Jul 17

Volt Doesn’t Meet CARB Designation, Californians Lose $5,000 Tax Incentive

 


[ad#post_ad]For a time, it was assumed by many (myself included) that the Volt would come with a 10 year/150,000 mile warranty in California and other CARB states (17 of them in total), and a 8 year/100,000 mile warranty for the greater, unwashed masses.

That perception changed on Wednesday, when GM announced the battery warranty would be 8 years/100,000 from coast to coast. I confess to being a little confused by the announcement myself, and how a 8/100 was possible to offer nationwide as the Volt was a partial zero emission vehicle, I even asked Doug Parks (GM global vehicle exec) later in the day to explain the warranty, wondering if maybe the 8/100 was just blanket announcement, but the higher 10/150 would still apply in California and CARB states.

Doug’s response was short and sweet, “Today’s warranty annoucement (sp) covers all states, including California,” no explanation on the how or why.

Well, that is not good enough really. So a little help from the California Air Resources Board should provide a more complete answer; and it comes in the form of designation. The Volt did not meet the criteria as a enhanced advanced technology partial zero emissions vehicle, or AT-PZEV, as was widely expected, therefore they don’t have to meet the 10/150 warranty, (or enjoy the incentives of that program), so 8/100 is the minimum benchmark they have to offer.

However, Shad Balch, GM’s energy and environment communications specialist, said that in the future (like 2013) GM is looking to get the AT-PZEV designation, which would mean the 10/150 would then come into play…along with all the other streamlining, debugging and upgrades that are going into ‘gen 2′ of the Volt.

The real kicker to the no AT-PZEV designation (besides the lessened warranty) is that the Volt does not now qualify for the additional $5,000 state incentive. Balch said GM “knew all along” it would not earn the AT-PZEV status, and that GM sees enough early demand for the first gen of the Volt without the rebate. (apparently no one gave Bob Lutz that memo before talking to the press)

Balch continued to say that “when we get through those early adopters, GM is hoping $5,000 shaved off the sticker price will help pave the way for expansion to a broader market”…assuming I guess that the state program is still funded at that point.

/early adopters get all the love

Source: Earth2Tech
[ad#postbottom]

This entry was posted on Saturday, July 17th, 2010 at 6:32 am and is filed under Financial, Warranty. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

COMMENTS: 246


  1. 1
    Money Pit

    -40

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Money Pit
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:38 am)

    (click to show comment)


  2. 2
    Roy H

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Roy H
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:41 am)

    Thanks for the explanation, Statik. That clears up a lot.

    All these incentives have an expiry and it is good that this one will be “saved” for later customers. Obviously the engine must have lower pollution to meet the high AT-PHEV status.


  3. 3
    Detroit Suckers

    -44

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Detroit Suckers
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:43 am)

    (click to show comment)


  4. 4
    drivin98

    +16

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    drivin98
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:48 am)

    You’d think they’d be a little more straight forward with you. It’s not like you weren’t going to find out and not blog about it. Anyway…

    Guess Volt buyers in California will have to settle for the same thousands of dollars of Federal incentives like the rest of us.


  5. 5
    Ted in Fort Myers

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Ted in Fort Myers
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:12 am)

    I sure hope that means that the Federal rebate will still apply. Had GM done the work and gotten the designation they would have reaped the rewards for years to come. Straight gas engine cars are so last century but they continue to persist in that direction. They maybe will never learn and it will be the EV-1 all over again. At least I will get my Volt and maybe my next car will have to be a BEV or EREV from another company. If that is how I feel as an early adopter imagine what the rest of the USA will think. I was never going to get a State rebate as Florida does not offer a rebate. But thousands of other potential customer in those states offering a rebate will opt for new technology cars from other manufacturers that do qualify.
    GM has effectively relinquished a lead to manufacturers that will produce cars that are currently further behind in development. Shame on the new leadership of GM. Where is Bob Lutz when we need him most.

    Thanks Static for the insight.

    Take Care,
    TED


  6. 6
    john1701a

    +11

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    john1701a
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:14 am)

    Two-Mode hybrids actually have a dirtier emission rating than their traditional counterpart. The expense of cleansing equipment combined with the efficiency penalty made pursuing cleaner a low priority.

    For Volt, it’s an even greater challenge, since the engine gets used even less. For the catalytic-converter to function, it requires heat. Normally, that heat is provided by waste energy from the engine. Volt strives to avoid waste. Minimal use of fuel means minimal exhaust cleansing available.

    To make the situation even worse, the better emission ratings require longer operational durations. ULEV is only 100,000 miles. For SULEV, it’s 120,000. For PZEV, it’s 150,000.


  7. 7
    Tagamet

    +18

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:16 am)

    Well, this will be a great thread for the Negative Nellies (I’m not referring to you Statik). This announcement in no way suggests that GM isn’t serious about continuing with the program. To draw that conclusion from the fact that they aren’t getting every singe *State* incentive just doesn’t make any sense.
    Yes, they should have been more candid about Calif, but come on. It’s one state. AFAIK, the *vast* majority of States don’t offer ANY incentives. The early adopters *do* always pay a premium, but even THAT doesn’t “fit” this situation. If GM said that the *base price* would initially be 5K higher everywhere – that would “fit”.
    The Volt will sell out for several years. It will be wildly successful. And best of all it’s the first step of many that GM is making to start the journey away from foreign oil.
    Aren’t they already working on Gen 3? How exactly does that fit with the idea of killing the program? It doesn’t. The Volt *program* is alive and well. ‘Nuf said.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  8. 8
    SURPRISE SURPRISE

    -50

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    SURPRISE SURPRISE
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:18 am)

    (click to show comment)


  9. 9
    Volt Suckas

    -54

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Volt Suckas
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:21 am)

    (click to show comment)


  10. 10
    Tagamet

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:22 am)

    Ted in Fort Myers: I sure hope that means that the Federal rebate will still apply. Had GM done the work and gotten the designation they would have reaped the rewards for years to come.

    This announcement is about Calif. You’ll only be effected if you go there to buy. In ALL the states, the FEDERAL tax break will still be in play.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  11. 11
    Red HHR

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Red HHR
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:25 am)

    Good story Statik! Have to mull this over. More Volts for the rest of us? 5k GM card rebate? Tomorrows story?


  12. 12
    Tagamet

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:25 am)

    drivin98: You’d think they’d be a little more straight forward with you. It’s not like you weren’t going to find out and not blog about it. Anyway…Guess Volt buyers in California will have to settle for the same thousands of dollars of Federal incentives like the rest of us.  

    Amen. +1

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  13. 13
    WANG HUNG LO

    -47

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    WANG HUNG LO
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:26 am)

    (click to show comment)


  14. 14
    Tagamet

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:27 am)

    PDNFTT.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  15. 15
    R U Wiser

    -40

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    R U Wiser
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:32 am)

    (click to show comment)


  16. 16
    Ted in Fort Myers

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Ted in Fort Myers
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:34 am)

    Tagamet: This announcement is about Calif. You’ll only be effected if you go there to buy. In ALL the states, the FEDERAL tax break will still be in play.Be well and believe,TagametLet’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  (Quote)

    Going to Michigan to buy my Volt. Good to see you on so early Tag.
    There are many CARB States. The closest to me is Georgia.

    Take Care,
    TED


  17. 17
    Eco_Turbo

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Eco_Turbo
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:36 am)

    Now that there will be less cars sold in California, that means more for the “Flyover States” 8-)


  18. 18
    Chump Change

    -41

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Chump Change
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:39 am)

    (click to show comment)


  19. 19
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:41 am)

    Ted in Fort Myers:
    Going to Michigan to buy my Volt.Good to see you on so early Tag.
    There are many CARB States.The closest to me is Georgia.Take Care,
    TED  

    Wow, that’s great that you’ll be smiling very early in the roll-out! (you JERK, hee hee).
    Keep us posted!

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  20. 20
    RB

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    RB
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:42 am)

    Another more straightforward possibility is that the CA rule will change, perhaps by the time the Volt is introduced, under pressure from the feds. The CARB is basically a political body. The Volt designation is not arising from any sort of physical principal or engineering requirement — it is just an arbitrary designation by a political group. That designation can change as political needs require.

    We saw the same kind of change the federal level, when the CA in CAFE was changed to mean “footprint average” rather than mean “corporate average.”


  21. 21
    JEC

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:43 am)

    Tagamet:
    This announcement is about Calif. You’ll only be effected if you go there to buy. In ALL the states, the FEDERAL tax break will still be in play.Be well and believe,
    TagametLet’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  

    Tag, That’s not true.

    As Statik mentions, this affects 17 CARB states. They all have their own program and they to could or will be affected by this.

    I know GA has a similiar rebate, and I was joking with a friend of mine a while back that he could buy me a Volt and I would give him 1/2 of the rebate.

    This really rots for a lot more than just CA!
    I am just surprise at the lack of candidness by GM on this, since they know this would be a big issue for MANY people.

    I am not in a CARB state, so personally it does not affect me.

    GM can do whatever they want, and obviously they are.


  22. 22
    Ted in Fort Myers

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Ted in Fort Myers
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:44 am)

    Eco_Turbo: Now that there will be less cars sold in California, that means more for the “Flyover States”   (Quote)

    You got that right ECO maybe that is why the extra rollout locations were added recently. All they make will be sold as Tag said but this will leave a bad taste in the mouth of many Cali’s and other of the 17 CARB states.

    Take Care,
    TED


  23. 23
    nuclearboy

    +13

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nuclearboy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:44 am)

    Tagamet: Well, this will be a great thread for the Negative Nellies (I’m not referring to you Statik). This announcement in no way suggests that GM isn’t serious about continuing with the program.

    Exactly Tag,

    The negative nellies act like this is a big deal. Perhaps they should ween themselves from the government teet and just look at the car itself which is an engineering masterpiece.

    GM designed the car to be great, not to meet the CARB standards.


  24. 24
    Tagamet

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:44 am)

    Great thread to check out the meaning of “Curahee”.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  25. 25
    Edward Haskel

    -49

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Edward Haskel
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:47 am)

    (click to show comment)


  26. 26
    Tagamet

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:52 am)

    JEC:
    Tag, That’s not true.As Statik mentions, this affects 17 CARB states.They all have their own program and they to could or will be affected by this.I know GA has a similiar rebate, and I was joking with a friend of mine a while back that he could buy me a Volt and I would give him 1/2 of the rebate.This really rots for a lot more than just CA!
    I am just surprise at the lack of candidness by GM on this, since they know this would be a big issue for MANY people.I am not in a CARB state, so personally it does not affect me.GM can do whatever they want, and obviously they are.  

    I stand corrected on the “only Calif” comment, but I stand BY the comment that it is still the minority of states in the Union (by a mile). I was referring to Ted’s comment (and the *Fed’s* reference) specifically about Florida and that he wouldn’t likely be going to Calif for his Volt. He’s going to Michigan.
    Thanks for the correction though. You’re right.
    BTW, I’m not buying a Volt because of the CARB rebate. I don’t even know if PA *is* a CARB state.
    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  27. 27
    Tom M

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tom M
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:52 am)

    “Balch continued to say that “when we get through those early adopters, GM is hoping $5,000 shaved off the sticker price will help pave the way for expansion to a broader market…”

    WTF!!!! So the loyal Volt followers here get to pay MORE for our cars so GM can then refine and make them better and then sell them for $5,000 less.. Thank you for rewarding our loyalty!


  28. 28
    neutron

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    neutron
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:53 am)

    What was it that did not let The VOLT achieve the highest status?
    The basic ICE? Was there a tradeoff / compromise to get better reliability/power???

    Does anyone have the story and can someone explain this comment by GM (they knew there was an issue)????????

    “Balch said GM “knew all along” it would not earn the AT-PZEV status, and that GM sees enough early demand for the first gen of the Volt without the rebate. (apparently no one gave Bob Lutz that memo before talking to the press)
    Balch continued to say that “when we get through those early adopters, GM is hoping $5,000 shaved off the sticker price will help pave the way for expansion to a broader market”…assuming I guess that the state program is still funded at that point.
    /early adopters get all the love”

    It is not like this design process has been rushed.

    Maybe GM needs to be more like Steve Jobs on the iPhone 4G explanation.


  29. 29
    Blind Faith

    -28

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Blind Faith
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:55 am)

    (click to show comment)


  30. 30
    Van

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Van
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:58 am)

    Apparently, this means the Nissan Leaf will sport a better warranty and a price more than $5000 less than the Volt in the CARB states. Is that the correct view?


  31. 31
    nuclearboy

    +14

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nuclearboy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:59 am)

    Tag,

    It looks like they have provided internet access to the inmates at the asylum. It’s probably a good day to go fishing.

    On another note, I just checked and apparently Californians purchase large quantities of expensive vehicles that don’t meet the CARB standards for a rebate. Oh the humanity.


  32. 32
    nasaman

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:01 am)

    Tagamet, post #7: Well, this will be a great thread for the Negative Nellies (I’m not referring to you Statik). This announcement in no way suggests that GM isn’t serious about continuing with the program. To draw that conclusion from the fact that they aren’t getting every singe *State* incentive just doesn’t make any sense.
    Yes, they should have been more candid about Calif, but come on. It’s one state. AFAIK, the *vast* majority of States don’t offer ANY incentives. The early adopters *do* always pay a premium, but even THAT doesn’t “fit” this situation. If GM said that the *base price* would initially be 5K higher everywhere – that would “fit”.
    The Volt will sell out for several years. It will be wildly successful. And best of all it’s the first step of many that GM is making to start the journey away from foreign oil.
    Aren’t they already working on Gen 3? How exactly does that fit with the idea of killing the program? It doesn’t. The Volt *program* is alive and well. ‘Nuf said.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  

    Right you are, Tag!

    ….And one more thing: We now know what GM may have meant a few days ago by “Major Consumer Initiative” —that Californians (and those in any other CARB states that offer an incentive) will have to take a ‘major initiative’ to roll up their sleeves and dig deeper in their pockets to buy a Volt than they at first assumed. And for those who don’t, that just leaves more Volts for the rest of us in all the non-CARB/non-incentive states. Gotta luv it! :) :) :)


  33. 33
    Moe Ron Dumsky

    -35

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Moe Ron Dumsky
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:01 am)

    (click to show comment)


  34. 34
    ziv

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    ziv
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:02 am)

    GM has managed to shoot themselves in the foot again, this time by a failure to act, i.e. allowing the Californians to think that they could double dip in the credit/tax incentive pool. For us in Northern Virginia this is pretty good news. Instead of Californians snapping up Volts at $37.5k less $7.5k less $5k or a net of $25k for a state of the art EREV they will have to pay around $30k like the rest of us. (Assuming a $37.5k msrp and no gouging, of course)
    California will still buy a boat load of Volts but it won’t be nearly impossible to get a Volt in Virginia, New York or Michigan now. Bad news for GM’s reputation, good news for me and other non-Californians.

    On a lighter note:

    _That 1.4L massive pollution generator in that Volt is obscene to Californians. Totally OBSCENE I tell you.
    By Troll fake name R U Wiser._

    Now that is simply the most ridiculous, funniest thing I have heard in days! They may be trolls but work this stupid is rather impressive.


  35. 35
    koz

    +26

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:04 am)

    Why? Why isn’t a 40 AER Volt (or any 40 mile AER vehical) qualified as an AT-PZEV? This is the question CARB should be pondering. Do 40 AER vehicles not offer enough emmisions advantages to merit this consideration?

    Un-frickin-believable! CARB needs to get off of their azz and right this wrong. This probably means the Volt won’t qualify for automatic access to HOV lanes in the CARB states since those exemptions for HEVs just expired. All these frickin years CARB has gotten it close but wrong. Time to get it right and properly encourage the SALE of vehicles that significantly transfer energy use from gas to the wall.

    I mean come…frickin…on, are you @$%@! kidding me. Have much more expense and less affordable should manufacturers have to make their range extenders that are designed to be used as LITTLE as possible?

    OH…and GM, how much did you spend on lobbying CARB? Can we get a refund on the incompetence of not being able to convince the board that the Volt actually does in a very meaningful, real way what CARB has been trying to get done for more than 15 years?

    One Volt, driven with the median driving conditions, will consume approximately 1/5 of the gas that a Prius will.

    SHHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSHHHH!!!


