 1 quart of gas this year. I guess we will see how the GM website for Volt owners will show the MPG-King or Queen.
If I am the winner then maybe they will give me credit for a free firmware upgrade to increase the sport button performance on weekends.
I want the MPG on the weekday but on the weekend and driving those Windy California roads… hard not to have fun.
Jul 15th, 2010 (8:59 am)In a previous post it was noted there would be 6 colors for the VOLT. ( am I counting 5 above?)
I noted a few days ago an insurance study stated.. one of the fewest cars stolen were ones painted “YELLOW”. (color #6 ???)
ALSO in that study it was also noted NO ONE swiped cars painted “PINK” ( an alternate sixth or if a new color list?? …… just think of the possibilities!!!) :+}
+5
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:03 am)Government waste pisses people off. The $20 million could be spent on something of lasting value instead of a divisive sign. More signs won’t sway anybody’s opinion. Those that didn’t support the stimulus only get pissed off even more at the waste whenever they see them.
$20 million will buy 4 basic freeway interchanges.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:06 am)The multiple category fuel mileage is what makes most sense for most consumers. They can look at what their typical drive cycle is and quickly calculate how little gas they are going to use.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:07 am)CS mode mileage on the EPA sticker won’t help since you hardly ever, ever drive only on generator. It’s like my stand-by generator at home. It only runs once a week to exercise. How would I use that small data factor to calculate my home energy usage? Answer: it doesn’t matter in the big picture.
I think the EPA will eventually need to go to an energy usage model where it doesn’t matter if your drive is electric, gasoline, alcohol, CNG, hydrogen, a combination or other. This may end up looking like the energy-star appliance sticker as so many have mentioned here.
What a consumer needs is a sticker that says: this vehicle uses $550 of energy per year to operate. All vehicles, ICE, electric, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, etc. should have the same pre-calculated sticker.
MPG is the old way. Move on to the new way.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:12 am)The length of the Volt is to be 177 with a wheel base of 105.7
the Cruze is 181 with WB of 105.7
The Malibu is larger at 191.8 and 112.3
and the Prius 175.6 with WB of106.3
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:16 am)Diamond White Tri-Coat w/ Tan Leather in a Volt SS! Gotta have me one of those!
+4
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:16 am)LOL You know it is Bush’s fault.
Some clown will come on here and reply that $20 Million is nothing and only SS, Medcare and defense bust he budget. They just don’t get it every dollar counts.
Government waste never = Stimulus.
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:16 am)Works for me!
Kind a like the energy star type yellow sticker that comes with new appliances.
The marker on the sticker “notes” how efficient “this appliance” compares to others like it. ;=]
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:17 am)StevenU said:
I think a number displayed on the back of the vehicle next to the brake light with lifetime fuel mileage (like someone said earlier, 1500 miles/2 gallons fuel) would do the trick.
Which brings up the question, what kind of mileage could a lead-foot like me expect? Would GM even want to sell me one, if it had an MPG display on the back?
+9
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:18 am)And waste is a waste.
+7
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:19 am)The EPA is basically off base. It feels compelled to go down the bunny trail of energy equivalence but that’s somewhat beside the point. Since the EPA is considering a table, why not a couple more entries in addition to MPG:
1. Dollars To Terrorists per mile
2. Junk in the Atmosphere (including all the really nasty carcinogenic stuff not just greenhouse gases) per mile.
The problem is that the measurement of MPG suggests that high MPG is a good thing whereas in practice it’s still a bad thing. It’s like smoking one pack a day rather than four. One may be better but it’s still deadly.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:20 am)I’m not sure if anyone else looked at the autoblog gallery Lyle linked to but the interior shots show the control panel in a color other than the white that many people have expressed distaste towards. The one in the gallery seems to be more of a charcoal and it looks pretty sharp.
-1
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:21 am)I will make my decision on buying a Volt, based on the MPG in the “charge depletion mode” . No matter what happens, this number will eventually come out as the Volt hits the market. Does GM take us for a bunch of idiots with their new phraseology. The American public is not as dumb as GM seems to think. GM needs to publish two numbers : 1)How far the Volt can go on a battery charge 2)It’s MPG in the all gas mode. All else is stupid marketing crap! Come on GM, give me a break!
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:23 am)It’s the interior volume that determines the size. A Highlander (CUV) has the same wheelbase (and undercarriage) as a Camry (sedan), but, they are entirely different vehicles.
+6
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:25 am)# 52 DonC
If the US could get from a 4 pack a day addiction, to a 1 pack a day addiction to oil, I think we could all breathe a lot easier.
+5
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:29 am)OK – let’s keep it simple yet communicate the possibilities the Volt gives. Here’s my suggested chart based upon 40mpg for the ICE motor:
ECONOMY RATING OF THIS EXTENDED RANGE ELECTRIC VEHICLE:
(RATINGS BASED UPON DAILY MILES DRIVEN):
0-40 miles —- NO GASOLINE CONSUMED
41-60 miles — from 1600 down to 120 mpg
61-80 miles — from 120 down to 80 mpg
81-120 miles — from 80 down to 60 mpg
121-200 miles – from 60 down to 50 mpg
201-300+miles – from 50 down to 40 mpg baseline
+7
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:32 am)That would be me because it would be true. But on the point of the signs, it seems you can’t be satisfied. If there aren’t any signs you ask: “What has this spending done?”. If they put the signs up to tell you you say: “They’re wasting money telling me where the money has gone!” Seems a tad inconsistent.
The only problem with the stimulus was, as I mentioned at the time, it probably wasn’t large enough.
But yeah, why not get all exorcised about absolutely nothing? It works wonderfully to divert attention from the real deficit problems and fits in so nicely with your Kook Aid Narrative that we can keep demanding more services but not pay for them without suffering any fiscal impacts. If you want to know what has created the budget deficit in the short term just look at a graph. The Bush tax cuts are responsible for most of the deficit, at a rate of about 15X all the spending on the economic recovery and TARP and Fannie and Freddie and everything else you keep pointing out as a problem. In truth you couldn’t find the money you’re complaining about on this graph because it’s so completely and impossibly irrelevant. Take a look:
http://www.offthechartsblog.org/whose-deficit-is-it-anyway/
+9
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:34 am)Not really,
Some jobs are useless and do nothing for the economy. Paying people to do useless things gets us nowhere when there are real needs in the country.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:34 am)Why would you do that?