  36. 36
    Tagamet

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:04 am)

    RB: Another more straightforward possibility is that the CA rule will change, perhaps by the time the Volt is introduced, under pressure from the feds.The CARB is basically a political body. The Volt designation is not arising from any sort of physical principal or engineering requirement — it is just an arbitrary designation by a political group.That designation can change as political needs require.We saw the same kind of change the federal level, when the CA in CAFE was changed to mean “footprint average” rather than mean “corporate average.”  

    Very good point. It’ll be interesting to see what if anything the CARB board does. With the fiscal difficulties states are having I think it’d be difficult for them to *expand* give-aways right now.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  37. 37
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:09 am)

    nasaman:
    Right you are, Tag!
    ….And one more thing: We now know what GM may have meant a few days ago by “Major Consumer Initiative” —that Californians (and those in any other CARB states that offer an incentive) will have to take a ‘major initiative’ to roll up their sleeves and dig deeper in their pockets to buy a Volt than they at first assumed. And for those who don’t, that just leaves more Volts for the rest of us in the all non-CARB/non-incentive states. Gotta luv it!   

    I have to admit that I read “Major consumer initiative” as something POSITIVE coning down (lol) – and there may still be another boot to drop which offsets this curve-ball.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  38. 38
    nuclearboy

    +27

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nuclearboy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:12 am)

    Lets look at this from the cold calculating view of a non-Californian and non Carb state resident.

    1. GM will produce 40,000 Volts over two years.
    2. GM will sell all 40,000 Volts over two years.
    3. A CARB based rebate will not spur more early adopters (see number 2)
    4. A CARB rebate is not needed in this case (see number 2)
    5. GM is not losing any market share because of this (see number 2).

    It looks like this will be a little more of a basic economic purchase. Those who were going to rely on the extra $5K to purchase the car will have to get out of the way and allow those who are willing to pay more for the car have it. This is how things should work in a situation where there is limited supply (see number 1).

    CA and CARB states should save their money and pay down their debt. The Volt does not need them. Go fix some pot holes.


  39. 39
    Tagamet

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:16 am)

    Tom M: So the loyal Volt followers here get to pay MORE for our cars so GM can then refine and make them better and then sell them for $5,000 less.. Thank you for rewarding our loyalty!

    How in the world do you figure that we are paying *more*???? If you’re not in a CARB state you just don’t get an extra benny. There is no PENALTY involved.
    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  40. 40
    Reginald Vanderbuilt IV

    -28

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Reginald Vanderbuilt IV
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:20 am)

    (click to show comment)


  41. 41
    koz

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:20 am)

    Van: Apparently, this means the Nissan Leaf will sport a better warranty and a price more than $5000 less than the Volt in the CARB states. Is that the correct view?  (Quote)

    No, the warranty will be worse. BEV do not have a CARB battery warranty requirement.


  42. 42
    Tagamet

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:20 am)

    nuclearboy: Tag,

    It looks like they have provided internet access to the inmates at the asylum. It’s probably a good day to go fishing.

    LOL, the thought DID occur to me about the asylum – and I’m setting goals of 15 more minutes before I bail and go fishing (g). I’m not going to reply to the trolls (-1), and they’d never be convinced if I *did*.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  43. 43
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:23 am)

    nuclearboy: Lets look at this from the cold calculating view of a non-Californian and non Carb state resident.

    1. GM will produce 40,000 Volts over two years.
    2. GM will sell all 40,000 Volts over two years.
    3. A CARB based rebate will not spur more early adopters (see number 2)
    4. A CARB rebate is not needed in this case (see number 2)
    5. GM is not losing any market share because of this (see number 2)….

    Well said! +1.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  44. 44
    Carlos G

    -14

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Carlos G
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:24 am)

    (click to show comment)


  45. 45
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:26 am)

    koz: SHHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSHHHH!!!

    RELAAAAAAX. It’ll be ok.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  46. 46
    neutron

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    neutron
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:26 am)

    I am in Michigan. The VOLT cost will not change for me or will it???……….
    The warranty issue…. a lower warranty… does that mean the price WILL be LOWER????
    Of course the price has not been posted but a curious thought.

    Or as noted above there might be changes in California so… we should “stay tuned”


  47. 47
    Zack Lee Wright

    -27

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Zack Lee Wright
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:29 am)

    (click to show comment)


  48. 48
    Rooster

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Rooster
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:37 am)

    nuclearboy: Lets look at this from the cold calculating view of a non-Californian and non Carb state resident.1. GM will produce 40,000 Volts over two years.2. GM will sell all 40,000 Volts over two years.3. A CARB based rebate will not spur more early adopters (see number 2)4. A CARB rebate is not needed in this case (see number 2)5. GM is not losing any market share because of this (see number 2).It looks like this will be a little more of a basic economic purchase. Those who were going to rely on the extra $5K to purchase the car will have to get out of the way and allow those who are willing to pay more for the car have it. This is how things should work in a situation where there is limited supply (see number 1).CA and CARB states should save their money and pay down their debt. The Volt does not need them. Go fix some pot holes.  (Quote)

    Well said. I’d like to add that if the Volt is really going to be the game changer we hope it will be, GM is going to have to get the cost out of the car and sell it for a profit without ANY rebates funded by taxpayers.

    Don’t get me wrong, rebates are a great incentive to help create demand for a new technology, but in the big picture, they are only temporary. Long term, the Volt (or any new technology for that matter) has to be able to stand on it’s on. The $7500 Fed rebate is plenty, and it will help create more demand for the Volt than there will be supply over the next 2 years. The more important question is will GM be able to drive $7500/vehicle in cost out of the Volt by the time the Fed rebate expires?


  49. 49
    john1701a

    +8

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    john1701a
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:38 am)

    koz: Why? Why isn’t a 40 AER Volt (or any 40 mile AER vehical) qualified as an AT-PZEV? This is the question CARB should be pondering. Do 40 AER vehicles not offer enough emmisions advantages to merit this consideration?

    Emission rating is determined two ways. First is based on distance. The 15,000-mile increments would take into account the nightly recharging. It’s the number of cold starts that really hurts, regardless of EV. Those are from the TAILPIPE.

    Other emissions taken into account are those directly from the tank. EVAPORATIVE emissions are commonly overlooked. When the fuel sits unused, that pollutes too, unless special effort & expense is made to prevent that.

    CARB wants that special effort & expense, hence a tax incentive as compensation.


  50. 50
    Tim Hart

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tim Hart
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:39 am)

    How can California possibly afford to give rebates for anything! They are basically in near bankrupcy. You can pretty much make the same case for the federal rebate. Hopefully, the quick as possible adoption of electric transportation will offset the insanity of the massive deficit spending mentality.


  51. 51
    koz

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:39 am)

    Tagamet: RELAAAAAAX. It’ll be ok.Be well and believe,TagametLet’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  (Quote)

    Actually, I am thinking like RB at #20, but am just doing my little part to illuminate the direction I think things should go. The EREV architecture in production development has been known long enough for CARB to have reacted more positively to it by now. I believe they need a kick in the pants and this is as hard as I can kick here.

    BTW, aren’t we supposed to let it out…I mean in your professional opinion.


  52. 52
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:40 am)

    neutron: I am in Michigan.The VOLT cost will not change for meor will it???……….
    The warranty issue….a lower warranty… does that mean the price WILL be LOWER????
    Of course the price has not been posted but a curious thought.Or as noted above there might be changes in California so… we should “stay tuned”  

    I hadn’t thought about the “lighter” warranty causing a lower base price, but you might be right. Given that its still, AFAIK the best warranty out there (given the extraordinary tech), I’d guess that today’s announcement may just effect the state benefits.
    I’m still betting that this pendulum will swing back and forth a few more times before Nov (positive news, then neg, then pos). JMO.
    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  53. 53
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:44 am)

    koz:
    Actually, I am thinking like RB at #20, but am just doing my little part to illuminate the direction I think things should go. The EREV architecture in production development has been known long enough for CARB to have reacted more positively to it by now. I believe they need a kick in the pants and this is as hard as I can kick here.BTW, aren’t we supposed to let it out…I mean in your professional opinion.  

    Yeah, I kinda thought that that was your intent (and I agree 1000%). Lottsa time for changes to be made by CARB (the ones that they should have ALREADY made)(lol). Aren’t they supposed to be SUPPORTING this kind of tech????
    And yes, it’s better to “let it out” – as long as you don’t turn inside out in the process. (g).

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  54. 54
    Mustafa Mohammad Jihadi

    -24

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mustafa Mohammad Jihadi
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:47 am)

    (click to show comment)


  55. 55
    JohnK

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:48 am)

    Tagamet: Wow, that’s great that you’ll be smiling very early in the roll-out! (you JERK, hee hee).

    Ted and I (he is #3 and I am #2 at same dealer) have to wait about 3 months while those with priority get their Volts. Really the first Volt to come to our dealer in Sterling Heights will arrive in March, while NYC gets Volts much earlier — but that is quite alright. ;)


  56. 56
    spu

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    spu
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:49 am)

    1. From what I could find, the CARB states are: California, New Jersey, Connecticut, Oregon, Washington, Rhode Island, New York, Maine, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Florida, Colorado, Arizona, Utah, Vermont, and 2 others… The only place I found the list was a right/left based article.

    2. While disappointed in the way GM presented this, especially in the webchat after the announcement, it will not affect my choice to purchase the Volt as soon as I can. I did not even realize MA was a CARB state before today and none of the other vehicles out there will meet my needs while matching the milage I will be able to get.

    2a. GM should have been more forthcoming in the webchat on their statement about the “different designations” (I think that was the phrase used). That could have lead to a discussion on:

    2b. Like others, I’m wondering why the regulation bodies do not see that a car that meets/exceeds their requirements for most of the driving for a majority of the public is a good thing. For me, the will be a ZEV for about 90% of the miles I will put on it. For me, it will be a PZEV even without the little sticker.


  57. 57
    Hearing Impaired

    -16

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Hearing Impaired
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:51 am)

    (click to show comment)


  58. 58
    Tagamet

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:52 am)

    Rooster:
    Well said.I’d like to add that if the Volt is really going to be the game changer we hope it will be, GM is going to have to get the cost out of the car and sell it for a profit without ANY rebates funded by taxpayers.Don’t get me wrong, rebates are a great incentive to help create demand for a new technology, but in the big picture, they are only temporary.Long term, the Volt (or any new technology for that matter) has to be able to stand on it’s on.The $7500 Fed rebate is plenty, and it will help create more demand for the Volt than there will be supply over the next 2 years.The more important question is will GM be able to drive $7500/vehicle in cost out of the Volt by the time the Fed rebate expires?  

    True that. I’d hope that by the time they have 200,000 Volts on the road (I love the way that sounds) that they’d have gotten the costs down. And if they can’t, at least by then most people that really want one will have had a shot at one.
    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  59. 59
    JohnK

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:54 am)

    I suspect that this has something to do with why the Volt is not going to support E85. Maybe the Volt can burn E85 just fine, but the pollution numbers are worse? In which case maybe GM will relent and go back to the flex-fuel designation. ???


  60. 60
    koz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:55 am)

    Tagamet: Yeah, I kinda thought that that was your intent (and I agree 1000%). Lottsa time for changes to be made by CARB (the ones that they should have ALREADY made)(lol). Aren’t they supposed to be SUPPORTING this kind of tech????And yes, it’s better to “let it out” – as long as you don’t turn inside out in the process. (g).Be well and believe,TagametLet’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  (Quote)

    +1
    Yaahoooooo


  61. 61
    Shawn Marshall

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Shawn Marshall
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:55 am)

    How much is Califorlornia in deficit?
    ?The Golden State wants to redistribute tax payer funds (which they don’t have) to others in order to underwrite the purchase of an uneconomic vehicle?
    Electric cars must stand on their own.
    I’m a Volt technology fan but we need to be real – these “incentives” are unrealistic and uneconomic intrusions into the market by government planners. Don’t think it’s likely to work very well and initially has resulted in over designed and overpriced vehicles.

    If we had a coherent national strategy of underwriting electric vehicle R&D and production on the basis of an import tax on (only)FOREIGN oil – that might do something real for us.
    I try not to comment but the Statik got me charged up. Woe to our poor country.


  62. 62
    Tagamet

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:56 am)

    JohnK:
    Ted and I (he is #3 and I am #2 at same dealer) have to wait about 3 months while those with priority get their Volts.Really the first Volt to come to our dealer in Sterling Heights will arrive in March, while NYC gets Volts much earlier — but that is quite alright.   

    Most excellent! May I ask how you know about the NY numbers? I haven’t seen anything on specific allotments by state.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  63. 63
    RB

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    RB
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:56 am)

    30 Van: Apparently, this means the Nissan Leaf will sport a better warranty and a price more than $5000 less than the Volt in the CARB states.Is that the correct view?  

    That is my understanding, yes.


  64. 64
    Ted in Fort Myers

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Ted in Fort Myers
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:56 am)

    Tagamet: Wow, that’s great that you’ll be smiling very early in the roll-out! (you JERK, hee hee).Keep us posted!Be well and believe,TagametLet’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  (Quote)

    I will let you know the mileage in charge sustaining mode on my trip back to Florida.
    Take Care,
    TED


  65. 65
    RB

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    RB
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:58 am)

    7 Tagamet: Well, this will be a great thread for the Negative Nellies

    Now be nice, Tag. :)


  66. 66
    MICHIGAN GUY

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MICHIGAN GUY
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:01 am)

    What this also means is that GM is saving California from going closer to BANKRUPTCY.

    The government of California cannot afford to be giving out any more money to every perceived righteous cause.

    They need to get down to basic, vital services, and not be into social control and welfare anymore.

    The fact that our Federal government is giving out $7500 for each electric car sold is a different thing however. We need to get off foreign oil. That is a matter of National Security and the survival of our country.

    GM has just done California big favor.


  67. 67
    JEC

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:07 am)

    JEC: So how do they charge this 12 V battery? …
    My guess is that the BEV/EREV uses a small inverter, that will keep the battery charged, but would not be sufficient to provide cranking amps…

    First, allow me to define some terms:
    • Inverter – Converts DC to AC
    • DC-DC Converter – Converts DC to DC (two different voltages)

    Batteries are always DC. The main 16kWh battery pack runs at 360 volts. Most car accessories run at 12 volts. So the idea is to convert 360 volts DC to 12 volts DC. This requires a DC-DC converter. In other words, as long as there’s sufficient power in the main 360 volt traction battery, the 12v accessory battery will stay charged though that.

    Second, GM told us the 12 volt battery is capable of jump-starting another car here:
    http://gm-volt.com/2009/05/18/there-will-be-no-customer-access-to-high-voltage-on-the-chevy-volt-but-it-can-jump-start-another-car/
    “For Volt the answer is a bit more conventional. Yes, we have a 12v battery. It is not a typical automotive “flooded” lead, but a sealed “acid starved” type…. and it is capable of providing enough power to jump start another vehicle.”

    DaveG,

    Your right about the converter/inverter definition. I just typed to quickly to realize that, so just substitute converter for inverter.

    Anyway, so the main question I had was on how the volt maintains charge on the 12 volt battery? Did I miss something?
    ——————————————–
    REPOST
    So how do they charge this 12 V battery? In a traditional ICE you always have the motor spinning, so the altenator will charge the battery. But, with a EREV/BEV, you may be sitting still in traffic for a long time, and now at night time, you could drain your battery.

    My guess is that the BEV/EREV uses a small inverter, that will keep the battery charged, but would not be sufficient to provide cranking amps. Also for the Volt, maybe if the 12V is losing capacity, the ICE kicks in and they use a more traditional alternator to charge it. The alternator could be linked to the drive, so that when the vehicle is moving it is charging, so you would not be draining your battery in normal moving mode.

    Hmmm…I never considered this before. Anyone got a better answer? I am probably missing something obvious, but it avoids me at the moment.


  68. 68
    nuclearboy

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nuclearboy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:08 am)

    Tom M: WTF!!!! So the loyal Volt followers here get to pay MORE for our cars so GM can then refine and make them better and then sell them for $5,000 less..

    This is typically the case with early adopters. Nothing new under the sun.


  69. 69
    stuart22

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    stuart22
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:08 am)

    I find it a little fishy that the first post and half of the first 10 posts today were obvious trolls – what is the difference today from other days, other than Statik (who has his own LEAF fan site) subbing for Lyle. Of course it can’t be anything but a coincidence the trolls (or troll) came in so early and in such numbers, almost as if they were prepared in advance to wage such a blanket attack on the Volt site.


  70. 70
    JohnK

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:10 am)

    It kind of sounds like this is something that Bob Lutz knew about and was not going to be a problem (to get the designation) and once he left it just could not get done without him.


  71. 71
    Jimza Skeptic

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jimza Skeptic
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:10 am)

    I am not surprised and saw this coming. On July 14 I posted this link to the California rebate program

    https://energycenter.org/index.php/incentive-programs/clean-vehicle-rebate-project

    I said it would need lawyers to figure this one out! Somehow I got the big -neg vote for just pointing out the regulations!


  72. 72
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:10 am)

    RB: 7 Tagamet: Well, this will be a great thread for the Negative Nellies

    Now be nice, Tag. :)

    Sorry. I got carried away (g).

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  73. 73
    JohnK

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:13 am)

    Well, with the cap on the well in the Gulf, there is nothing to worry about. We’ll soon be back to $1.50 gasoline and there will be no need for EV’s…
    It really does not change much. But politics is always in the details… Or is that the devil… Or is it the same difference?


  74. 74
    Tagamet

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:15 am)

    stuart22: I find it a little fishy that the first post and half of the first 10 posts today were obvious trolls – what is the difference today from other days, other than Statik (who has his own LEAF fan site) subbing for Lyle.It’s got to be a coincidence the trolls (or troll) came in so early and in such numbers, almost as if they were prepared in advance to wage such a blanket attack on the Volt site.  

    Or it was the same troll (maybe two) posting under a number of handles. It just shows how little they “get out” of mom’s basement.
    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  75. 75
    JEC

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:17 am)

    Van: Apparently, this means the Nissan Leaf will sport a better warranty and a price more than $5000 less than the Volt in the CARB states.Is that the correct view?  

    Apparently.

    But most are of the opinion that it does not matter, since the demand for the Volt is so high that GM could sell them at basically any price they desire.

    So, to say that this does not change the ballgame is a little premature. You just gave Nissan a foot hold in 17 states that the Volt will not have.

    This is no way to win a battle. GM should be up in arms about this, and maybe they are behind the scenes.

    Here we go again…. “STAY TUNED>>>>>”


  76. 76
    koz

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:18 am)

    john1701a: Emission rating is determined two ways. First is based on distance. The 15,000-mile increments would take into account the nightly recharging. It’s the number of cold starts that really hurts, regardless of EV. Those are from the TAILPIPE.Other emissions taken into account are those directly from the tank. EVAPORATIVE emissions are commonly overlooked. When the fuel sits unused, that pollutes too, unless special effort & expense is made to prevent that.CARB wants that special effort & expense, hence a tax incentive as compensation.  (Quote)

    Cogent points.

    GM has stated their gas storage is a sealed system, so your #2 shouldn’t the isdue unless they changed things.

    15,000 miles in a year can be sliced an infinite number of ways. How does CARB slice it? The simplest would be 15,000/365 or 41.1 miles/day. The most logical would ave commute 25-30 miles/day for ave number ofcommuting days plus ave annual long/medium drives. Either way, not many starts and not a lot of generator run time in comparison to ICE/HEV. How are emmissions in combustion power direct to the wheels vehicles during acceleration? The Volt can start soft (no load) and run soft (light, steady load). I find it very, very hard to believe this is a bad emmission scenario. Perhaps GM has chosen to go with more starts/stops whule in CS more for NVH and efficiency reasons but they haven’t yet said so. Even if they have done, it would be the right decision IMO and I doubt total emmissions are significantly affected.


  77. 77
    pKIO3

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    pKIO3
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:18 am)

    Van: Apparently, this means the Nissan Leaf will sport a better warranty and a price more than $5000 less than the Volt in the CARB states.Is that the correct view?  

    Not necessarily a better warranty. If you read today’s article on Statik’s website, he is indicating that they expect a 5yr/60000 mile warranty. It appears this is based on a survey Nissan sent out. There is also an interesting question in the survey about how much battery capacity loss would be acceptable before the battery is replaced under warranty.


  78. 78
    john1701a

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    john1701a
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:21 am)

    JohnK: It kind of sounds like this is something that Bob Lutz knew about and was not going to be a problem (to get the designation) and once he left it just could not get done without him.  (Quote)

    Two-Mode history clearly indicated this was going to become an issue. GM allowed the development of a hybrid dirtier than a non-hybrid. Not hearing a peep about this with Volt meant not being any worse than a traditional vehicle was the best we could hope for. It’s an unfortunate reality pointing out that history was suppose to prevent. Instead, any mention was looked upon as an effort to undermine.

    What now?

    The response of saying “wait for the second generation” totally validates the assessment and on-going concern of “too little, too slowly”.


  79. 79
    JohnK

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:28 am)

    OK, I’m going to go out for a 70 mile bike ride. When I get back I’m expecting to see another article that is very positive. So there!


  80. 80
    JEC

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:30 am)

    pKIO3:
    Not necessarily a better warranty.If you read today’s article onStatik’s website, he is indicating that they expect a 5yr/60000 mile warranty.It appears this is based on a survey Nissan sent out.There is also an interesting question in the survey about how much battery capacity loss would be acceptable before the battery is replaced under warranty.  

    I am not up on the CARB rules, but I remember hearing something about the requirement for the battery warranty in CA.

    So, does this mean that if the Leaf/other BEV’s do not meet the battery warranty, that they do not get the rebate? This would be good for GM, since this would eliminate that advatage…lets hope so!

    Is this just a CA mandate, or do the other 16 CARB states have a different requirement?

    I am not “CARB” enabled, sorry.


  81. 81
    CocoEV

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CocoEV
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:30 am)

    To all Leaf fanboys popping up here recently, Nissan has got their own huge share of credibility problems too! First and foremost still has not announced the batt. warranty specs while taking preorders wtf? They are basically strategizing how to postopne the full explanation they can’t put longer warranty than 3-5yrs because of their underdeveloped (aircooled) batt. pack. Basically, every major automanuf. with the exception of Nissan goes to watercooling and babysitting the batteries in many ways.. It’s clear people should wait for the real deal from GM, Tesla, BMW, Toyota, not cost cuting maniac Renault (parent of Nissan)..


  82. 82
    Tagamet

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:31 am)

    JohnK: OK, I’m going to go out for a 70 mile bike ride.When I get back I’m expecting to see another article that is very positive.So there!  

    Works for ME!
    Wear a helmet.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  83. 83
    Gary

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Gary
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:32 am)

    Van: Van

    I wouldn’t think so. How long is the Tesla Roadster’s warranty? Three years, It’s an electric vehicle just like the Leaf.


  84. 84
    Crackwhore Need Pipe

    -22

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Crackwhore Need Pipe
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:35 am)

    (click to show comment)


  85. 85
    Tagamet

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:37 am)

    JEC:
    I am not up on the CARB rules, but I remember hearing something about the requirement for the battery warranty in CA.So, does this mean that if the Leaf/other BEV’s do not meet the battery warranty, that they do not get the rebate?This would be good for GM, since this would eliminate that advatage…lets hope so!Is this just a CA mandate, or do the other 16 CARB states have a different requirement?I am not “CARB”enabled, sorry.  

    I’m not CARB enabled either, but this site may help:

    http://www.arb.ca.gov/homepage.htm

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet


  86. 86
    Dot Nyet

    -14

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dot Nyet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:40 am)

    (click to show comment)


  87. 87
    koz

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:42 am)

    JEC: I am not up on the CARB rules, but I remember hearing something about the requirement for the battery warranty in CA. So, does this mean that if the Leaf/other BEV’s do not meet the battery warranty, that they do not get the rebate? This would be good for GM, since this would eliminate that advatage…lets hope so!Is this just a CA mandate, or do the other 16 CARB states have a different requirement?I am not “CARB” enabled, sorry.  (Quote)

    BEV do not have the 10yr battery warranty requirement, so are elligble for the $5k regardless. The 10yr warranty requirement was born out of the nead for the battery’s proper function in order for HEVs to meet the lower emmissions they are being credited for.

    This is why it is a silly requirement for an EREV that is not reasonably functional without a properly functioning battery.


  88. 88
    Sally

    -22

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Sally
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:44 am)

    (click to show comment)


  89. 89
    The Real McCoy

    -23

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    The Real McCoy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:48 am)

    (click to show comment)


  90. 90
    solo

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    solo
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:55 am)

    koz: e Volt.

    Please tell me what motivation GM or any car manufacturer has to meet this alphabet soup AT-PZEV designation anyway. First it cost more to build the car, second they are REQUIRED to warranty it for 150,000 miles! Lets face it, by 150,000 miles most cars are on their 3′rd or 4th owner. Often this person is somebody who, A: is going to college and spending their excess money on beer and weed, not preventative car maintenance, B: on welfare and spending their excess money on beer and weed, not preventative car maintenance, C: an illegal alien working for cash and spending their excess money on beer and weed, not preventative car maintenance.

    If other manufacturers had to warranty their products for 10 years, microwaves would cost $2000.00, refrigerators would cost $5000.00, TV’s would cost $3500.00. The auto industry is the most over regulated industry anywhere. All because the radical left sees the automobile as some evil device that must be taken out of the hands of the common people. Global warming B.S. is the excuse they use today. When I was young these same nuts used tail pipe emissions as their excuse. Use flower power to get to work! They failed obviously, only because technology finally caught up with the regulation with the birth of computerized fuel injection. Re-grouping, the radical left graduated from college and some came out with chemistry degrees. Realizing the a perfect combustion process of gasoline yields water and CO’2, they picked CO’2 as their new enemy because, well most people drink water….. They got the idiots in Holywood to join their bandwagon and the rest is history. Now my computer shuts down unless I use it continually. Soon our TV’s will have a heat sensor to see if you are standing in front if it, otherwise it will shut off. Next our refrigerators will do the same, ruining everything inside. You will have to get the government’s permission to store food for more than 2 days because you should WALK to the LOCAL market in your VILLAGE to buy food every day as part of your MANDATORY government exercise program. God bless Arizona. Perhaps they will be the first state to attempt to secede from the union. I’ll tow my Volt behind my Diesel motorhome when I move to Arizona.


  91. 91
    Volt45

    +13

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Volt45
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:58 am)

    So the Volt is not “advanced” technology?
    So the Volt is not a “partial zero emissions” vehicle?

    Sometimes I hate my own state.


  92. 92
    LRGVProVolt

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    LRGVProVolt
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:06 am)

    #4 drivin98: You’d think they’d be a little more straight forward with you. It’s not like you weren’t going to find out and not blog about it. Anyway…Guess Volt buyers in California will have to settle for the same thousands of dollars of Federal incentives like the rest of us.  

    GM has been straight forward! It’s not like they are keeping this, I’ll agree, disappointment from you until after you buy the Volt. California actually is delaying the adoption of electric vehicles or causing the price to be higher by having this law because the state of battery technology is not there yet and manufacturers would have to include the price of a second battery for the almost certain battery failure before the ten years. is up.

    Nissan has not announced the battery warranty for the Leaf as of today. I doubt that they will have any warranty that is competitive, as they came they will be, with the Volt battery warranty.

    We have yet to hear what the MSRP will be on the Volt. It may very well be the case that GM will be able to lower the price now that they have decided that the battery will last eight years. Remember all the talk about GM needing to include the price of another battery and therefore set a high price of $40,000. Time will tell and we don’t have to wait long to find out.

    Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.


  93. 93
    Dave K.

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave K.
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:07 am)

    Shawn Marshall: Electric cars must stand on their own.

    Good point. The news of California incentive ineligibility brings vehicles of other manufactures in play. Good news for competitors. And for producers of similar vehicles. It’s July of 2010 and GM hasn’t priced the Volt. This number is now more meaningful than ever.

    Events that will help the Volt:

    1>Washington DC can change the tax credit to an instant rebate.
    2>GM can MSRP the Volt below $37,000
    3>Dealers can get onboard with curteous support rather than the usual first model year mark up.

    Making the jump from conventional vehicles to an EV or EREV is a join decision for most households. When the new Camaro rolled out most L.A. dealers were asking 3k over MSRP. My local dealership took $1800 over. Will this happen with the Volt as well?

    =D-Volt


  94. 94
    DonC

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:11 am)

    No idea about the rebate situation in other states, but in CA you would not be likely to get one even you bought a Volt which qualified. There is a very limited pot of money available and a lot of vehicles that qualify so getting a rebate is like winning the lottery. On the other hand if you can’t enter the lottery you can’t win it.

    If you are on the fence about a Leaf or a Volt it could make the Leaf more attractive. (Of course we don’t have the pricing on the Volt).

    Tagamet: I stand corrected on the “only Calif” comment, but I stand BY the comment that it is still the minority of states in the Union (by a mile).

    It’s a much higher percentage of the population than the simple number of states would suggest and, more importantly, it’s probably 70% of the potential market for EVs, if you assume that EVs will be popular in the same areas that hybrids have been, which seems right.

    So it’s going to be an issue.


  95. 95
    Steve

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Steve
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:22 am)

    Doesn’t mean the Other 16 CARB states had an additional $5k rebate does it? Just the same emission rules. Let them pay what the rest of us have to pay for the car.


  96. 96
    BillR

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    BillR
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:26 am)

    First, this seems to be a CA only consideration to me, but I don’t know all of the details. But other states that are offering rebates for EV’s, do they state that they need to meet CA standards, or do they have their own particular standards? I’m betting that most states have their own statutes in regards to the rebates.

    Now back to the CA issue. CARB apparently considers pure EV’s and Fuel cell vehicles to be zero emissions vehicles (ZEV). This link describes some of CARB’s categories:

    http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/factsheets/calemissions.pdf

    This comes from the linked article:

    ——————————–

    As John Swanton, an air pollution specialist with CARB, explained to us in an interview, “the point is to warranty expensive parts that are likely to cause emissions problems if they fail, but may not incapacitate the vehicle.” In other words, if the battery in a plug-in hybrid goes kaput, the car could conceivably stay on the road, belching out smog-forming emissions comparable to “a pretty poorly running gasoline vehicle.”

    This is the “real meat” of California’s vehicle emission standards, said Swanton: “making vehicles cleaner, longer, not just pushing advanced vehicles out to new buyers.”

    With this in mind, CARB has set a 10-year or 150,000-mile standard for batteries in vehicles designated as “partial zero emission vehicles,” or PZEVs — the models that as Swanton put it, “bridge both worlds” between gas and electricity.

    ———————————————————————–

    So other than the 10yr/150,000 mile battery warranty, the Volt has zero evaporative emissions, (meets PZEV) and has ZEV enabling technology (meets AT-ZEV).

    A simple solution gets the Volt its rating and owners the $5000 rebate. GM leases the battery pack in CA, with a standard lease for 10 years, 150,000 miles. It meets the intent of a warranty, as the battery pack is always functioning to the prescribed performance level.

    In fact, based upon potentially low emissions from the ICE, combined with good AER, the Volt might possibly qualify as a ZEV. See that last few pages of this link from CARB.

    http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zev_tutorial.pdf


  97. 97
    Steve

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Steve
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:27 am)

    Sally: How GM treating you Volt lovers ?I cannot believe that actually admit they will stick it to the first Volt buyers.Sorry but I would be very angry at GM for this $5000.00 penalty. What have you done wrong?Perhaps Volt is wrong car and not worth extra money. If rich go ahead otherwise think twice.  (Quote)

    GM didn’t write the emission rules. CA did. GM figured they can’t meet them. Go talk to your state politicians. It’s not so much a $5k penalty as having to pay the same price as the rest of the country. CA isn’t getting a special deal.


  98. 98
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:29 am)

    DonC: No idea about the rebate situation in other states, but in CA you would not be likely to get one even you bought a Volt which qualified. There is a very limited pot of money available and a lot of vehicles that qualify so getting a rebate is like winning the lottery. On the other hand if you can’t enter the lottery you can’t win it.If you are on the fence about a Leaf or a Volt it could make the Leaf more attractive. (Of course we don’t have the pricing on the Volt).
    It’s a much higher percentage of the population than the simple number of states would suggest and, more importantly, it’s probably 70% of the potential market for EVs, if you assume that EVs will be popular in the same areas that hybrids have been, which seems right.
    So it’s going to be an issue.  