The vehicle will be in charge depletion mode (using electricity) most of the time. The MPG would be irrelevant since you won’t use any Gallons.
If you really meant ‘charge sustaining mode’ (using some gasoline), then, this is also not a good way to base a decision. The car will rarely be in charge sustaining mode if you drive like 90% of the population and charge at least once a day.
There needs to be some kind of combination number so that these cars can be compared to their dinosaur brethren.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:36 am)How about a graph that goes from 0 miles to 340 miles (the volt range) on the X-axis, and the Y-axis would show what your MPG would be at each range. So from 0-40 it would be infinte, then the graph would slowly go down towards approx 50mpg @ the 340 mile mark.
People could easily look at the graph to see what mpg they would get w/a typical trip of theirs. Many would be please to see that they would use no gas on their 40mile or less trips.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:37 am)I would argue that the last thing this country needs is more new freeway interchanges. More roadway to crumble, more roadway to repair, more future cost. I would call THAT government waste. We have enough infrastructure and should spend money REPAIRING it, not adding to it. I know it was just an example you were giving, but it illustrates my point that one man’s waste is another man’s investment. That’s why it’s so hard to trim government spending.
-4
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:39 am)Give it up!
A pack a day may not be that much better.
Heavy cigarette smokers who cut back their smoking – rather than quit – might not see any health benefits, according to researchers.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1081221.stm
An EREV cuts down oil consumption sufficiently. Higher mileage vehicles not so much.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:42 am)if they just come up with scenario estimates for the mpg, future care will have all kinds of messed up mpgs and they’ll keep revising the EPA way of testing. be honest about it! lets not kid ourselves because we support the volt so much.
the stick should read as follows
battery mode 40 miles per full charge
generator mode XXmiles per gallon
thats what it actually is, and anyone buying the car with common sense can see they’ll keep getting those 40 miles of electric if they keep charging. they don’t need a driving scenario that tells them they’re gonna get an outrageous mpg number. that’s just in my opinion a way to show a really high mpg number that can never be the same for all consumers.
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:43 am)My opinion is that the only people who would understand the graph would be those who wouldn’t need it. It’s difficult to overestimate how “graph challenged” the average American is. Show most people a graph and their eyes glaze over. (But tables aren’t much easier for most).
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:45 am)Starcast, you are a wise prophet and your prophecy was fullfilled quickly
.
It is amazing but true.
+4
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:47 am)For us Quebec’ers in the north eastern part of the continent, we are anxiously waiting for this car.
Our electricity is a mere 5.5 cent a kilowatt and we’ve been paying an additional premium on our gas ever since the ‘76 olympics, as much as $0.20 per litre or $0.80 a US gallon more than the rest of Canada (not to mention the difference with the US prices).
This car for us is a deliverance from OPEC. I like to mention that I like what I’ve read from many of the posters here, people are starting to get the idea of producing their own electricity with solar and wind. It won’t be long when all that fuss about “Just replacing the polution from the tail pipe to the smoke stack ” will be a thing of the past.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:47 am)Autobloggreen has a very well done article on the battery with considerable detail. Very interesting and worth a look.
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/07/15/more-details-on-the-construction-and-production-of-the-volt-batt/
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:59 am)Thinking further, the EPA really needs to throw out their conventional methodology because it is based upon vehicles having only one source of power generation, while the Volt has more than one.
I’d like to see the EPA come up with a line chart, with MPG on the y-axis and miles driven between recharging on the x-axis. Also in the chart should be two lines which would end up hugging the bottom of the chart – these lines would represent the best MPG ratings and the worst MPG ratings of ICEed cars in the same size class as the Volt.
The visual contrast between the Volt’s figures vs. ICE figures would be shockingly visible. Stick this chart on a Volt’s window and people will understand right away how special it is.
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:02 am)The best model for the Volt still is the following:
One (only one) over night charge one’s own garage (110 volts)
Usage scenario:
1) Daily usage: 40 to 60 miles (ave:18000 miles/year) This is 365 daily charge.
This is 150,200,250 overall mpg assuming a charge sustaining mileage of 30,40,50 respectively.
2) Daily usage: much less then 40 miles: No gas usage. A BEV might be a better choice.
Fuel cost all electric.
3) Daily usage: much more than 60 miles. An ICE or hybrid probably is a better choice.
I hope the EPA will use the first scenario as the bases they calculate the Volt’s fuel efficiency. There was nothing unreasonable about the 230 mpg!!! This is precisely the selling point for the Volt.
-10
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:02 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:03 am)Excellent example. The word ‘Daily’ should be in bold.
+4
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:07 am)Regardless as to the rating this car could prove to be very profound.
The cost of everything is determined at the margins. That means a slight drop in demand of anything can produce a large change in price.
In this case we are shipping billions of dollars a day overseas.
The Volt will immediately begin to change this.
Some people are going to be buying only two tanks of gas a year.
All that money, all that purchasing power, that was flowing overseas is going to stay here now.
The problem with the economy is lack of demand or purchasing power. My friend the engineer tells me he pays 8 cents a kilowatt hour for electricity. That means more people will have more cash left over in their pockets to inject demand into the economy. It also means that more money stays here instead of circulating over there. Just a little thing like this helps purchasing power stay in our economy.
When we all are buying 1/10th the amount of gas, then we don’t need to send armies over to the middle east at half a trillion dollars a year – a price that doesn’t show up at the pump or on the sticker.
And alas, the air will hopefully be cleaner.
Ah, in such a dark time, its nice to have some promise like this.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:08 am)The way our gov’t spends money these days, 20 million IS nothing.
Just clowning around.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:09 am)+100….Didn’t see your post – you beat me to the punch. But I do agree that a line graph would have a tremendous visual impact on buyers, especially if included in the graph is a line representing mileage figures for ICE cars. Seeing the Volt’s line high above the ICE line (actually it would be sloping down to eventually meet the ICE line) would be clear to all but the stupidest among buyers, who probably wouldn’t buy a Volt anyway.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:11 am)A couple billion here.. A couple billion there…
Eventually it adds up.
In your personal life, do you ignore a dollar bill just because it is so small a piece of the pie? Nope. You count each and every one of those puppies and make sure you know where it went when it’s gone. I think CJS would agree with me here.