    Good point about the population, but to put my reply to Ted in context, he was asking if it would effect the FEDERAL tax break.
    I’m just guessing but I’ll bet GM went to the mat to get their vehicles included by CARB.
    In the end. we come back to “This could change by the release date, stay tuned 9argh) AND it’s not all about the money.
    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  99. 99
    PJK

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    PJK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:30 am)

    CA is the land of fruit and nuts anyway. The volt has the highest gas mileage by far but it doesn’t meet some CA criteria??… I think CA better stop letting people smoke that funny stuff… I think all that marijuana they are smoking is polluting there atmosphere more than the VOLT will. This is just another example of politicians weaseling out of another “incentive”… they just know the VOLT will be popular and don’t want to pay. They got what they wanted out of the incentive when they announced it… political gain.


  100. 100
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:35 am)

    LRGVProVolt: Time will tell and we don’t have to wait long to find out.

    Best thought of the day, IMO

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  101. 101
    PJK

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    PJK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:40 am)

    I don’t like the idea of politicians dictating to corporations.


  102. 102
    Roy H

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Roy H
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:43 am)

    Van: Apparently, this means the Nissan Leaf will sport a better warranty and a price more than $5000 less than the Volt in the CARB states.Is that the correct view?  

    People have answered yes and no. Both are correct. This has to be split up.

    There are 17 CARB states but only 3 or 4 offer $5k incentive. Just because a state supports CARB does not mean they have an incentive.

    The warranty for the LEAF battery is expected to be less. They have already announced a program to upgrade to a much better battery in a few years for a reasonable price. This is NOT for free under warranty. More importantly they have said that all leased LEAFs will get this new battery when returned at the end of the lease. Although the existing battery may last a lot longer, this suggests to me that Nissan is not confident that the battery will last more than 5 years.

    In the states that offer the $5k rebate, the LEAF will qualify and the Volt will not.


  103. 103
    LRGVProVolt

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    LRGVProVolt
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:44 am)

    #5 Ted in Fort Myers: I sure hope that means that the Federal rebate will still apply.Had GM done the work and gotten the designation they would have reaped the rewards for years to come.Straight gas engine cars are so last century but they continue to persist in that direction.They maybe will never learn and it will be the EV-1 all over again.At least I will get my Volt and maybe my next car will have to be a BEV or EREV from another company.If that is how I feel as an early adopter imagine what the rest of the USA will think.I was never going to get a State rebate as Florida does not offer a rebate.But thousands of other potential customer in those states offering a rebate will opt for new technology cars from other manufacturers that do qualify.
    GM has effectively relinquished a lead to manufacturers that will produce cars that are currently further behind in development.Shame on the new leadership of GM.Where is Bob Lutz when we need him most.Thanks Static for the insight.Take Care,
    TED  

    Lost my orgiinal post so here we go again.

    Ted, you amaze me with your question and negative statements! That’s no surprise to me though; I’m easily amazed by the amount of negativity that Americans have.

    Firstly, you don’t need to worry about the Federal rebate on the Volt. Why would this problem with the California CARB designation effect the Federal rebate.

    Secondly, GM has done everything (and more :) ), in bringing us this vehicle. Some things are just not possible. IMHO, its very likely that GM could have given a 10/150 battery warranty but would have had to include the price of the second battery in the MSRP as has been conjectured in the past. I believe rather that testing has indicated that 8/100 is a safe warranty that will allow GM to price the Volt more competitively. Time (a very short time) will reveal whether or not I am right.

    Yes, I will agree with you that many will feel the way you do. But once the roll-out has occurred in November, people will begin in earnest to examine the Volt as potential buyers and all this talk about an otherwise disappointing announcement won’t even be an issue in their minds. After all it’s that American known instant gratification syndrome, we see on the blog here today with all this negativity.

    Static, thanks for answering questions that appeared in the http://gm-volt.com/2010/07/14/official-chevrolet-volt-battery-warranty-is-eight-years100000-miles/ post.

    Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.


  104. 104
    DonC

    +8

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:51 am)

    Shawn Marshall: How much is Califorlornia in deficit?
    ?The Golden State wants to redistribute tax payer funds (which they don’t have) to others in order to underwrite the purchase of an uneconomic vehicle?
    Electric cars must stand on their own.
    I’m a Volt technology fan but we need to be real – these “incentives” are unrealistic and uneconomic intrusions into the market by government planners. Don’t think it’s likely to work very well and initially has resulted in over designed and overpriced vehicles.
    If we had a coherent national strategy of underwriting electric vehicle R&D and production on the basis of an import tax on (only)FOREIGN oil – that might do something real for us.
    I try not to comment but the Statik got me charged up. Woe to our poor country.  

    There is a lot here to deal with. First, CA is broke the same way Elon Musk is broke. It’s hardly as if there isn’t any money available — I could balance the CA budget in two minutes. It’s that idealogical political paralysis has blocked all compromise. Second, there isn’t any real redistribution going on. The funds for the EV rebates don’t come the general fund, they come from special purpose CARB activities — which is why there isn’t much money in the pot. http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/2010/nr031710b.htm

    Third, saying that electric cars need to stand on their own fails to account for existing subsidies. Gas cars are the recipients of huge subsidies which the oil companies have put in place over a hundred years. If you added up all the money we spend securing our oil — including the war in Iraq — and oil without subsidies would be over $10/gallon. Moreover, and this is an important point, oil is controlled by governments, not companies, and those governments are free to collude, which they do. So what you are saying is that a fledging technology should be able to stand up on its own to a heavily subsidized government monopoly. That doesn’t seem very reasonable.

    Fourth, the idea of electric cars “standing on their own” misses the point that we’re in a war. On one side are oil rich dictators and Islamic terrorists. On the other are the free market democracies. Thinking that you’ll have free markets devise a solution to a geo-political conflict is akin to assuming that the free market would come up with a plan to win WW II. It can’t and won’t happen. Free markets are very good at developing products and services and distributing them, but they’re not capable, on their own, of waging must less winning a war.

    Fifth is that the problem is not exactly foreign oil. It matters not where the oil comes from. If the US didn’t import any foreign oil this would not stop the Saudi’s from raking in megabucks from our allies and funding terrorism throughout the world. The problem isn’t foreign oil, it’s just oil, which is why the “Drill Baby Drill” crowd had it so wrong. The fact that we directly fund terrorism because we don’t want to pay the price to stop may be aggravating but it doesn’t change the fundamentals. We need to destroy oil as a strategic commodity.

    I agree with you on the point that our country is in deep trouble if we aren’t better informed and don’t have a good grasp of the issues.


  105. 105
    LRGVProVolt

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    LRGVProVolt
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:52 am)

    R#102 oy H: In the states that offer the $5k rebate, the LEAF will qualify and the Volt will not

    You just said that “this suggests to me that Nissan is not confident that the battery will last more than 5 years”, so how do you figure that they will qualify for the rebate!?!

    Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.


  106. 106
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:53 am)

    Off to buy yet another keyboard. I keep wearing the letters off the keys. Maybe if it’s wireless, I’ll get a govt rebate….(JUST KIDDING)!

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  107. 107
    Dave K.

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave K.
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:02 am)

    Concept in 2007 to photo op in Summer of 2010.

    Obama-Volt.jpg


  108. 108
    LRGVProVolt

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    LRGVProVolt
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:03 am)

    #100 Tagamet:
    Best thought of the day, IMOBe well and believe,
    TagametLet’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  

    Thanks, Tag.

    If I could say one more thing, it would be that everyone should pay more attention to those of you that got to test drive the Volt. Your experiences mean far more than all the negative speculation and just plain irrational statements being made. Many of the Trolls would be embarrassed if they realized how illogical their comments are.

    Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.


  109. 109
    vegaselectric

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    vegaselectric
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:15 am)

    Carlos G: I can assure you that Nissan would never do anything like this to our customers.I would kindly invite you all to seriously consider a Nissan LEAF as your next automotive purchase. We will always be honest and up front with our capabilities. You can count on us.Have a wonderful wonderful weekend and we will see you at your nearest Nissan dealership as soon as possible.Be advised that the LEAF can be pre-ordered today   

    You can pre-request a CODA and it doesn’t look like a Pokeman Character who mated with a rabbit or was it a squirrel. Hay, that’s just my opinion as a Nissan Pathfinder owner. Put a bag over it and it will look fine!


  110. 110
    LRGVProVolt

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    LRGVProVolt
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:18 am)

    #21 JEC: I am just surprise at the lack of candidness by GM on this, since they know this would be a big issue for MANY people.

    What lack of candidness? It’s plain and simple that GM is not hiding anything in their announcement, have announced it well before the roll-out, and may very well have made this decision to offer the Volt to everyone at a lower price to be even more competitive with other manufacturers. It seems aboveboard, forthright, straightforward, honest, and fair to me!

    Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.


  111. 111
    vegaselectric

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    vegaselectric
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:29 am)

    Economics! All that smog control costs money, and adds precious weight which lowers the already low mileage totals. If you are competing with a Prius on gas, and your gas mileage is lower than a Prius, big problem. They could have used carbon fiber panels or my favorite the Saturn dent- proof panels but no, as cheap as possible to recoup cost. What does that mean to us early adopters, $$$$$$ up front at the check out window & more $$$$ in the purchase of the longest extended warranty. You better buy it from where ever you can get the longest warranty because this thing is going to be expensive to replace computers, monitor screens, the battery and so much more. That $2,000 on an extended warranty will be money well spent!

    *RESEARCH & E-MAIL MANY, MANY DEALERS IN MULTIPLE STATES, TO FIND YOUR VERY BEST PRICE ON THAT EXTENDED WARRANTY. PRICES CAN VARY BY AS MUCH AS $1,000. BEEN THERE, DONE THAT HAVING BEEN IN THE CAR LOT BUSINESS. THOSE SALES COMMISSIONS CAN REALLY BE STRONG AT YOUR EXPENSE IF YOU DON’T SPEND THE TIME YOU WILL DROP THE DIME!


  112. 112
    Matthew B

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Matthew B
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:30 am)

    JEC: Tag, That’s not true.

    As Statik mentions, this affects 17 CARB states. They all have their own program and they to could or will be affected by this.

    That is only the case if the rebate is tied to a CARB rating.

    Oregon is becoming a CARB state next year, but the rebate law is unconnected with the higher emission rating. All the Oregon rebate requires is a plug and a big enough battery.


  113. 113
    Roy H

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Roy H
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:31 am)

    LRGVProVolt:
    You just said that “this suggests to me that Nissan is not confident that the battery will last more than 5 years”, so how do you figure that they will qualify for the rebate!?!Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.  

    The rebate is not conditional on the battery warranty, but rather on the pollution level of the vehicle.


  114. 114
    Matthew B

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Matthew B
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:33 am)

    Hey California, the ball is in your court.

    The state will be better off emissions wise with more Volts sold. If they chose not to embrace the best option they have, then they only demonstrate their stupidity.

    Not that they don’t do this all the time…


  115. 115
    CorvetteGuy

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CorvetteGuy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:37 am)

    Wow! I get back from vacation and it ‘s going crazy around here! And for no reason, in my opinion…

    The people who run the California Air Resources Board are a bunch of kooks in the first place. You have no idea how many jobs these people have killed, and more companies are leaving the state even as I write this. If they had promised $5000 in rebates for the VOLT or cars like it, then you know they were just planning to RAISE TAXES (they will call it a ‘fee’ to avoid approval by the taxpayers) again on everyone else to pay for that.

    Schwarzenegger’s ‘greenhouse gas emission’ law: AB-32 will be put on hold this November anyway… The measure on the upcoming ballot is called the “California Jobs Initiative” which calls for delaying implementation of the regulations until our state’s unemployment rate – which currently hovers at about 12 percent (to as high as 16% in my town) — drops to 5.5 percent for 4 CONSECUTIVE QUARTERS.

    Bottom line is: Don’t count on the State of California to pay for part of your VOLT. I’m not. In fact I’m not fully convinced that the Federal Rebate of $7,500 will ever make it to my bank account. Government Regulators (which we call “CZARs” now…) will find a way to screw us out of that money. They always find a way. But that does not deter me from my plans to get a VOLT for my wife. It will just be a bigger pinch on the budget than I had planned.


  116. 116
    flmark

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    flmark
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:37 am)

    Wha Wha Wha. Boo Freakin Hoo. Am I supposed to have some sympathy for the Californicators? With all the state cutbacks, I sit here in FL hoping lawmakers actually decide to fund the state solar rebate program- AS PROMISED. I am owed $52,000 and there is nothing to indicate when- or IF- I will see the money. It is a sticky business for merchants to try and market their product based on a government rebate program. Perhaps I am desensitized by the current lull in solar money, but my reaction to this news item is- so what!!! We need electric cars and we need them now. My dealings with FL’s Public Service Commission have shown me that we can’t expect our government to do Jack-S%2T to make these good, ecologically based decisions. WE (citizens) better make these decisions because it is the right thing to do. We will all choke to death on black goo while we wait for our legislators and bureaucrats to wake up and smell the haze. Get me my damn Volt now. You Californicators get to the back of the line- or go string up your CARB official weenies!


  117. 117
    Matthew B

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Matthew B
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:47 am)

    I don’t like the idea of politicians dictating to corporations.
    PJK:

    It is in strings that are attached to money the gubment is giving away. I don’t see how that is “dictating” to the corporation.


  118. 118
    LRGVProVolt

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    LRGVProVolt
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:56 am)

    #113 Roy H:
    The rebate is not conditional on the battery warranty, but rather on the pollution level of the vehicle.  

    What am I missing here? This post is titled Volt Doesn’t Meet CARB Designation, etc., and the text of the article explains that it is the battery warranty that results in the Volt not getting the CARB $5,000 rebate. It further states, that Volt buyers in the future will be eligible when a 10/150 warranty is given. So what does the battery warranty have to do with the pollution level?

    Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.


  119. 119
    Matthew B

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Matthew B
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:56 am)

    LRGVProVolt:
    You just said that “this suggests to me that Nissan is not confident that the battery will last more than 5 years”, so how do you figure that they will qualify for the rebate!?!  

    CARB is concerned about emissions. If the Volt battery capacity is greatly reduced, the car will still go but burn more gasoline. If the LEAF battery capacity is reduced, the car won’t go as far.

    Of course government workers can’t think far enough ahead to realize that the LEAF owner may own a gas car and if the LEAF won’t go as far, they’ll drive the gas car more.


  120. 120
    EVNow

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    EVNow
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:57 am)

    This tells me – GM decided to reduce the price of Volt. They decided to give lower warranty – and thus reduce cost of warranty repairs. That is good news – though some CA people lose out. Ofcourse Leaf users in CA benefit – since the amount available for the rebate is small and likely to run out quickly.

    BTW, With this information we can do a bit of guessing as to how the battery capacity reduces over time.

    So – even though Volt uses only 50% of the capacity they couldn’t warranty for 10 year/150K miles. Assuming they were ok with the battery using 100% of the remaining capacity at they end of 10 year/150K miles – what this shows is that battery capacity will be less than 50%.

    Assuming a recharge every day – 10 years is 3600 recharges – and some 144,000 miles on electric alone.

    But, they were ok with 8 years, 100K miles. Again assuming a recharge every day – 8 years is 2900 recharges – and some 115,000 miles on electric alone. So, with 8/100, you can’t recharge and use that 40 miles electric range everyday – but you can most of the days.

    So, somewhere around 3,000 charges, Volt battery will stop holding 50% of the capacity.


  121. 121
    srschrier

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    srschrier
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:05 pm)

    Regulatory and emissions standards change as newly designed technologies evolve. One day it’s ok to drive a hybrid on California’s HOV lanes, a few years later it’s not. After a few years the 100K mile warranty becomes a 150K mile warranty. Next the minimum may be a 200K mile warranty. Like everything else the CARB standards may change to allow, or disallow, more hybrids and Voltec platforms as new versions emerge.

    As of July 17 the Volt’s price hasn’t been officially announced nor have the MPGs in CSM, probably reflecting the (fluid) situation of the issue.


  122. 122
    pKIO3

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    pKIO3
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:09 pm)

    EVNow: With this information we can do a bit of guessing as to how the battery capacity reduces over time.

    Sorry but IMHO this is really stretching it. No where in the article does it say they couldn’t warranty for 10/150K. Its states that according to the CARB official:”The Volt did not meet the criteria as a enhanced advanced technology partial zero emissions vehicle, or AT-PZEV, as was widely expected, therefore they don’t have to meet the 10/150 warranty”. They didn’t have to meet the 10/150 warranty. That is quite a bit different from saying the can’t meet it.