For want of a horseshoe, the kingdom was lost!
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:18 am)#5
Yeah, looks pretty good! +1
I think they’d better up their production plans, LOL.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:24 am)If the charge depletion mode value will sway you whether or not to buy a Volt, then perhaps the Volt is not the car for you to start with. Or you just don’t get it.
People need to do the MATH and see how mild the difference is between a CS mpg of 35 vs. 50 for THEIR particular driving situation.
Lets say you have a good 25mpg car now. If you drive 60 MILES a day during the week (300mile/wk), you would use 12 gal in your original car, 2.8 gal with Volt at 35mpg, and 2.0 gal with Volt at 50mpg. That’s if you CAN’T charge during the day.
0.8 more gallons of gas at 35mpg vs. 50mpg. THATS IT!! 2 bucks per week.
If this is a deal breaker, then MOVE ON! You obviously never thought the Volt was a worthy car to start with, and never intended to buy one either.
All you want to do is complain and bust GM’s chops. This crap is getting old.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:28 am)#58
Me too. +1
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:29 am)So just stating the battery range and the charge sustaining gas mileage is too simple?
I guess the EPA has to find a balance between too simple that people might need to do math to see what their typical fuel consumption will be and too complicated and confusing with so many different ratings that their eyes glaze over.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:31 am)This assumes 50mpg in CS mode. Note 0-40 would be infinte.
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:31 am)#73
Amen. +1
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:33 am)Actually, I like that.
They could add two other cars on the graph (straight lines they would be on the graph; a combined city/highway mpg at all distances).
These comparison cars could be chosen and shown as the “best in class” MPG for their particular segment. No need to even say who they are.
That way, EVERY customer who looks at the graph can actually SEE the difference between the Volt and the others, at every distance situation. No need to pull out the calculator.
Cool idea.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:35 am)Art Says
Jul 15th, 2010 (9:42 am)
if they just come up with scenario estimates for the mpg, future care will have all kinds of messed up mpgs and they’ll keep revising the EPA way of testing.
be honest about it! lets not kid ourselves because we support the volt so much.
the stick should read as follows
battery mode 40 miles per full charge
generator mode XXmiles per gallon
thats what it actually is, and anyone buying the car with common sense can see they’ll keep getting those 40 miles of electric if they keep charging. they
don’t need a driving scenario that tells them they’re gonna get an outrageous mpg number. that’s just in my opinion a way to show a really high mpg number
that can never be the same for all consumers.
Graphs and tables simply won’t work because there is an infinate number of possibilities. IMO there should be a number for battery type, battery size in other words kwh, city and hwy mileage on all electric drive with defrost active. There should be a fuel tank size, gallons or liters, type of fuel, premium, regular, ethanol and the mpg for city and hwy with defrost active. You should be able to compare the ifficiency of both, electric drive separate from fuel drive Knowing the true efficiency of each vehicle you are comparing. I agree with you Art, The Volt’s gas mileage could vary infinately depending on how often you charge the battery. K. I. S. S.
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:37 am)Wow, we were on the EXACT same page. I posted the same thing almost to a word.
This is a really good idea if you ask me.
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:44 am)Russ.
I can tell you that the MPG in “charge depletion” mode is infinity, you will use no gasoline in CD mode x miles / 0 = infinity.
hope that helps you….you won’t find much better anywhere.
(BTW I think that your post really shines a new light on this part of your post…”The American public is not as dumb as GM seems to think”
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:49 am)If the EPA were to post electric freeway miles per charge (*On level ground the only real figure would need to tell you the test temperature naturally, but it won’t). Just like the refrigerator numbers they take it in cool rooms & not a hot working kitchen corner). EPA numbers are not real world numbers. Who drives at that ridiculously low 21mph. Posted highway speed ranges from 65-75mph. If they do, it will still be much better than wait and see. Just take another 15-25% off for 100*F+ and a/c & hills. Look at your current car and your original EPA sticker how far off are those numbers. Mine were 2mpg less.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:51 am)Proof that it is a great idea is that a number of us are independently thinking of the idea at the same time.
I don’t know how to install pictures here otherwise I’d make an example. Someone else already did, but didn’t include the flat lines at the bottom representing ICE cars. And from a visual clarity point of view, the background grid lines ought to be toned way down or dropped out even, but I’m being picky here.
Hey – why doesn’t someone among us here who has good computer skills make up a chart, bring it up here, we’ll finalize it and then fire it off to the EPA as a suggested way to rate the Volt and any other EREVs that may follow in the years to come?
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:55 am)I assume they aren’t in favour because 32 / 35 / 35 doesn’t stand out from the crowd. That initial 32 for EV range is going to be lost when compared to a car like the Prius which will say 51 / 48 on the sticker.
(32 comes directly from EPA numbers announced by GM. The 35ish ICE is an estimation based on GM’s comments regarding the relationship of the Volt to other ICE cars in the same class, the apparent ICE fuel economy of a Cruze which should be more efficent than the Volt on the highway but not the city, and the mid teens MPG that people have been getting driving the Volt at relatively low speeds around the parking lots during test drives).
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:55 am)TmKa ,, I share your view , If the Volt is a success , Ten clones will hit the market in the next couple of years so 30,000 units per year could easly hit 300,000 per year . Future trading Commodities Is looking for growth market share , so a decline in the need of oil today and a ever growing decline in the future will effect oil prices . Not to much in 2010 but the markets move fast and Ten Clone Cars at 200,000 to 800,000 units yearly would have massive price effect on the price per Barrel.
The only down side is the price of gas could drop(next 8 years) so low that it could cripple the new technology . I don’t think it will but only time will tell. The “Gene is out of the Bottle”
UP side for Cheap Gas
1. cheaper food (farmers machine costs)
2. cheaper shipping ( UPS, Fed-ex, Trucking ect…)
3. consumers have more $$ to spend on kids , vactions & dinner out.
3.
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:59 am)Test
Checkitout!
Might be the most detailed pic ofthe batt pack so far…..
EDIT:
Oh well, it won’t post. But it’s up at ABG, it’s a really good shot of the inside.
Jul 15th, 2010 (10:59 am)Fixed it for Ya.