  123. 123
    Truman

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Truman
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:19 pm)

    DonC:
    Fourth, the idea of electric cars “standing on their own” misses the point that we’re in a war. On one side are oil rich dictators and Islamic terrorists. On the other are the free market democracies.

    If the US didn’t import any foreign oil this would not stop the Saudi’s from raking in megabucks from our allies and funding terrorism throughout the world.

    I don’t think you understand the US-Saudi Arabia relationship. Since WWII, the US has guaranteed the House of Saud’s security against its own people (hated dictators tend to get overthrown – see Iran), in return for following orders on oil production (pump more when we say, pump less when we say), investing those petrodollars in US banks and securities, using US corporations for building up their country, and trading their oil using only US dollars (Saudi Arabia has vetoed recent moves by OPEC to ditch the dollar for the Euro or a basket of currencies).

    Only since the botched invasion of Iraq has the Saudi Arabia dictatorship (the Royal Family) started to worry about its Protector’s competence, and has since began buying weapons from China, making oil deals with China, and started planning for a post-US future. The few princes (out of thousands) that “fund terrorism” are tolerated as a relief valve for popular anger, since it is very difficult to remain in power over a country seething with hatred for its puppet Royal Family. That’s one reason the US moved military assets out of Saudi Arabia to conquered Iraq – it was one of bin Laden’s “demands” and a point of rebellion among the Muslims in the “Holy Land” of Saudi Arabia (home of Mecca and Medina).

    Here’s the close relationship with the ‘oil rich dictator’:
    http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/saudi_arabia.htm

    As for “funding terrorism throughout the world”, one countries “Special Operations” are another countries “Terrorism”:
    http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/76824/mike_davis_return_to_sender_car_bombs_part_2_
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21047176/

    “Terrorism” and “Human Rights” are very much in the eye of the beholder:
    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-03/12/c_13208120.htm

    But you’re right, once oil is a less strategic commodity, wars and coups and special operations and invasions will have to move on to other motivations, perhaps securing lithium or the rare earths.


  124. 124
    vegaselectric

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    vegaselectric
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:20 pm)

    EVNow: This tells me – GM decided to reduce the price of Volt. They decided to give lower warranty – and thus reduce cost of warranty repairs. That is good news – though some CA people lose out. Ofcourse Leaf users in CA benefit – since the amount available for the rebate is small and likely to run out quickly.BTW, With this information we can do a bit of guessing as to how the battery capacity reduces over time.So – even though Volt uses only 50% of the capacity they couldn’t warranty for 10 year/150K miles. Assuming they were ok with the battery using 100% of the remaining capacity at they end of 10 year/150K miles – what this shows is that battery capacity will be less than 50%. Assuming a recharge every day – 10 years is 3600 recharges – and some 144,000 miles on electric alone.But, they were ok with 8 years, 100K miles. Again assuming a recharge every day – 8 years is 2900 recharges – and some 115,000 miles on electric alone. So, with 8/100, you can’t recharge and use that 40 miles electric range everyday – but you can most of the days.So, somewhere around 3,000 charges, Volt battery will stop holding 50% of the capacity.  (Quote)

    Eight years and one day on the battery & 3yrs and one day on the computer $$$$$$!
    Where’s my extended warranty!
    Time to start searching for the dealer who wants volume numbers on warranty’s! Prius buyers have one, 25% off the warranty, I talked to him when I was going to buy a 2010 Prius. That’s before the Volt made the homely Prius an after thought in my appointment calendar.


  125. 125
    Rooster

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Rooster
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:22 pm)

    LRGVProVolt: Thanks, Tag.If I could say one more thing, it would be that everyone should pay more attention to those of you that got to test drive the Volt. Your experiences mean far more than all the negative speculation and just plain irrational statements being made. Many of the Trolls would be embarrassed if they realized how illogical their comments are.Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.  (Quote)

    From the lack of maturity apparent in their posts, I doubt any are old enough to drive without mom & dad being in the vehicle.


  126. 126
    Engineer

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Engineer
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:35 pm)

    Jesus, what is with all the trolls?


  127. 127
    Streetlight

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Streetlight
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:42 pm)

    Good grief-look at the barnyard language this article fostered!

    Anyways, once Sacramento realizes VOLT competition is discouraged by a CARB absurdity (my way or the highway) its simply amazing how fast Sacramento can move. (Yes I had, unrelated to energy but nevertheless to technology, a good result in Sacramento a very long time ago.)

    The June 2010 Design News cover story features LEAF. Nothing much that hasn’t appeared here. There is one spec that’ll ring your bell. To charge LEAF at 110 VAC takes 16-18 hrs. (220 VAC-8 hrs; 440 VAC-25 min.) There’s also much discussion on cost per W-hr/kg. http://www.designnews.com

    VOLT leads the way and to GM’s (and Whitacre) credit VOLT does not heed to outdated energy policy.


  128. 128
    Matthew B

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Matthew B
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:50 pm)

    EVNow: So – even though Volt uses only 50% of the capacity they couldn’t warranty for 10 year/150K miles. Assuming they were ok with the battery using 100% of the remaining capacity at they end of 10 year/150K miles – what this shows is that battery capacity will be less than 50%

    Remember the criteria you may be placing on the Volt may be different than the criteria you may put on battery “life.”

    When calculating the warranty life, the engineers are going to be looking at the very tail of the distribution since the economics dictate that very few should ever get a warranty claim.

    When talking about battery life outside a warranty calculation, people are usually taking about the median of the distribution.


  129. 129
    nasaman

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:52 pm)

    GM just announced the Volt battery warranty would be 8yrs/100,000 miles. Nissan hasn’t wasted any time responding to this by sending out a questionnaire to all their $99 Leaf depositors. Here it is….

    4800083607c16799f2a3b.jpg

    4800083579317a096357b.jpg

    48007182440994fe19c6b.jpg

    I have to admire how rapidly Nissan got this survey out & really hope GM will take notice!


  130. 130
    jhm614

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    jhm614
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:58 pm)

    Three notes:

    1) The lower warranty requirements 8/100 instead of 10/150 will lead to a lower MSRP. GM might not give back all of the “difference” but they will give back some.

    2) CA is in rough financial waters — the 5k rebate might not have been there anyway.

    3) Don’t compare the Volt to the Leaf — the Volt is a primary / do anything car and the Leaf is a second / commuter /city car. It’s reasonable that the Volt will cost more.

    4) Nissan may decide to match the Volts battery but there is no guarantee. The things I have read were point to a 5/60 or 6/60.


  131. 131
    nasaman

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (12:59 pm)

    PS to my post #129: The Leaf survey came from ABG, where you can vote for the yrs/miles you’d want the Leaf’s warranty to be. I voted for 8yrs/100,000mi in hope of “leveling the playing field”. What do you think makes sense?


  132. 132
    CorvetteGuy

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CorvetteGuy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:06 pm)

    Engineer: Jesus, what is with all the trolls?  (Quote)

    When Lyle switched to this current version of ‘blog software’ the trolls seemed to be exiled back to their swamps (is it swamps or drawbridges where trolls hang out?) but recently they have escaped to show us how miserably our school system has failed them and their education. It is obvious from their postings that a career in engineering is not in their future. But I hear that Starbucks pays pretty good if you can get into full time management.


  133. 133
    JEC

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:10 pm)

    LRGVProVolt: JEC

    LRGVProVolt: #21 JEC: I am just surprise at the lack of candidness by GM on this, since they know this would be a big issue for MANY people.

    What lack of candidness? It’s plain and simple that GM is not hiding anything in their announcement, have announced it well before the roll-out, and may very well have made this decision to offer the Volt to everyone at a lower price to be even more competitive with other manufacturers. It seems aboveboard, forthright, straightforward, honest, and fair to me!

    Ok. To each his own.


  134. 134
    JEC

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:12 pm)

    Matthew B: JEC: Tag, That’s not true.

    As Statik mentions, this affects 17 CARB states. They all have their own program and they to could or will be affected by this.

    That is only the case if the rebate is tied to a CARB rating.

    Oregon is becoming a CARB state next year, but the rebate law is unconnected with the higher emission rating. All the Oregon rebate requires is a plug and a big enough battery.

    So, does anyone have a list of states that this will impact the Volt, besides CA?


  135. 135
    Dan Petit

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dan Petit
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:20 pm)

    I saw President Obama with the Veridian Joule color Volt yesterday on HD tv.

    The internet “technology” just can’t get the color *anywhere near* right apparently.

    It looks fantastic in a Silver-Light-Green on the HD tv.

    Nothing other than a test drive in it and seeing it “in person” does the Volt justice.

    If only every poster here could have driven it.

    That HD tv image and proper color rendering has made it once again – - – - breathless.


  136. 136
    JEC

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:23 pm)

    PJK: I don’t like the idea of politicians dictating to corporations.  

    Do like the idea of politicians bailing out corporations?

    Careful how you answer this one….


  137. 137
    Ali Moni

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Ali Moni
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:33 pm)

    This is a job for good Governor Arnold to straighten out. He needs to reign in the rogue CARBites and offer at least a $2500 rebate from Cali for the Volt. Arnold has supported alternative energy for a long while and this is one incentive that will further spur sales of the first mass produced EV from an American automaker.

    Please do the right thing Mr. Governor and get control of the CARBites!


  138. 138
    EVNow

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    EVNow
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:34 pm)

    pKIO3: Sorry but IMHO this is really stretching it. No where in the article does it say they couldn’t warranty for 10/150K.

    Nor did I claim the article said that.

    It is hardly a streatch to say GM decided to warranty for 8/10 instead of 10/15 after considering the possibilities and what not warrantying for 10/15 would mean in their launch state. I don’t think GM would be so unprofessional not even to consider all the issues before making a decision.

    Ofcourse warranty is always a question of how much cost GM was willing to sign on to given what their engineers are telling about likely pack performance.


  139. 139
    DonC

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:35 pm)

    Truman: I don’t think you understand the US-Saudi Arabia relationship.

    You’ve set forth the traditional State Department justification for supporting Saudi Arabia. That approach simply hasn’t worked, as the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center, planned and carried out by Saudis, made clear. Let’s admit it has been a failure and move on.

    The Saudi brand of Islam, Wahabi Islam, is a huge threat to Western democracies. Saudi oil wealth funds terrorism throughout the world, including all the Madrassas in Pakistan and Indonesia. The only way to stop Islamic terrorism is to cut off its funding, and the only way to cut off its funding is destroy oil as a strategic resource. I don’t hate the Saudis, I just think they need to find some productive work.

    Making sure oil does not power our transportation system is not a market based exercise, it’s a question of national security and economic survival, which is why thinking about the market based viability of alternative fuel vehicles is so misplaced. The market may not, absent government intervention, produce tanks and planes, but that doesn’t mean you don’t need them.


  140. 140
    Mike D

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mike D
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:35 pm)

    Whoever keeps leaving the troll-esqe negative comments over and over under different names is helarious. I think one day after i buy a volt i’m going to make a specific webpage dedicated to showing my exact ongoing cost savings with the car, from purchase forward, just to show all of the people under the “you have to make up the purchase price difference in direct fuel savings” flag that they’re effing retards.

    You buy a volt with a couple options, 32k out the door after tax credit.

    You’d pay 20k for a cruze.

    This is where all of the RETARDS step in and say “ok, now that means you now need to make up $12,000 worth of gas savings, and that takes 345345346 years!!!!!!!!”

    They’re retards because they don’t take into account the biggest cost of buying a new car, which is the price that you sell it for, however many years later when you sell it. Theoretically, you would be better off, financially, in a car that cost $40,000 and was magically still worth $40,000 5-8 years later, even if it only got 15 MPG.

    I’m not a psychic and can’t tell for sure the exact market value of what a volt will be when 5-8 years old, because i don’t have a time machine, and neither do you, but it isn’t very hard to forecast. Hybrids hold their value very well… because they last… because that’s the point of having one… so using them as an example, and using the steep value drop of ICE cars after 5-8 years, we know that the 20k brand new cruze will be worth about 3000-6000 when it’s 8 years old. So you’re losing between 14k and 17k on your cruze, mileage aside.

    An 8 year old volt will be worth what? Let’s see, being that it’s battery warranty is just now expiring, that means it’s still getting 40 miles avg on a charge, keep in mind it’s only the end of the WARRANTY, not the end of the LIFE. (Products don’t have warranties that are only a hair shorter than the avg life of the product, it’s too risky for the business due to too many replacements). So your 8 year old volt is still going to have an average AER of 40 when it’s 8 years old, and slowly degrade down to 30 over the next 5 years, 20 over the next 5. I shit you not, an 18 year old volt will still be able to function, just have a short 20ish mile AER. So what will it be worth when 8 years old? Since it cost $32k out the door after rebate, because you got 1 or 2 options over base price, the effective price of the car was still $39,000ish when you purchased it. The $7500 rebate which still stands (who cares about an extra 5k in 17 states? you people are…yup…..i’m going to say it again….RETARDS!!!) So since you bought a $39,000 car, what will it be worth in 8 years being that it’s electric, very advanced, will still have a 40 mile AER and will still last much longer, and will be just barely out of warranty. $17 to 20k? I think 20 is a very very fair value estimate for 8 years.

    But you only paid 32k for it, so you only lost $12,000-$15,000 over those 8 years. The 20k cruze owner whose ice car will be worth 3k to 6k after 8 years will have lost $14,000 to $17,000. About the same, but the volt edges it out; and that’s FUEL SAVINGS ASIDE. Which uses less fuel? hmmmmmmmmmmm????

    Someone please tell me i’m wrong. All of you effing idiots who say the volt doesn’t make financial sense, please read this post SLOWLY and CAREFULLY and tell me i’m wrong.

    All of the people who say “you have to make up the direct purchase price difference between a hybrid/electric and a gas car in direct fuel savings” ARE RETARTED!!! ALL OF YOU!! THERE ARE SO MANY OF YOU!!!! AND NONE OF YOU USE YOUR BRAIN!!! hahaha. You don’t realize the 5k extra for the hybrid is still going to make it worth 3-5k more than a comparable ICE car when you sell it down the road, so you don’t need to save $5000 in fuel, more like 1-2k!!!! DUUUHHHHH!!!!!

    Someone tell me i’m wrong. please.


  141. 141
    EVNow

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    EVNow
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:43 pm)

    Matthew B: Remember the criteria you may be placing on the Volt may be different than the criteria you may put on battery “life.”

    The warranty is not just for battery failure but battery performance as well. It is that part I’m talking about i.e. 40 nominal miles of electric range even at the end of warranty time.

    BTW, I do think the CA laws on AT-PZEV should be changed. It is perverse not to give Volt AT-PZEV rating – but give it to some non-plugin hybrids.


  142. 142
    ClarksonCote

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    ClarksonCote
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:49 pm)

    The fact that a Prius gets AT-PZEV status but the Volt does not is pretty mind boggling. What’s the rationale?


  143. 143
    Bruce Embry

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Bruce Embry
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:51 pm)

    Good Afternoon all,
    Goverment incentives are a bad thing in a free market econmy. We all like our freedom, but expect goverment to pay up. Money for these incentives programs comes from the taxes that the goverment takes from every one of us. All of these incentives programs does nothing to inprove the economy, but to increase the debt and taxes that we all pay. I would rather goverment reduce taxes and take the incentives away, then I would be able to pay the full prices of a Volt.

    Another thing to think about is that these incentives drives up the price of the cars “Volt”. I bet if the incentive was not there, the volt price would still be less then $33000. Ok go ahead complain about the goverment incentives, with these we all LOOSE MORE FREEDOM.

    So do you guys think that everyone should pay you to drive a Volt?


  144. 144
    DonC

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:59 pm)

    CorvetteGuy: The people who run the California Air Resources Board are a bunch of kooks in the first place. You have no idea how many jobs these people have killed

    Personally I prefer not to be able to see my air. I don’t have any idea of how many jobs CARB has killed but then again I doubt you do either. The estimates usually show the numbers, if there are any, to be fairly small. On the other hand, there can be no doubt that cleaner air has saved tens of thousands of lives. Personally I’d prefer my children to be healthy. If it costs me a couple of hundred dollars a year then so be it. Maybe you have different priorities.

    If you think that jobs are so much more important than curbing pollution, go to Beijing or Dehli and then get back to me. A fter of course you’ve managed to get over your sinus and bronchial infections.


  145. 145
    DonC

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (2:05 pm)

    Bruce Embry: Goverment incentives are a bad thing in a free market econmy.