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:01 am)I think the biggest problem with MPG is that everyone and their brother is putting out more and more fuel efficient ICEs. Hyundai claims 34 highway on their new Sonata, which is creeping up on diesel and hybrid numbers. Mazda is bringing Sky-D(iesel) and Sky-G(as) to our shores next year, promising very impressive fuel economy numbers. Personally, I’d love a diesel Mazda 5 AWD. Buckets of torque and 40mpg? Yes, please.
I think a more problematic question is this: How do you compute gas mileage equivalency for a BEV? Your costs per charge are going to be radically different if you pay $.18/kwh vs $.08/kwh, so how do you compare? I think the two technologies are so different that making any sort of comparison is going to be problematic, at best.
-1
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:04 am)Although I won’t waste my time on most of this, the fact that some test drives in CS mode have indicated mid teens mpg is meaningless.
As someone who did get to test drive a Volt in CS mode, I can tell you the car SAT idling in CS mode, not moving, more than it was being driven. It took several minutes for EACH test driver to be briefed on what to expect from the car, AC running full blast. For me in particular, when we stopped after a 5 minute test drive, I sat there and asked questions for 5 minutes more, the car still on.
If you want to use this type of situation to make a point about CS mode mpg, then knock yourself out. It’s rather naive. Not to mention, wrong.
-2
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:14 am)The Volt looks very good in red. The fuel efficiency sticker should be a battery range number followed by liquid fuel rating. Something like:
city use: 40 B + 48 L 39 E85
highway: 40 B + 46 L 37 E85
This information needs to be easily understood by the consumer. It is there to inform not confuse.
=D-Volt
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:16 am)EPA should read like this..
PHV PRIUS:
EV Range: Up to 13 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 60mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
Chevy Volt:
EV Range: Up to 40 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 90mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
All depending on driver and driving conditions.
JMHO
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:19 am)I will never own a red car (just a personal preference, don’t get out of joint, VR lovers).
The one I want is BLUE!! (And not some wimpy light blue, either; a strong blue). They could call it “Electric Blue.”
The first poll I voted in on this site was one asking for Volt color suggestions: Blue was the winner by a wide margin. That was years ago.
Now we hear “light blue … maybe”.
What’s up with that?
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:22 am)Give a link to the page where the picture is, and I’ll try to make it appear in a later post.
-2
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:26 am)MPG? Who cares? I want to know MPD (Miles Per Dollar). Electricity is not free.
Zero emissions is not accurate. What emissions were created in the generation of the electricity?
8 years/ 100,000 miles of driving a Volt (length of warranty) will not come close to making the vehicle more cost effective, considering its price tag, to operate than a conventional 4-stroke. I’ll happily stick w/ my clean-burning, .10 cents/ mile (including oil changes) gasoline engine.
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:26 am)It won’t come up/post. I think Lyle is working on the next thread. He’ll generally filter the posted website site when he’s working on the next thread. Anyway, it’s up on ABG. Great look see on the inside!
/drooling at the cells…
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:33 am)Let’s try this again.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:33 am)This whole mileage rating business IMO is silly. There are two types of energy sources for the Volt: 1) battery from the grid/brake regeneration and 2) gasoline to drive a generator.
Two numbers must be on the Monroney stcker
1) Value from a consistent driving test loop that includes x # miles of electric/regen ONLY
2) Value from a consistent test loop that includes x # of miles of petroleum-based fuel ONLY
This method will tell me how efficient the vehicle will be on pure electric power (value #1). The current rating method resembles value #2. If a vehicle gets it’s propulsion fully or partially from an electric source, value #1 will give the consumer a means for comparison (an inefficient or overly heavy electric vehicle will be rated lower than a lighter or more aerodynamic vehicle.
Russ: I will make my decision on buying a Volt, based on the MPG in the “charge depletion mode” . No matter what happens, this number will eventually come out as the Volt hits the market. Does GM take us for a bunch of idiots with their new phraseology. The American public is not as dumb as GM seems to think. GM needs to publish two numbers : 1)How far the Volt can go on a battery charge 2)It’s MPG in the all gas mode. All else is stupid marketing crap! Come on GM, give me a break! (Quote)
-1
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:35 am)Pretty good representation Captain. Easy and Straightforward. I like it.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:40 am)MetrologyFirst Says
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:04 am)
block quote
GXT
: (32 comes directly from EPA numbers announced by GM. The 35ish ICE is an estimation based on GM’s comments regarding the relationship of the Volt to other
ICE cars in the same class, the apparent ICE fuel economy of a Cruze which should be more efficent than the Volt on the highway but not the city, and the
mid teens MPG that people have been getting driving the Volt at relatively low speeds around the parking lots during test drives).
block quote end
Although I won’t waste my time on most of this, the fact that some test drives in CS mode have indicated mid teens mpg is meaningless.
As someone who did get to test drive a Volt in CS mode, I can tell you the car SAT idling in CS mode, not moving, more than it was being driven. It took
several minutes for EACH test driver to be briefed on what to expect from the car, AC running full blast. For me in particular, when we stopped after a
5 minute test drive, I sat there and asked questions for 5 minutes more, the car still on.
If you want to use this type of situation to make a point about CS mode mpg, then knock yourself out. It’s rather naive. Not to mention, wrong.
This is a good example of how your mpg could be under certain situations like rush hour traffic jams. I’m not trying to put the Volt down, I’m simply trying to point out the other end of your graphs. Different electric vehicles work best in particular driving needs. If someone needs to drive alot, the cruise might be a better value in terms of total cost. The other day I read somewhere that GM said the Volt was not meant as a highway cruiser for long trips but rather best suited for city and short trips. Under the right circumstances the Volt has enormous potential! There is nothing wrong with pointing out the possibility of the poor end of the graph, it’s no different then pointing out the possibility of getting extremly high mpg as well.
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:44 am)Awesome.
Only change I would make is maybe ending the X axis at about 200 miles; change the X axis title from “miles driven” to “miles driven per day”.
I think we got a winner.
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:44 am)Autoblog Review: 2010 Chevrolet Silverado Hybrid is all swing, all miss
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/15/review-2010-chevrolet-silverado-hybrid/
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:45 am)You’re almost there! Now add color under the area for each car’s AE mode on the left side of the graph. If Toyota and Ford have no pure AE mode, that should be shown.