    Yes government incentives are a bad thing in a free market “econmy”. But only a complete idiot would think that the free market has anything to do with oil. Oil is a strategic commodity controlled by governments and government cartels. That should be obvious. So what part of “cartels aren’t free markets” don’t you get?


  146. 146
    banerian

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    banerian
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (2:24 pm)

    I don’t get it.
    GM makes the cars and CA makes the laws. Why is GM getting bashed?
    Whatever


  147. 147
    Bruce Embry

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Bruce Embry
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (2:26 pm)

    DonC: Yes government incentives are a bad thing in a free market “econmy”. But only a complete idiot would think that the free market has anything to do with oil. Oil is a strategic commodity controlled by governments and government cartels. That should be obvious. So what part of “cartels aren’t free markets” don’t you get?  (Quote)

    Ya,
    So Goverment taxes big oil and we pay more. Get it!


  148. 148
    CorvetteGuy

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CorvetteGuy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (2:46 pm)

    DonC: If you think that jobs are so much more important than curbing pollution, go to Beijing or Dehli and then get back to me.

    I would love to see California get back all of those jobs sent overseas. California will soon be bankrupt BECAUSE we don’t build anything here anymore. Even Toyota shut down their factory in Southern California.

    CLICK for the Report

    And I have lived here since 1959. The air quality was at it’s worst in the 70′s. We can breathe just fine today with the EXISTING laws on the books. AB-32 goes too far to please the kooks on the CARB Board of Directors.

    Yes sir. JOBS in California and the rest of the United States is far more important right now.


  149. 149
    MetrologyFirst

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MetrologyFirst
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (2:47 pm)

    Mike D: Someone tell me i’m wrong. please.

    Some people, like me, buy a car and drive it into the ground. I could care less about resale value.

    My last two new Chevy cars have been driven into the ground (180K, 260K miles), then donated to CASA for repair/parts/auction. I intend to do the same with my Pontiac (172K miles to date), if it ever dies.

    I have money down on a Volt right now; I will likely keep it forever as well.

    If you get tired of a car after 3-4 yrs and need to sell it, it wasn’t the right car to buy in the first place.


  150. 150
    nuclearboy

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nuclearboy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (3:03 pm)

    Mike D: Someone tell me i’m wrong. please.

    OK, I’ll bite. Its hot outside and I want to take a break.

    I love the Volt and want one. I am just not sure the financial argument is going to hold ground on Version 1.

    I realize the price of gas is an unknown variable. If it skyrockets, the Volt is more advantageous.

    The resale value argument you make has more than one side to it. You present a side that leaves out the issue of significant E-REV and BEV improvements. I am inclined to believe that these cars will be much better in 8 years and this will reduce the utility and desirability of today’s Volt. This won’t impact the Cruze as much.

    In 2019 we might look back the 2011 4 seat Volt with its 40 mile range, heavy battery, steel frame, standard old school ice and generator, two wheel drive, antiquated electronics, etc. etc.. Resale value may drop off if improvements happen to the newer cars. I am hoping for significant improvements in all aspects of these vehicles.

    Today, I think the Volt is a great idea and if you buy one you will benefit from being an early adopter, you will save gas, and you will have a very nice handling and quiet car. I just don’t think you will actually save money over a cheap ICE vehicle and I don’t think that matters.

    If money savings is the primary goal, fixing up a 15 year old used car probably cannot be beat.


  151. 151
    Mark Z

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark Z
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (3:08 pm)

    Looks like my Model S deposit over a year ago was a good idea. I will still consider the VOLT, but folks in the know have told me to wait for 2nd gen. Maybe by then we can change the politicians in California and Washington DC and get those credits for E-Rev too!


  152. 152
    nuclearboy

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nuclearboy
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (3:21 pm)

    Truman: Fourth, the idea of electric cars “standing on their own” misses the point that we’re in a war. On one side are oil rich dictators and Islamic terrorists.

    DonC, you are being very politically incorrect today :) .

    These poor put upon individuals (remember, you cannot use the term ISLAM and Terrorism together) are simply caught up in the process of a “man-caused-disaster” as our homeland security secretary (Janet N.) calls it.

    Janet has her eye on you.


  153. 153
    jeffhre

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    jeffhre
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (3:40 pm)

    koz: Why? Why isn’t a 40 AER Volt (or any 40 mile AER vehical) qualified as an AT-PZEV? This is the question CARB should be pondering. Do 40 AER vehicles not offer enough emmisions advantages to merit this consideration?
    Un-frickin-believable! CARB needs to get off of their azz and right this wrong. This probably means the Volt won’t qualify for automatic access to HOV lanes in the CARB states since those exemptions for HEVs just expired. All these frickin years CARB has gotten it close but wrong. Time to get it right and properly encourage the SALE of vehicles that significantly transfer energy use from gas to the wall.

    Rude dude, just plain rude. They’re doing that, results in 2013, stay tuned.

    “However, Shad Balch, GM’s energy and environment communications specialist, said that in the future (like 2013) GM is looking to get the AT-PZEV designation, which would mean the 10/150 would then come into play…along with all the other streamlining, debugging and upgrades that are going into ‘gen 2′ of the Volt.
    The real kicker to the no AT-PZEV designation (besides the lessened warranty) is that the Volt does not now qualify for the additional $5,000 state incentive. Balch said GM “knew all along” it would not earn the AT-PZEV status, and that GM sees enough early demand for the first gen of the Volt without the rebate. (apparently no one gave Bob Lutz that memo before talking to the press)” – Statik


  154. 154
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (3:44 pm)

    LRGVProVolt:
    Thanks, Tag.If I could say one more thing, it would be that everyone should pay more attention to those of you that got to test drive the Volt. Your experiences mean far more than all the negative speculation and just plain irrational statements being made. Many of the Trolls would be embarrassed if they realized how illogical their comments are.Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.  

    “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king (g). I’m loving the idea of being one of the very lucky ones to have driven the Volt, and at the same time, I wish that *everyone has had the chance. It would clear up *SO* much. But describing it is like trying to explain what the color blue is to Helen Keller.
    Soon though, soon.
    Thanks for the complement!

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet
    /got my brandy-new keyboard, but it still can’t spell
    //and I WOULD have used zero gasoline.

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  155. 155
    Eco_Turbo

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Eco_Turbo
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (3:52 pm)

    #35 koz said:

    One Volt, driven with the median driving conditions, will consume approximately 1/5 of the gas that a Prius will.

    Maybe the CARB people should be checked out to see what their relationship to the oil companies is.


  156. 156
    Tagamet

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:00 pm)

    nasaman: GM just announced the Volt battery warranty would be 8yrs/100,000 miles. Nissan hasn’t wasted any time responding to this by sending out a questionnaire to all their $99 Leaf depositors. Here it is….I have to admire how rapidly Nissan got this survey out & really hope GM will take notice!  

    Holy CROW! They are using a questionnaire to help determine the battery warranty???? Shouldn’t they maybe, like, er, determine the actual average LIFE of the battery and use that? Just getting this questionnaire would help me decide to run like a scalded dog!! JMO.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  157. 157
    ClarksonCote

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    ClarksonCote
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:04 pm)

    <RANT>
    This is an outrage (see also post #142)…

    I can understand that perhaps the Volt will produce more emissions per unit time of running the gas generator, if the generator runs in smaller intervals and hence on average, does not have as much heat available to burn off particulate emissions, etc.

    However, any such calculation of emissions on CARB’s part should factor in that for 40 miles of driving, there are no emissions period, and average those higher emissions over this amount of time.

    The other troubling piece here seems to be that the Volt is not only falling short of the AT-PZEV rating, but it’s not getting the PZEV rating either! Maybe I’m wrong here, but the CARB wiki says a PZEV also requires a 10/150k warranty. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Air_Resources_Board )

    If I had to guess, I’d say the reason for no AT-PZEV or PZEV rating is because the Volt doesn’t have “Zero Evaporative Emissions” given the nature of the generator (see the link above for requirements of each emissions standard). But again, factoring the 40 miles EV ability, this is ridiculous, and CARB should adjust their rating criteria to catch up to this new EREV implementation method.
    </RANT>

    join thE REVolution


  158. 158
    Pat

    -7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Pat
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:05 pm)

    Fisrt CA is broke ..they are in the process of cutting salaries of state employees, their benefits etc …they are in the hole for 20 billion or so …doubt they will go with this rebate …so without this it makes the same price for everyone .. GM should make profit on VOLT and put the $$$ in quality production…GM should be hell bent on quality ..they should market VOLT like BMW …quality & price ..Volt will flourish in the hands of environment conscious owners, charge the battery every night [unlike the dum dumbs who are drunk or worse by the time they roll into bed, plenty in US] now if folks dont charge the battery Volt will be like a gas car and very little reduction in oil use ..
    Volt cud also become a great export car for the rich in the rest of the world only if quality is high …

    Alas thecurrent buisness model in US dont work ….Quality is day in day out in this buisness …There is more competition out in the mkt Japanese & now Koreans … GM Ford Chrsyler need to change their buisness model spend $$$ on quality production rather than on Ads and super salesmen ..It will not cut it …Reduce the salaries of top heavy management and focus on engineers and workers ..provide incentives to them to produce quality cars …Alas it does not set well for the greedy CEO and wall st …so US suffers from jobs going to Far east


  159. 159
    Tagamet

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:07 pm)

    Mike D: Someone tell me i’m wrong. please.

    Right or wrong, your choice of language stinks.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  160. 160
    Guy Incognito

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Guy Incognito
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:14 pm)

    If GM had stayed with the original engine for the Volt, the 1.0 L Turbocharged Quad-4 with Variable Valve Timing, it probably would have gotten the AT-PZEV designation from CARB.

    This sucks, it really does.


  161. 161
    nasaman

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:23 pm)

    Tagamet, post #156:
    Holy CROW! They are using a questionnaire to help determine the battery warranty???? Shouldn’t they maybe, like, er, determine the actual average LIFE of the battery and use that? Just getting this questionnaire would help me decide to run like a scalded dog!! JMO.Be well and believe,
    Tagamet Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  

    I see the Nissan survey (see my posts #129/131) a bit differently —as simply an additional input to their decision —and perhaps a VERY IMPORTANT INPUT. When you look at the voting results at ABG thus far (roughly 50% voted for an 8yr/100,000mi warranty while only a little over 8% voted for the next lower option of 5yrs/60,000mi), it suggests to me a pretty large number of the sales Nissan had counted on from their $99 depositors will NOT occur unless Nissan at least matches the Volt announcement of 8yrs/100,000mi! To me, if the Leaf $99 depositors vote similarly, this will be a VERY important factor to Nissan! (And I admire them for doing this survey so promptly after the Volt warranty announcement.)


  162. 162
    jan

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    jan
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:35 pm)

    Doesn’t this 8 year warranty imply that the price of a new Volt will be reduced because of significantly reduced risk of premature battery failure? In other words wasn’t a $40,000 Volt including two batteries in that price @$10,000/battery. The state of California $5,000.00 is a bad deal in comparison, no?


  163. 163
    Anderson Moseley

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Anderson Moseley
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:36 pm)

    California can’t afford to give away any more of its people’s hard-earned money, anyway.

    That nearly-bankrupt state is the perfect example of Liberal/Progressive policies gone wild and a cautionary tale (that will probably be predictably ignored by, you guessed it, Liberal/Progressives).

    The Volt should stil be a hit everywhere it’s sold.


  164. 164
    Bob G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Bob G
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (4:57 pm)

    Sounds like a good reason to cancel the roll out in California and allocate those vehicles to other states that will appreciate them. I sure would love to see Volts at my dealership in the Seattle area.


  165. 165
    Dave K.

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave K.
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:07 pm)

    jan: Doesn’t this 8 year warranty imply that the price of a new Volt will be reduced because of significantly reduced risk of premature battery failure?

    Very good point. Hope GM is onboard with this thinking. GM will make money when Volt owners trade in the original T battery (in 2019?) for a lighter or stronger upgrade.

    =D-Volt


  166. 166
    JohnK

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:21 pm)

    Tagamet: May I ask how you know about the NY numbers?

    There is a thread in the forums about dealers and various things like premiums and when to expect delivery. Several dealers in the NYC area (including Connecticut) have given expected delivery (and allocation numbers) considerably before March.


  167. 167
    JohnK

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:25 pm)

    I’m back and did not even get to 50 miles and no new more upbeat article, bummer. Well, anyway it rained and that helped to counteract the heat (for a while).
    As Tag says, “Be well”. Oh, and LJGTVWOTR.


  168. 168
    Sean

    -4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Sean
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:33 pm)

    Come on GM wake up! What are you thinking?


  169. 169
    JohnK

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:37 pm)

    jan: Doesn’t this 8 year warranty imply that the price of a new Volt will be reduced because of significantly reduced risk of premature battery failure?

    Not really. The assumption (on this website) has been that if there was a problem with the battery lasting that it would be covered by the warranty. So the cost of the warranty would factor into the Volt, but allow GM to make a profit sooner if the cost of the warranty goes down. And the price of $40K was assuming a warranty on the battery that would give peace of mind to the Volt owner (8 to 10 years). Actually when you think about it the 8 year warranty means the value of the Volt is slightly diminished from what we had speculated about. So, in essence it is a RAISING of price (diminished value), but this may allow the MSRP to be one of the lower values that have been bandied about ($33K to $37K before the fed. rebate).


  170. 170
    JohnK

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:44 pm)

    nasaman: Whoa Nelly, I am getting tired of GM backstabbing their loyal customers.

    What back stabbing? If anybody is doing any backstabbing it would be the beaurocrats that have denied the CARB rating. And, you know California simply could not afford such a cost anyway — they are pretty near to bankrupcy themselves.


  171. 171
    Jimza Skeptic

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jimza Skeptic
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:55 pm)

    spu: 1.From what I could find, the CARB states are: California, New Jersey, Connecticut, Oregon, Washington, Rhode Island, New York, Maine, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Florida, Colorado, Arizona, Utah, Vermont, and 2 others… The only place I found the list was a right/left based article.2. While disappointed in the way GM presented this, especially in the webchat after the announcement, it will not affect my choice to purchase the Volt as soon as I can.I did not even realize MA was a CARB state before today and none of the other vehicles out there will meet my needs while matching the milage I will be able to get.2a. GM should have been more forthcoming in the webchat on their statement about the “different designations” (I think that was the phrase used).That could have lead to a discussion on:2b. Like others, I’m wondering why the regulation bodies do not see that a car that meets/exceeds their requirements for most of the driving for a majority of the public is a good thing.For me, the will be a ZEV for about 90% of the miles I will put on it.For me, it will be a PZEV even without the little sticker.  

    Maybe there is a lawyer in this group, but the attached California tax credit rules link also goes into the Federal Tax deduction. From what I read, it is based kWh’s. I don’t see how the VOLT qualifies for the entire $7500. I get more like $4168 if they base it on 8 kWh usable.

    https://energycenter.org/index.php/incentive-programs/clean-vehicle-rebate-project

    Maybe it is based on entire battery size, and then it falls right into $7500. But when you drill down in the supporting attachments, there are a lot of details. LOL They could have made it so simple! ;-)


  172. 172
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:56 pm)

    JohnK: Tagamet: May I ask how you know about the NY numbers?

    There is a thread in the forums about dealers and various things like premiums and when to expect delivery. Several dealers in the NYC area (including Connecticut) have given expected delivery (and allocation numbers) considerably before March.

    Most excellent! Thanks!

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  173. 173
    Lawrence Weisdorn

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Lawrence Weisdorn
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:59 pm)

    CARB seems to be laying down the gauntlet for zero emission cars and probably will not make allowances for the current version of the Volt.


  174. 174
    Tagamet

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (5:59 pm)

    Jimza Skeptic: Maybe there is a lawyer in this group, but the attached California tax credit rules link also goes into the Federal Tax deduction. From what I read, it is based kWh’s. I don’t see how the VOLT qualifies for the entire $7500. I get more like $4168 if they base it on 8 kWh usable.

    I’m sure that the wording was such that the Volt is eligible for the entire $7500 for the 16kWh battery.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  175. 175
    Jimza Skeptic

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jimza Skeptic
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:02 pm)

    What’s really funny is that the TESLA, $109,000 toy for the rich gets the rebate. And you know a majority of those people have an SUV burning gas. They only take the TESLA out to be seen. Plus they could afford the car without any rebate. ;-)


  176. 176
    Future Leaf Driver

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Future Leaf Driver
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:05 pm)

    Nasaman, are you signed up for a LEAF too?