+5
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:48 am)Actually I do ignore it. Why? Cause it’s not worth my time. There are bigger fish to fry. More precisely this is called applying the 80/20 rule, which says that you get 80% of all results from the first 20% of your efforts.
Here is an example. It’s the middle of winter. It’s freezing outside and it’s freezing inside. You come downstairs and notice your front door is off its hinges and cold air is surging into your house. You also notice that your windows could use a little bit of caulk. So what do you do?
Apparently you would spend a week recaulking the window on the theory that “every bit of air infiltration matters”. I’d spend a day fixing the door. Now I wouldn’t say your approach is dumb, but the fact is that when you’re finished working for the week your house is still going to be every bit as cold as before but my house will be a whole lot warmer the next day.
What this illustrates is that while in a perfect world you can do everything — fix the door and caulk the windows — in the real world there is something called “opportunity costs”. This means that when you work on one thing you’re not working on something else. If you caulk the windows you’re not fixing the door. Spend your time ranting about inconsequential government expenditures and you’re not fixing all the consequential ones.
There are only three areas of government expenditures that count: Social Security; Medicare & Medicaid and other related entitlements; and Defense. Address these or forget about it.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:48 am)I would say it is neither simple nor obvious and it misses the point. I expect to get well over 250 mpg because I will be charging at home and at work and will have very few times where I actually enter CS mode. Your idea of saying 40 AER/55 city and 45 highway (or whatever the actual numbers are) in no way conveys what my true MPG is expected to be based on my driving scenario.
EPA can come up with whatever system they want but here’s what I’m hoping for. GM is collecting all the data (miles driven, kwh charged, and, I believe gas used) for their Volt fleet. I’m hoping that, with privacy concerns being addressed, that GM dealerships can say to a prospective customer that, in the last year we have sold 30 Volts and to date they are averaging 187 MPG (or whatever the number turns out to be).
The technology exists and, as a Volt supporter, I sure would be willing to share my MPG number with GM and other EV enthusiasts.
Can a brotha’ get a +1?!?!??!?!?!
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:50 am)Possibly.
But this situation also affects EVERY OTHER car the same way. Not to mention, really tanks the range on a pure electrics apparently. Once again, we need to make sure we are comparing apples to apples and not singling the Volt out in an unfair comparison, either positive or negative.
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:51 am)From what I gather the Volt under the revised J1711 the Volt will have a 140 MPG rating. IMO this understates the MPG because no one other than Rashiid would get a Volt if they were consistently driving over a hundred miles a day. Not the right vehicle for this.
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:53 am)You are correct, sir! “Miles-Per-Dollar” is the ENTIRE POINT of the Chevrolet VOLT, but it will take many years of adaptation to EREV vehicles to get the EPA and the public in general to think that way when looking at a new car window sticker.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:53 am)I completely agree with Hmmm. It doesn’t have to be any more complicated than simply displaying the two key figures: 1) the average AER (e.g., 40), and 2) the average mileage in charge-sustaining mode (e.g., 50 mpg). Individual drivers can then make judgements concerning the amount of fuel they consume based on their particular circumstances.
Breaking down different mileage scenerios into a table could be something that GM does on its own in some of its own advertising, but not necessarily in anything official sanctioned by the EPA. Unlike the Volt’s amazing technology, the mileage rating isn’t rocket science.
Sincerely, George, Canada…go Volt!!
Jul 15th, 2010 (11:56 am)Cite at #68.
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:02 pm)Yeah, i just put 340 in there because that is the Volt’s range when fully fueled. I think GM did do some graphs like this showing charging cycles too.
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:04 pm)Hey! are you going to use this as a sales tool.. haha. Where’s my commission
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:05 pm)So 12 days a year a Leaf is not enough for you – total of 3,000 miles. If you use a Prius on those days you burn 60 gallons total (instead of 180 with just Volt). Even with a 20 mpg ICE car – you would burn 150 gallons.
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:08 pm)oh, OK.
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:08 pm)If the Volt gets 40mpg in CS mode, why wouldn’t people that drive 100 miles/day get a Volt? 40mpg is better than most cars on the road. Then you get the 40miles AER as a bonus.
-1
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:13 pm)Because people will misinterpret it, as they often do even on this blog (not the regulars, mostly), and Nissan and Toyota will encourage that. Think about it. Reading what people say on blogs, talking to people, etc., do a whole bunch of people, whether college or high school educated, reason especially well?
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:14 pm)I kind of like that shade of red for the Volt. That and the super shiny silver color. I think GM should probably not have a Volt in that bird egg bluish color. That didn’t look good.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:24 pm)This it, CJS & DonC?
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:25 pm)Major fallacy in this logic of 40 Miles off battery.
How much energy does it take. You could one car SUV, which takes 16 KWHrs of energy to go the 40 Miles, or a small car, which only takes 8 KHWhrs.
Giving both of them the 40 Miles on Battery rating does not provide any value, because the SUV costs 2x the smaller car to go that 40 Miles. It will take 2x the energy to charge, and thus cost 2x for the same distance.
Take two examples not quite so obvious, where the cars are similar sizes, yet the effeciency of one is far greater the other. By providing an efficiency rating, you can directly compare these two cars. You can compare one to the other, and get a good idea what it would cost you.
(This rating could be similar to the rating, they place on refrigerators, so you can compare them side by side.)
Providing a chart for every car, and not a single number will be ridiculous. What are you going to do, take a picture with your phone of the chart, and go to the next dealer, and compare this picture on your phone to the graph on the next car.
I think you also need, the standard City and Highway numbers also.
So the volt would be 8 KHWhrs for 40 Miles on Battery, then 35 city, and 50 Highway, (or whatever the real published numbers become.)
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:27 pm)VOLT’s power train has been well known for three years. Still EPA demands GM heed to outdated policy. Certainly the now discredited 230 mpg demo’d EPA’s incongruity–which amazingly enough EPA just this past quarter ‘10 acknowledged doesn’t wash.
By now (after three years) even those tiny EPA minds have had sufficient opportunity to publish a congruent ER-EV policy. But here EPA stands– either confusing the buyer, having to decipher or both. The notion of applying mpg to pricing electricity per 100 miles is perfectly ludicrous. Case in point. I moved my office in Jan. My former office power bill (PG&E) came in around $125 mo. My present office (Alameda Power) runs $25/mo. Same use. But at home (Alameda) the power bill is tiered – the third tier being $0.183 kW-real bad. Different electric pricing. This is so around the country.