    I voted for an extended warranty option. Always do for any new technology, especially in the $35k range!

    What’s with all the screaming here today about the $5k rebate? All early adopters pay more. Like the catman says, “it’s not always about the money!”

    GO EV!!!!

    nasaman: GM just announced the Volt battery warranty would be 8yrs/100,000 miles. Nissan hasn’t wasted any time responding to this by sending out a questionnaire to all their $99 Leaf depositors. Here it is….I have to admire how rapidly Nissan got this survey out & really hope GM will take notice!  


  177. 177
    JEC

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:14 pm)

    nasaman: Whoa Nelly, I am getting tired of GM backstabbing their loyal customers.I AM OUT !!!  

    Would the real Nasaman, please stand up?

    I thought so…


  178. 178
    Future LEAF Driver

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Future LEAF Driver
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:20 pm)

    Gotcha, that makes sense!

    GO EV!!!

    nasaman: PS to my post #129: The Leaf survey came from ABG, where you can vote for the yrs/miles you’d want the Leaf’s warranty to be. I voted for 8yrs/100,000mi in hope of “leveling the playing field”. What do you think makes sense?  


  179. 179
    JEC

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:38 pm)

    I am with nasaman ! GM has gone too far.

    I am outa here. Done with the Volt. Never really liked EREV crap anyway.


  180. 180
    Future LEAF Driver

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Future LEAF Driver
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:39 pm)

    Hey, wait a minute, where did your rocketship go?

    GO EV!!!

    nasaman:
    You bet! The Volt no longer appeals to me and many on this site as GM has alienated us severely,Go Nissan LEAF ! (No Volt for me)  


  181. 181
    Jimza Skeptic

    -7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jimza Skeptic
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:44 pm)

    I am really going to consider the Nissan LEAF as my next purchase.

    It just has so many advantages over the Volt and deserves a closer look.

    See ya.


  182. 182
    Stone Clarkson

    -10

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Stone Clarkson
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:47 pm)

    (click to show comment)


  183. 183
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:48 pm)

    Future LEAF Driver: Hey, wait a minute, where did your rocketship go?GO EV!!!
      

    I think that the warranty ran out.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  184. 184
    Comcastic

    -9

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Comcastic
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:52 pm)

    Wow $5K penalty for buying a Volt.

    Actually I think the Volt should not even qualify for the full $7500 rebate since it is not a zero emission vehicle. Perhaps $3000 federal rebate would be more appropriate for a hybrid vehicle like the Chevrolet Volt.


  185. 185
    William Ford III

    -8

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    William Ford III
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:55 pm)

    Volt early adopters just got a smack upside the head. Shake those marbles loose. Check out the Ford electrics if you get a chance, we beat the Volt on so many levels it will make your head spin.


  186. 186
    Simple Simon

    -11

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Simple Simon
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (6:57 pm)

  187. 187
    unni

    -2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    unni
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:00 pm)

    K lets make a deal :-)

    for an additional $2500 , Californians can get 10 year/150,000 , so they will get $5000 tax credit.
    50 – 50 deal , GM happy ?? ,Californians happy ??

    some time GM may ask $3500, still Californians get 2yr/50000 miles warranty + $1500 back :-)

    man , time for solutions ,


  188. 188
    nasaman

    -2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:02 pm)

    Hey, who’s trying to hijack me! Confess you dolt!
    (whispers, “It’s me, Tagamet)(hee hee)

    er,
    nasaman


  189. 189
    Tim in SC

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tim in SC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:25 pm)

    Isn’t California broke? How in the hell would they be able to pay for it anyway when they are having to pay their state employees minimum wage?


  190. 190
    JEC

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:27 pm)

    Ok, now that I had a couple beers, and some time to reflect on what this all means to the Volt nation, here is my best take on todays news:

    1) CA Volt buyers will pay what everyone else does.
    2) The Leaf gets a leg up on the Volt with regards to the CARB credits. This really seems to be a smaller issue than I originally thought. Seems like CA is going to only have a very limited number of rebates.
    3) The Volt will sell with or w/o CARB adherence.
    4) The states with CARB seem to have no real idea how to qualify a vehicle as CARB. Technology is changing quicker than our politicians can mandate. To bad for GM, and others who lose out to poorly designed CARB rules/regulations.
    5) Prices of battery based cars are going to drop in the next 5 years. This makes early adopters, become the ones dishing out (and willingly) the extra bucks.
    6) Things they are a changin’


  191. 191
    nasaman

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:28 pm)

    ATTN ALL GM-VOLT.COM READERS: The numerous “nasaman” posts since #161 are all fakes (therefore defamatory)! Unless my user name is in ***green*** the post is false!!!

    Please —everyone— ignor all “nasaman” posts subsequent to post #161


  192. 192
    Red HHR

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Red HHR
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:28 pm)

    Truman: Only since the botched invasion of Iraq has the Saudi Arabia dictatorship (the Royal Family) started to worry about its Protector’s competence, and has since began buying weapons from China, making oil deals with China, and started planning for a post-US future.

    I believe China *is* buying more oil from Saudi Arabia than we are.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/20/business/energy-environment/20saudi.html


  193. 193
    JEC

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:30 pm)

    JEC: I am with nasaman ! GM has gone too far.I am outa here. Done with the Volt. Never really liked EREV crap anyway.  

    Imposter alert!


  194. 194
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:32 pm)

    nasaman: ATTN ALL GM-VOLT.COM READERS: The numerous “nasaman” posts since #161 are all fakes! (unless my user name is in ***green*** the post is false!!!)  

    OK, so what’s the code for green text (g)?

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  195. 195
    jscott1000

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    jscott1000
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:34 pm)

    Why is this forum suddenly being spammed with a bunch of trolls?

    The Volt doesn’t need the $5K rebate from CARB. End of story. Nothing to see here. Move along.

    ——————-

    Did anyone else get the survey from NISSAN? Looks like they are very nervous about their battery warranty. Reading between the lines it appears they will offer a 5 year 60,000 mile battery warranty and offer an option to extend it. Most of the questions on the survey pertained to how much one might be willing to pay for a better warranty. In this case I think the Volt comes out on top.


  196. 196
    Red HHR

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Red HHR
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:44 pm)

    DonC: Making sure oil does not power our transportation system is not a market based exercise, it’s a question of national security and economic survival, which is why thinking about the market based viability of alternative fuel vehicles is so misplaced. The market may not, absent government intervention, produce tanks and planes, but that doesn’t mean you don’t need them.

    This just bears repeating, every gallon of imported oil makes our nation doubly poor. Or if it middle eastern oil, something like a gunshot to the foot, or worse…


  197. 197
    Dave K.

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave K.
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:53 pm)

    Looks better in Victory Red (top) w/ Euro hood.

    =D-Volt

    red-volt.jpg

    volt_red.jpg


  198. 198
    Red HHR

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Red HHR
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (7:57 pm)

    unni: OK lets make a deal :-)

    for an additional $2500 , Californians can get 10 year/150,000 , so they will get $5000 tax credit.
    50 – 50 deal , GM happy ?? ,Californians happy ??

    some time GM may ask $3500, still Californians get 2yr/50000 miles warranty + $1500 back :-)

    man , time for solutions ,

    Sounds good to me. If I lived in California, a state mandated warranty, assuming I liked warranties.
    So are we going to see the hinted at price of $32,500 without the warranty, for the rest of us?


  199. 199
    Matthew B

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Matthew B
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:01 pm)

    Guy Incognito:

    The reason the Volt doesn’t meet CARB is because GM is unwilling to buy off on a long enough battery warranty.

    A more fuel efficient engine won’t solve that problem.


  200. 200
    Red HHR

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Red HHR
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:09 pm)

    Dave K.: Looks better in Victory Red (top) w/ Euro hood.

    =D-Volt

    I am still not 100% convinced that is Victory Red. My HHR and Colorado are Victory red. However Victory Red must be cheaper than the metallic Cadillac Red that I think the photo is of, and I would be happy to put the savings in my pocket. So what is with black roof? Faux photocells?


  201. 201
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:25 pm)

    That red color is really stunning.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet


  202. 202
    Texas

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Texas
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:26 pm)

    Things that feel wrong usually get corrected. It simply does not make sense that the Volt would not qualify for any emission or efficiency standard. It is better than ANY non-plug-in hybrid or ICE car. Period. Only a pure EV will be better but those are just toys for now, until the infrastructure is in place and quick-charge or swap stations are everywhere.

    Thus, this will be corrected, if it’s a problem. Remember, you still get the $7,500 rebate so stop your whining. ;)


  203. 203
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:47 pm)

    In less than a year, some of us will be tooling around in our Volts. With luck, things will never be the same (g).

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  204. 204
    Dave K.

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave K.
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (8:56 pm)

    Red HHR: I am still not 100% convinced that is Victory Red.

    You may be right on this. Checked a photo of a 2010 Camaro in Victory red. Looks similar, but slightly more orange.

    Very close to the red w/ black accents Mach 1. Have always loved this look.

    =D-Volt

    red%20mach1.bmp

    red-volt.jpg


  205. 205
    WopOnTour

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    WopOnTour
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:00 pm)

    JEC: So how do they charge this 12 V battery? In a traditional ICE you always have the motor spinning, so the altenator will charge the battery. But, with a EREV/BEV, you may be sitting still in traffic for a long time, and now at night time, you could drain your battery.

    My guess is that the BEV/EREV uses a small inverter, that will keep the battery charged, but would not be sufficient to provide cranking amps. Also for the Volt, maybe if the 12V is losing capacity, the ICE kicks in and they use a more traditional alternator to charge it. The alternator could be linked to the drive, so that when the vehicle is moving it is charging, so you would not be draining your battery in normal moving mode.

    Hmmm…I never considered this before. Anyone got a better answer? I am probably missing something obvious, but it avoids me at the moment

    The Volt has a 12-Volt AGM battery in the rear of the vehicle (accessible through an access panel under the hatchback’s luggage space.) It is constantly being charged by a DC-DC converter (aka auxillary power module, also in the rear of the car) whenever the Volt is “ON”. This converter converts the ~345-360V available at the main battery down to 13-15.5V (it has numerous voltage “setpoints”) and will control current output to deal with varying loads on the 12V system. So no conventional belt driven “alternator” is required.Most of the Volt’s control, enterainment and comfort systems still operate off the conventional 12-Volt rail.
    HTH
    WopOnTour


  206. 206
    Gary

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Gary
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:10 pm)

    Dot Nyet: Volt is not EV it is officially a HYBRID. You are being like GM Management, very very misleading. This shit will come back to haunt you my friendo.

    I was referring to the Tesla Roadster in my sentence, not the Volt. I wasn’t the one misleading. You misled yourself by not reading and interpreting my post properly. Please, put some thought into responses before putting fingers to keyboard. As cheap as disk storage is nowadays, you’re wasting precious space on this web server. Ugh.

    Children.


  207. 207
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:12 pm)

    Matthew B: The reason the Volt doesn’t meet CARB is because GM is unwilling to buy off on a long enough battery warranty.

    *If* that’s true then CARB just needs to change. Simple.

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  208. 208
    Like_Budda

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Like_Budda
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:14 pm)

    john1701a: Two-Mode actually have a dirtier emission rating than their traditional counterpart. The of cleansing equipment combined with the efficiency penalty made pursuing cleaner a low priority. For Volt, it’s an even greater challenge, since the engine gets used even less. For the catalytic-converter to function, it requires heat. Normally, that heat is provided by waste energy from the engine. Volt strives to avoid waste. Minimal use of fuel means minimal exhaust cleansing available.To make the situation even worse, the better emission ratings require longer operational durations. ULEV is only 100,000 miles. For SULEV, it’s 120,000. For PZEV, it’s 150,000.  (Quote)

    John you’re a turd. The 2-mode does NOT have a dirtier tail-pipe than an equivalent full-size pickup. It operates up to 30-35mph WITH ZERO FUEL (and NOTHING at the tail-pipe) just like your beloved Prius. (I should know I now own THREE of them and I love-em!)
    Quit making shit up! Pot-stick!!
    .LB


  209. 209
    JEC

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JEC
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:30 pm)

    WopOnTour:
    The Volt has a 12-Volt AGM battery in the rear of the vehicle (accessible through an access panel under the hatchback’s luggage space.) It is constantly being charged by a DC-DC converter (aka auxillary power module, also in the rear of the car) whenever the Volt is “ON”. This converter converts the ~345-360V available at the main battery down to 13-15.5V (it has numerous voltage “setpoints”) and will control current output to deal with varying loads on the 12V system. So no conventional belt driven “alternator” is required.Most of the Volt’s control, enterainment and comfort systems still operate off the conventional 12-Volt rail.
    HTH
    WopOnTour  

    Thanks. I am not sure how I missed this for so long. Sounds like the right solution.


  210. 210
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:31 pm)

    Tomorrow. Stay tuned (g)

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet


  211. 211
    Red HHR

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Red HHR
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:36 pm)

    Dave K.: Very close to the red w/ black accents Mach 1. Have always loved this look

    Had a Ford J-Car when I was a kid, fastest car in town.
    a382r.jpg
    A bit fond of the red black scheme myself..


  212. 212
    JohnK

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:38 pm)

    I consider this OT: got to admit that the red Volt is a real head turner. But in the hot sun… dunno…
    And what is with the trolls pretending to be regulars? Is there a way to see where a poster came from? I’ve seen people talk about web addresses. How do you find the IP address of a poster? Am I asking too many questions?


  213. 213
    Tagamet

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (9:59 pm)

    JohnK: I consider this OT: got to admit that the red Volt is a real head turner.But in the hot sun… dunno…
    And what is with the trolls pretending to be regulars?Is there a way to see where a poster came from?I’ve seen people talk about web addresses.How do you find the IP address of a poster?Am I asking too many questions?  

    Never too many questions. One thing that’s hard(er) to fake is the gravitar, like nasaman’s shuttle or my cats. When someone was spoofing nm tonight (pretending to be him) I grabbed his gravitar and posted like him, so it was his gravitar and name, but if you then looked at all MY gravitars – they were then nasaman’s. I then changed them back.
    The IP can be tracked with programs like “traceroute”. It graphically shows all the nodes that the signal has come through and how many milleseconds it took on each leg of the trip. Since most people are set up with “dynamic IP addresses”, the info isn’t TOO useful unless you are the admin of the site Lyle can do a LOT of cool stuff. Good thing that he’s on the light side of the Force (g).
    Does an of that help?

    Be well and believe,
    Tagamet

    Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS


  214. 214
    Truman

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Truman
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:03 pm)

    DonC:
    You’ve set forth the traditional State Department justification for supporting Saudi Arabia. That approach simply hasn’t worked, as the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center, planned and carried out by Saudis, made clear. Let’s admit it has been a failure and move on.

    They didn’t really play up the fact that 15/19 of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, now did they. Instead, they sold a War on Terror, and invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. That should give you some indication as to the likelihood of your wishful thinking on the Saudi Arabia-US relationship – they aren’t going to admit “failure” and move on, because it is the Saudi dictator billionaires who are the allies of the US, not the Saudi people that have no democratic rights. The Saudi billionaires hate their Saudi domestic terrorists, like the early al-Qaida members that blew up the Khobar Towers that housed US Air Force personnel, just as much as the US Government hates people like Timothy McVeigh, Bronze Star decorated US Army veteran of the first Gulf War:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khobar_Towers_bombing
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

    The Saudi brand of Islam, Wahabi Islam, is a huge threat to Western democracies. Saudi oil wealth funds terrorism throughout the world, including all the Madrassas in Pakistan and Indonesia. The only way to stop Islamic terrorism is to cut off its funding, and the only way to cut off its funding is destroy oil as a strategic resource.

    You will find that, in your “free market democracy”, you will never be offered a “vote” on the details of US foreign policy. No matter how you feel about Saudi Arabia, the people that run the US find them useful allies, many years after 9/11/2001, and will continue to use the relationship until China steals them away.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=5769819&page=1
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aKfmA4fMrsbM

    The worlds largest consumer of oil will not break with OPECs biggest producer of oil willingly:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC

    But you’re right, what’s good for you is not the same as what is called US “national interests”.
    Not that that knowledge will help you any.


  215. 215
    Red HHR

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Red HHR
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:19 pm)

    More red Volts…
    red-volt.jpg
    http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/07/first-look-chevrolet-volt-in-red/
    They say it is Crystal Red…


  216. 216
    JBFALASKA

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JBFALASKA
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (10:32 pm)

    Looks like the nuts came out tonight. Actually, just one, since the person clearly uses the same words and logs in as different individuals.