Safe policy is stating 1) range per factory-set charge; 2) time to charge per speed at 0.0 incline; and, 3) stating the charge time for each voltage level. Now the buyer has something useful.
For the range extender, simply how far is range extended and how much fuel it takes to get there. For mountain mode, a sample incline, say 3%. (The max incline for interstate highway construction is 6%. Below 6%-degrees and incline difference is nil.)
-3
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:53 pm)Eventually ya gotta go ahead and caulk the windows as well. The opportunity to get rid of this wasteful spending will come on election day.
If we all buy Volts (or other alternative ways to move around), the defense budget will take a huge hit. The health care budget should take a hit as well due to cleaner air and water. You can lower social-security a little when gasoline is $1 and the food bill is based on lower transportation costs.
It’s all interrelated. Just fixing the door won’t get us there.
Jul 15th, 2010 (12:53 pm)To me, as long as the car still uses gas, the MPG should calculate it when it is powerd by gas (depletion point)
-15
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:01 pm)(click to show comment)
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:09 pm)Miles per charge
Hours to charge
Miles per kWh
Miles per gallon
I’m sure that if there were several EREVs to choose from, these would be the important numbers to compare (why didn’t anyone else mention hours to charge?)
-2
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:13 pm)There have been a number of bad suggestions but this one is, far and away, the worst. A single dollar figure will never cut it. Say the EPA comes up with some complex formular that allows them to say $500/year for the Volt. That will be wrong by a factor of 3 or more for a buyer who drives no more than 39.9 miles/day on any occasion and will be off by a factor of about 40 the other way for a buyer who drives his Volt on two 7500 miles trips per year.
A single dollar figure will give the user NO guidance for what HIS driving is, unless it precisely matches the EPA driving cycle (which won’t be on the sticker, anyway, so he won’t know if it DOES match).
—
The underlying assumption on this site seems to be that only GM-Volt Believers and Volt Early Adopters can possibly understand energy costs, so the sticker should reflect their tastes. Well, that ain’t the case, not by a long shot.
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:15 pm)No I would not!!! Who are you to make up what I would say?
I say don’t waste the money in the first place and to say that $ 860,000,000,000 of waste is not the problem is at best foolish.
-2
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:18 pm)No, you don’t HAVE to caulk the windows. You wight WANT to, but you don’t HAVE to. You do HAVE to put on the door though to have any hope of warming your house. Don C is right about this. Good analogy.
And, unfortunately, although everyone buying Volts might? help reduce the defense budget, all THAT savings (and more $$$ likely) will have to go to improving the grid to handle all those electric cars.
You never get something for nothing.
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:20 pm)LOL It did’t take long. Now if I can just get those lotto numbers.
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:20 pm)A perfect example of what I was referring to at the end of my previous post. “You know we can’t give those non-Believers complete informatinon; they wouldn’t know what to do with it.”
The purpose of the EPA is to give people information to make good decisions, not to do GM’s marketing for them.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:22 pm)Provide two numbers: 1) electric range, 2) millage on range extender. This will provide clear info for buyers and allow for comparison with other plug in cars. Stop playing with numbers!!!
-5
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:24 pm)Why not? Well, how about because the Volt is more than twice as expensive as a car that gets 40mpg?
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:25 pm)If GM is smart, they will include it in the full color brochure!
-7
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:27 pm)140mpg? So, I can charge the Volt, add two gallons of gas and go 300 miles? Super! Will GM refund my money if that doesn’t happen?
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:29 pm)That Victory Red color is HOT.
A lifetime MPG calculation would be a nice addition for a “lifetime” display.
+4
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:35 pm)+4
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:41 pm)That should be the VOLT slogan:
“How far will you go on just 9 gallons?”
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:47 pm)I was taking the analogy to it’s conclusion. You can spend $5 on caulk now, or, continue spending $50/month extra to heat your house. Yep, it’s your choice.
I prefer to get rid of the ‘continue to spend $50′ guys on election day.
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:49 pm)I love this. Because you would not be able to find my taxes on a graph of all taxes sooooo I guess that I can just stop paying them. My taxes don’t mean anything. Thanks we can all benifit from that kind of thinking.
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:50 pm)If anyone is comparing colors…. I’m not sure who used the name ‘vicotry red’ for the color of these photos released on AutoBlog…. but this VOLT is definitely NOT painted in GM’s ‘Victory Red’ (color #74U on past GM color charts, Victory Red is a flat, non-metallic fire engine red color). This is a beautiful shade of red … but it is metallic paint as you can see in the shots taken in bright sunlight. Since GM has not released any actual ordering information, it is impossible to tell for sure, but i’m betting the actual color is closer to the Crystal Red Metallic that you can get on a Cadillac CTS or the Red Jewel Metallic on a Chevy Malibu LTZ.
No matter what – that’s the BEST LOOKING VOLT YET!
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:56 pm)Profound. Sometimes people on this board amaze me with their insight. Ya need to push that idea up through the org back to corporate. I think it’s a winner!
Me. I go about 150 miles right now. With Volt, I’ll probably go 6,000.
Jul 15th, 2010 (1:58 pm)I wonder how fuel efficient it will be? It sure would be surprising if it went higher than 230 mpg though more likely not. I guess will have to wait and see?
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:00 pm)As stated before Family of 3 but only 1 car. I intend to keep it that way. Should I go rent a second car 12 days a year No way. Also I have a lack of confidence of the range of the leaf in an Iowa winter.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:01 pm)This is very misleading. The truth is increasing governmnet waste is not like calking the windows it is like CUTING ANOTHER HOLE IN THE WALL. WithThis govenment it is more like they tore the roof off with new spending. You can never fix something you contiue to add to. Your way is like a drowning man asking for more water.
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:04 pm)I can see a permanent post on Lyle’s website that works like a video game – where VOLT drivers go to log how far they’ve driven before they used 9 gallons of fuel!
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:08 pm)My comment was not political. It was logical.
If people from either side want to argue it using a political slant, have fun.
I don’t do that. It’s a waste of time.
It’d be nice to keep the political crap off the board.
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:22 pm)Actually you could put in 0 gallons and drive forever.