    Oh well.

    Simpler math for that Simple Simon – AMERICA exports more than $100 billion dollars per year for oil. AMERICA could buy every American an electric with that money, instead mild subsidies will help do to the Middle-East what all our attempts to now couldn’t do. We had a terrible experience in the 1970s when the Arab nations cut us off, yet we did nothing. Glad there is change coming.


  217. 217
    koz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:04 pm)

    jeffhre: Rude dude, just plain rude. They’re doing that, results in 2013, stay tuned.“However, Shad Balch, GM’s energy and environment communications specialist, said that in the future (like 2013) GM is looking to get the AT-PZEV designation, which would mean the 10/150 would then come into play…along with all the other streamlining, debugging and upgrades that are going into ‘gen 2′ of the Volt.The real kicker to the no AT-PZEV designation (besides the lessened warranty) is that the Volt does not now qualify for the additional $5,000 state incentive. Balch said GM “knew all along” it would not earn the AT-PZEV status, and that GM sees enough early demand for the first gen of the Volt without the rebate. (apparently no one gave Bob Lutz that memo before talking to the press)” – Statik  (Quote)

    I don’t want to be for a 10 yr battery warranty. Actually, I don’t even want to pay for an 8 yr warranty. My preference would be a 5 yr warranty standard with an option to pay for 8 years if one so chooses. My frustration is that CARB is mandating that vehicles like the Volt are required to have a 10yr warranty to qualify as an AT-PZEV (or even a PZEV) in the first place.

    This is rediculous with a capital R. CARB has been trying to bring about meaningful change in automotive emissions for a long time now. The does this in a big way, yet it qualifies as nothing. All a 10yr warranty does is add cost or raise the bar too high for some EREVs to bepractical if they want to meet CARB’s rules. The whole point of the 10 yr warranty was to insure the credited low emmission designation for HEVs like the Prius would be met for at least the first 10 years (150K miles) of the vehicles life. The Volt does not have this issue. Even if GM allows the car to function if the battery dies, it can only function in a limp home mode at best. I can understand if the vehicle still remains mostly functional like today’s HEVs do, but I cannot understand this logic applied to the Volt.

    Personally, I don’t care that much if the Volt gets an addition $5K rebate or not but it should certainly qualify for whatever incentives (if any) are being offered for AT-PZEVs.


  218. 218
    Michael

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Michael
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:05 pm)

    Red HHR:
    They say it is Crystal Red…  

    Crystal Red Metallic Tintcoat is what GM said it was going to come in.


  219. 219
    koz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:12 pm)

    Dave K.: You may be right on this. Checked a photo of a 2010 Camaro in Victory red. Looks similar, but slightly more orange. Very close to the red w/ black accents Mach 1. Have always loved this look.=D-Volt  (Quote)

    Ummm…isn’t that a mustang?


  220. 220
    jeffhre

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    jeffhre
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2010 (11:58 pm)

    koz:
    I don’t want to be for a 10 yr battery warranty. Actually, I don’t even want to pay for an 8 yr warranty. My preference would be a 5 yr warranty standard with an option to pay for 8 years if one so chooses. My frustration is that CARB is mandating that vehicles like the Volt are required to have a 10yr warranty to qualify as an AT-PZEV (or even a PZEV) in the first place.This is rediculous with a capital R. CARB has been trying to bring about meaningful change in automotive emissions for a long time now. The does this in a big way, yet it qualifies as nothing. All a 10yr warranty does is add cost or raise the bar too high for some EREVs to bepractical if they want to meet CARB’s rules. The whole point of the 10 yr warranty was to insure the credited low emmission designation for HEVs like the Prius would be met for at least the first 10 years (150K miles) of the vehicles life. The Volt does not have this issue. Even if GM allows the car to function if the battery dies, it can only function in a limp home mode at best. I can understand if the vehicle still remains mostly functional like today’s HEVs do, but I cannot understand this logic applied to the Volt.Personally, I don’t care that much if the Volt gets an addition $5K rebate or not but it should certainly qualify for whatever incentives (if any) are being offered for AT-PZEVs.  

    Do you write the law and build the cars to meet it, or do you build several cars and then write the laws to fit one of the cars?

    If you did the second one would one it pass the tests of favoritism and no laws by fiat?

    If the law has already been written who is responsible for meeting it; CARB or the OEM’s?

    Existing PZEV’s 2009
    2009 Toyota Camry Hybrid
    2009 Volkswagen GLI
    2009 Subaru Forester
    2009 Subaru Outback
    2009 Subaru Legacy PZEV – sedan and wagon
    2009 Honda Civic GX–runs on Compressed Natural Gas is categorized as AT-PZEV
    2009 Mazda MAZDA6 i SV
    2009 Mazda MAZDA6 i Sport
    2009 Mazda MAZDA6 i Touring
    2009 Mazda MAZDA6 i Grand Touring


  221. 221
    Roy H

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Roy H
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (12:09 am)

    jan: Doesn’t this 8 year warranty imply that the price of a new Volt will be reduced because of significantly reduced risk of premature battery failure?In other words wasn’t a $40,000 Volt including two batteries in that price @$10,000/battery.The state of California $5,000.00 is a bad deal in comparison, no?  

    That was pure speculation from several years ago. GM has told us for a long time now that they are confident that the battery will last beyond the warranty, we just didn’t know if the warranty was 100k miles or 150k miles. If this second battery was required then the car would undoubtedly be over $40k.


  222. 222
    carcus3

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    carcus3
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (1:33 am)

    221 posts on this subject, and the term “cold start” was used ONCE ???! — This is why I don’t have much desire to post here anymore.

    Who’s Killing the Plug-In Hybrid?
    http://www.eastbayexpress.com/gyrobase/whos-killing-the-plug-in-hybrid/Content?oid=1176188&showFullText=true


  223. 223
    Johnny B. Good

    -6

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Johnny B. Good
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (1:57 am)

    #49 has part of the answer.

    The other part is in the following….
    “Balch said GM “knew all along” it would not earn the AT-PZEV status”

    They knew but finally told all of you. What else do they know that we don’t other than price?
    Yup, MPG. That’s your next heartbreak for you. Price will be strike 3.

    And for all you goons who don’t bother to research before you blab your idiotic mouths, the Judge decided the Governator did not have the right to reduce state employees to minimum wage. You’d know that if you bothered to look it up you idiots.


  224. 224
    K Newman

    -2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    K Newman
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (2:02 am)

    I am not surprised by the Volt not meeting CARB requirements (just wait till we find out how much gas the four cylinder engine uses).

    Since I travel in excess of 40 miles the days I leave my home office, I am primarily concerned with the MPG AFTER the electricity is used up. In addition, I was hoping that the Volt would be “clean” enough to qualify for a HOV designation–this seems like a fast fading hope.

    So far, there are more negative coming out now than positives (low production numbers, higher price gouging from Chevy Dealers wanting to maximize profit, no CARB Designation meaning less change of a HOV designation in most states, no ability to CONSERVE the battery power by turning on the gas engine before the 40 mile battery charge is depleated and possibly lower gas mileage)

    GM you have to come up with a “Killer APP” like offering a Propane version of the Volt or the ability to purchase an optional (GM approved) battery pack which could use most of the Volt’s trunk space)


  225. 225
    Dave K.

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave K.
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (4:24 am)

    K Newman: (just wait till we find out how much gas the four cylinder engine uses).

    I believe the 1.4L mpg will range from 39-49 depending on driving style. Saw an article today that mentioned a Volt MSRP of “about 35k”. Don’t know if this is an inside number. Or if it’s just another guess. May have something to do with the recent battery warranty news. Should get more details on CS mpg, options, and MSRP sometime in August. Expect ordering to begin by September 1st.

    =D-Volt


  226. 226
    taser54

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    taser54
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (7:01 am)

    K Newman: I am not surprised by the Volt not meeting CARB requirements (just wait till we find out how much gas the four cylinder engine uses).Since I travel in excess of 40 miles the days I leave my home office, I am primarily concerned with the MPG AFTER the electricity is used up.In addition, I was hoping that the Volt would be “clean” enough to qualify for a HOV designation–this seems like a fast fading hope.So far, there are more negative coming out now than positives (low production numbers, higher price gouging from Chevy Dealers wanting to maximize profit, no CARB Designation meaning less change of a HOV designation in most states, no ability to CONSERVE the battery power by turning on the gas engine before the 40 mile battery charge is depleated and possibly lower gas mileage)GM you have to come up with a “Killer APP” like offering a Propane version of the Volt or the ability to purchase an optional (GM approved) battery pack which could use most of the Volt’s trunk space)  

    Really sounds like the Volt isn’t for you. You dwell on the “negatives” and feel the need to make assumptions that are negative. Have fun working from your home office and buy some other car that fits your long distance needs. Oh and come back an tell us what you bought so we can tell you what the negatives are. You know, just so we can practice your style too.

    ——————————-


  227. 227
    koz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (7:11 am)

    jeffhre: Do you write the law and build the cars to meet it, or do you build several cars and then write the laws to fit one of the cars? If you did the second one would one it pass the tests of favoritism and no laws by fiat? If the law has already been written who is responsible for meeting it; CARB or the OEM’s?Existing PZEV’s 20092009 Toyota Camry Hybrid2009 Volkswagen GLI2009 Subaru Forester2009 Subaru Outback2009 Subaru Legacy PZEV – sedan and wagon2009 Honda Civic GX–runs on Compressed Natural Gas is categorized as AT-PZEV2009 Mazda MAZDA6 i SV2009 Mazda MAZDA6 i Sport2009 Mazda MAZDA6 i Touring2009 Mazda MAZDA6 i Grand Touring  (Quote)

    The AT-PZEV designation was newly added, I believe, in the last 2 years. The Volt’s and other architecture was roughly known by this time, not that it matters since the “full” series architecture was invented long before. CARB could easily have imagined what these vehicles would be like and what the benefits would be. They should have incorporated a meaningful designation to encourge displacing energy use from gas to the wall via this architecture long ago. That is the intent of the ZEV designation, correct?

    If memory serves:
    When the original mandates were gutted (as they should have been) PZEV and AT-PZEV designations should have been born at that time (1996ish). This is where the technology capailities lay. Instead, the first stuck with BEVs as a lesser goal and allowed themselves to be strongarmed/coerced into kicking the can down the road favoring fuel cells. In fact, I believe PZEV designation and benefits weren’t defined until AFTER Honda and Toyota were in final design (1999).

    Laws (legislation) is changed all of the time. Times change, and legislation should change with or in CARB’s case, ahead of it. The concept of not righting and egregious wrong in CARB’s classifications out of fear of the appearance of impropriety seems awfully foolish. “Let’s not properly support a technology that will displace 80-90% of tailpipe emmissions on a fleetwide basis because we don’t want people to think we’re doing it for the wrong reason.” Wasn’t that pooch screwed when BEVs were cast aside in favor of hydrogen? Incidentally, gasoline consumption (and thus tailpipe emmissions to a very similar extent) of a 40AER EREV like the Volt will be reduced by roughly 80-90% across the fleet from those HEVs you mention.

    Do you believe Volts with a non-functioning main battery would be a pratically operable vehicle? If this is so, then a battery warranty restriction should apply. If not, then it should not.

    Yes, I am being very critical of CARB here but I am not against CARB in general. Unlike many others, I feel they have done some good as it relates to pushing technology to reduce tailpipe emmissions. They have done a lot of good outside of automobiles as well. Wasn’t CARB initiated in the late 60′s and instrumental in improving LA’s (and the rest of CA) air polution. I don’t think they are infallible, however. They have made several mistakes in their automotive mandates and this is another one. Fortunately, there is an active review and updating process which has improved the legislation over time. This is just another growth opportunity for them, IMO :)


  228. 228
    koz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (7:25 am)

    carcus3: 221 posts on this subject, and the term “cold start” was used ONCE ???! — This is why I don’t have much desire to post here anymore.Who’s Killing the Plug-In Hybrid?http://www.eastbayexpress.com/gyrobase/whos-killing-the-plug-in-hybrid/Content?oid=1176188&showFullText=true  (Quote)

    If the mean commute is around 28 miles and the mean number of 40+ mile drives in a year is around 15, how much discussion do you propose should be dedicated to Volt cold starts?


  229. 229
    koz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    koz
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (7:31 am)

    Oh…BTW all you negative Nellies out there. You just lost your Volt is only for California, only to meet CARB EV2 argument.

    The post tops to balance on are dwindling.


  230. 230
    Eco_Turbo

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Eco_Turbo
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (8:22 am)

    Tell Californians not to worry, the non CARB states will be happy to share the clean air created by Volt use. I’ve heard of no bans on second hand air… at least not yet…


  231. 231
    Ali Moni

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Ali Moni
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (10:40 am)

    Mike D: Mike D Says
     
    Jul 17th, 2010 (1:35 pm)

    Dude! You might not be right but you sure are FUNNY! Thanks for the morning laugh!


  232. 232
    Matthew B

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Matthew B
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (4:15 pm)

    Tagamet: Matthew B: The reason the Volt doesn’t meet CARB is because GM is unwilling to buy off on a long enough battery warranty.

    TAG: *If* that’s true then CARB just needs to change. Simple

    For the *IF* part, read Statik’s article again.

    For the “CARB” needs to change part, yep, they need to change and I posted such earlier. Just don’t expect anything because on the list of what is dysfunctional in California’s government, CARB is way down the list.


  233. 233
    Jimza Skeptic

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jimza Skeptic
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (8:44 pm)

    Jimza Skeptic: I am really going to consider the Nissan LEAF as my next purchase.It just has so many advantages over the Volt and deserves a closer look.See ya.  

    This is not the real Jimza Skeptic… They have hi-jacked my name.


  234. 234
    jdsv

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    jdsv
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2010 (10:04 pm)

    I just love the LEAF troll coming on the board and wasting his time. Doesn’t he/she/he-she understand that we support LEAF sales, but it’s just not the right car for all of us?

    I currently live in a one-vehicle household, commuting 34 miles round-trip and requiring semi-frequent but necessary 160 mile trips one-way. If his or anyone’s claim is that the EREV is a useless, polluting intermediary to EVs, I have a question for him.

    Which is better for the environment :
    1) Buying a LEAF for commuting and then a cheap ICE for the trips
    or
    2) Buying a single vehicle that will cover all driving for 8+ years

    Why would I double my vehicle footprint just to transform dollars into emissions? It’s amazing how a perfect, doubly-ideal solution for some can be spun as irresponsible by others.


  235. 235
    DaveP

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DaveP
     Says

     

    Jul 19th, 2010 (1:48 am)

    This is just kind of mind boggling. How could the Volt NOT get the AT-PZEV rating? For goodness sakes, the 2010 Chevy Cobalt has a PZEV rating.
    http://www.greenercars.org/highlights_greenest.htm

    I have this weird suspicion they didn’t want to meet the 10/150k battery warranty so they just didn’t meet the rest of the requirements. Or they DID meet the rest of the requirements. Whichever, but my suspicion is the factor they didn’t want to meet was the extended battery warranty. Balch just says GM knew all along the Volt wouldn’t meet the AT-PZEV standard… He doesn’t say why. If they knew all along they weren’t going to warranty the battery that long that would fit just as well as if they knew the evaporative emissions weren’t good enough or something.

    SO, if it turns out the new Cruze gets a PZEV rating, we’ll have a good indication that I was right… :) they just didn’t want to meet the battery warranty. We’ll see what happens.

    Good investigative journalism, Statik. :)


  236. 236
    LeoK

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    LeoK
     Says

     

    Jul 19th, 2010 (9:11 am)

    nuclearboy: Lets look at this from the cold calculating view of a non-Californian and non Carb state resident.1. GM will produce 40,000 Volts over two years.2. GM will sell all 40,000 Volts over two years.3. A CARB based rebate will not spur more early adopters (see number 2)4. A CARB rebate is not needed in this case (see number 2)5. GM is not losing any market share because of this (see number 2).It looks like this will be a little more of a basic economic purchase. Those who were going to rely on the extra $5K to purchase the car will have to get out of the way and allow those who are willing to pay more for the car have it. This is how things should work in a situation where there is limited supply (see number 1).CA and CARB states should save their money and pay down their debt. The Volt does not need them. Go fix some pot holes