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:23 pm)With my current car, I can go 279 miles on average.
With the Volt, I hope to go 450 miles on average.
40 MPC, 50 MPG in CS mode.
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:35 pm)This was the posting on it
http://gm-volt.com/2009/10/22/gm-announces-chevy-volt-paint-colors-and-contest-to-name-the-signature-hue-and-win-a-test-drive/
the colors were Black, Silver Ice Metallic, Cyber Gray Metallic, Crystal Red Metallic, a premium White Diamond Tri-Coat, and an unnamed Silver Emerald
-3
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:35 pm)So, you put 9 gallons in a Prius and 9 gallons plus a charge in a Volt, start driving and see which one goes further?
Yes, I know what you intended to say but what you actually said can be interpreted in different ways. I know, I know… any interpretation that doesn’t show the Volt in a positive light is a “misintepretation.”
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:47 pm)Really? Just charge it and drive it forever? From, say, San Francisco to Boston? Super! Does GM refund my money if that doesn’t work out?
-10
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:00 pm)(click to show comment)
-13
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:06 pm)(click to show comment)
+6
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:18 pm)Man, you are one sick puppy.
-7
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:25 pm)Hmmmmmmm…
Let’s see, if you used 9 gallons in a Volt and 9 gallons in a Prius, how far could one of you “Range Anxiety” lamo’s go on your supposed long trip….
Volt:
40 + (38 * 9gal) = 382miles
Prius:
50 * 9gal = 450miles
Nope, can’t post this because those who have “Range Anxiety” don’t want to see the truth.
But wasn’t the best thing about the Volt being able to take longer drives on less gas?
Or Leapfrog the Prius, a plain jane Hybrid Prius?
American made, American built, Foreign power storage and Oil Dependent….YaVolt!
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:26 pm)Again, the point is missed. People won’t be regularly driving 300 to 400 miles (8 to 10 days) without charging a plug-in car. Why would they do that?
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:28 pm)Sheesh. The trolls are talking to each other again.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:28 pm)Here’s the equation for the graph. The same equation will give you entries for a table.
V is overall effective MPG for the Volt driven a certain distance after being fully charged.
D is that total distance driven between charges.
G is the number of miles, out of that total, driven with the engine running (CS mode).
M is the MPG rating of the Volt with the engine running (CS mode).
V = D/(G/M)
Very simple. G/M gives you how many gallons of gasoline you’d consume for that trip. Dividing that into the total miles D — which crucially *includes* the miles driven electrically — gives the effective MPG.
Notice if you always drive using the battery, G will be zero (the engine was never running), and dividing by zero will give infinite MPG.
Out to about 80 miles, you get triple digit effective MPG (assuming 40 miles on battery and 50 MPG in CS mode).
If you never, ever charge up, then D=G and your MPG will be whatever the CS MPG is. This is a very unusual situation to be in unless you’re on a road trip beyond the range of that first tank of gas. And this is why the CS mileage rating is, in isolation, a fairly useless number.
I like the clarity of a window sticker with a table at, say, 25 mile increments. Buyers would get a good idea of their own MPG:
“Wow, Thomas, as far as we drive every day, we’re gonna get something like 168 MPG”.
“Wow, Richard, as far as we drive every day, we’re gonna get something like 80 MPG”.
“Wow, Harold, as far as we drive every day, we’re not gonna use any gasoline at all!”
-6
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:29 pm)lol….
I GOT to get me a pair of those glasses they are wearing!
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:31 pm)We now return to our regularly scheduled *Volt* discussion…. (g).
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:31 pm)Stop the presses!
This is WAY off the thread, but BP is reporting that as of 2:25 PM today their new capping device has stopped the oil flowing into the Gulf.
We VOLT fans want to stop much more oil from flowing starting in November, but today’s news makes this a good day for everyone concerned.
Let hope it holds and the cleanup can proceed without further snags.
LINK TO ARTICLE is below…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gulf_oil_spill;_ylt=AihedCr1bCoiZviZRpUAx8Cs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNoY3JtbTFxBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNzE1L3VzX2d1bGZfb2lsX3NwaWxsBGNjb2RlA21vc3Rwb3B1bGFyBGNwb3MDMgRwb3MDNwRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDYnBub29pbGxlYWtp
GO VOLT!
+4
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:34 pm)Time for an IP block.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS
-9
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:39 pm)Funny how when the facts are laid out it’s “Trolloing”.
….by purchasing a Volt that burns gas and pollutes the air all just by simply driving….charge? who needs to, I can keep goin and going and burning and burning GAS!
American made, American built, Foreign power storage and Oil Dependent….YaVolt!
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:41 pm)If the Volt gets 40 MPG in CS mode, and 40 miles on the battery, then the guy driving 100 miles will get 67 MPG overall. Not 40. 67. V = D/(G/M).
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:42 pm)Time for an IP change….
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:45 pm)Anybody that knows anything about EV knows that the EPA number will just be a marketing ploy. Where is the standard that measures an EV’s efficiency per KW or something to that similar extent.
+3
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:48 pm)Time for an IP block for your Institution.
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:51 pm)Isn’t the Volt roughly getting 5 miles per Kw?
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS
-1
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:55 pm)That includes plugging in the car; I allowed for 40 miles electric up front. And both cars got 9 gallons of gas. Perfectly fair.
There’s the way you want to interpret that slogan and then there’s the different ways that slogan can be reasonably interpreted. Gee… maybe it would make a bad slogan.
And maybe honking up the 230mpg number was a bad idea, too. GM really should have known it would not fly.
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:56 pm)Charlie H sees his ‘contributions’ here as “contrary viewpoints.”
In fact, in both tone and substance, he has shown himself to be merely an unusually cogent and articulate troll. Worst kind. Matters of style aside, he’s really not so different in mood from Itchy Crotch and the dum dum guy.
While he sometimes turns in compelling arguments, they flow from a premise which is fundamentally biased: he disagrees with the objectives of the site, and he thinks we’re all idiots for coming here. Don’t let him cow you; hit that neg button!
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:56 pm)good idea..go to one…please.
there is trolling, then there is being an ass..and your comments repeateedly are starting to fall in that catagory.
Personaly while freedom to express yourself is a right, there is a socially acceptable line, and Lyle has a right to maintain the forum as he sees fit. Not by vote, but by his personal standards. Feel free to incorrectly flame the volt, gm and other stupid posts, but please leave anatomical biological references out of it.
Only trolls really make this a volt vs prius thing, most informed people here with a brain see the advantages to both, but you always reference prius this and prius that. they are completely dissimilar in my mind, excellent at what they do, but completely different onthe technology front.
dont go away mad, just go away, you are a waste of bits and bytes in the cyber universe aimlessly chipping away at you woeful inadequacies in a series of 0′a and 1’s, which also seems to reflect the highest to values on the respect meter (0-100).
thoughtful relevant discussion is welcome even if i do not agree. but you are low class 2bit (01) poster here. I will not even call you troll for offending those that are.
-1
Jul 15th, 2010 (3:58 pm)You forgot the ‘h’ there Chief.
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:02 pm)Off topic:
So the Victory Red car in the Autoblog pics is evidently the final production configuration. What’s different?
The shifter is much narrower so that little Debbie won’t pinch her fingers while helping daddy by shoving it into the cubby after parking in the garage.
The charcoal gray center stack includes the display screen surround. However, the driver’s display screen surround is still white. Looks kind of mismatched.
The interior door trim no longer has the zippy electro-future graphics (darn, I liked that), but the featureless beige color (which still looks pretty good) turns into white when it wraps onto the dash. Looks kind of mismatched.
Not too sure about the fit of the center-top dash storage door. Looks kind of loose.
Nonetheless, Victory Red exterior, Ecru Beige leather interior, Charcoal center stack. Gotta tell the dealer to order up one for me.
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:03 pm)No, he/she has always been nothing but an ass. This is so self-obvious that I’ve had very little motivation lately to actually challenge he/she/it.
It’s the people who pretend to be enlightened when they are obviously not who really get my goat. There is no hint of pretension with the Crotch; just a consistent bee-line straight to the “A” material.
-5
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:06 pm)Considering that there’s about 160 million vehicles on the road and GM’s current plans call for “ramping up” to a whopping 30K Volts per year, while still continuing to produce about 2 million conventional cars per year, we won’t use Volts to reduce our annual fuel consumption by 90% any time soon.
It will be a long time before the Volt has the same impact on our national fuel consumption as the over 1 million Toyota hybrids already on the road (with an additional 150K or so added every year).
Everybody wants easy answers to a very hard problem. There isn’t one. We’re going to have to do something radical and, likely, expensive and, maybe, inconvenient if we want to dramatically cust gas consumption any time soon. Nobody has the stomach for that.
-8
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:12 pm)Too funny. After soo many here have said the Volt is a “Leapfrog” over the Pruis you have the nerve to say it’s the “Trolls” that make the comparisons? What nerve…….oh well, whatever makes you sleep at night……i care.
Yeah yeah, ok, my color comment was a little “distasteful”.
American made, American built, Foreign power storage and Oil Dependent….YaVolt!
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:14 pm)Go away. You’ve embarrassed yourself. Even more than usual.
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:19 pm)So obviously, there is no reason at all to take any action which detracts from the past decade of Prius sales; right CH?
Seeds are small. Trees are large. The difference between the two is time. You’re a smart fellow, Charlie; I know you can get this. Why would you want to dig up a seed, throw it on the rocks and stomp it into splinters? It must be because you do not want the tree.
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:23 pm)He hasn’t been around in a while. Must have just got his computer privileges back from Mom.
He was always a solid Toyota/Prius fan. He has no interest in the Volt other than to throw around BS and twist the facts to suit his argument. Just -1 the guy.
-8
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:24 pm)And yet here’s the other “Troll” that decides to put words in peoples mouths by re-writing what they post as the Troll seems should be fit.
American made, American built, Foreign power storage and Oil Dependent….YaVolt!
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:25 pm)Yes. Please change your destination IP address.
-2
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:29 pm)You are, of course, perfectly aware that one charge + 9 gallons is not the expected mode of Volt operation; it would in fact only be true on a long road trip. The majority of driving isn’t road trips for most people. To “be fair” you have to assume that mostly commuting is done with a Volt, starting with at least one recharge a day. If your commute is less than 40 miles a day, that’s ZERO gallons of gas (perhaps there is another reason why you insist on evaluating the Volt using the most unlikely, worst-case scenario?).
If this daily driving cycle doesn’t reflect your lifestyle (maybe you live on the road), go buy something else; and hang out at some other site.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:31 pm)I’ll let the other, legitimate posters at this site decide whether or not I am a troll (I assume you are referring to me). As for re-writing your post, I assure you; I’ve extended all the respect and deference which you are due.
+1
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:32 pm)kdawg Says
Jul 15th, 2010 (2:22 pm)
block quote
Charlie H
: 140mpg? So, I can charge the Volt, add two gallons of gas and go 300 miles? Super! Will GM refund my money if that doesn’t happen?
block quote end
Actually you could put in 0 gallons and drive forever.
Not to sound pickie, but the Volt requires some gas in the tank for periodic manditory testing and lubrication of the ice. I think it is important not to post information that could misslead potential Volt customers. I do know what your point was though.
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:34 pm)If someone would buy a Volt and never plug it in, you got it right.
If someone drives 400 miles a day routinely, you got it right.
Those 50-100 people should never ever buy a Volt. They should by a Prius! I Agree!!
For the rest of us who understand how to use an outlet, the Volt will be better.
Sorry, Charlie!!
-6
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:35 pm)Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. That’s all any of you do here, twist the facts to make the Volt look like it’s better. But when the obvious truth is presented, it’s “Trolling”.
American made, American built, Foreign power storage and Oil Dependent….YaVolt!
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:42 pm)Hey Lyle,
Your blog should have an ‘objectionable material’ button so other bloggers can request deletion of offensive posts. This can be automated. I’m thinking ‘three objections, you’re deleted’ would be a good rule.
Also, if a handle gets voted off the island all the time, their logon should be disabled. This can be automated. I’m thinking ‘three times, you’re out’ would be a good rule.
You don’t get a vote for either unless you are a long-time member to prevent trolls from deleting regulars.
Or, just assign a moderator. I vote for Tag.
Thanks,
Loboc
Loyal Fan.
+2
Jul 15th, 2010 (4:43 pm)PPPDNFTT.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS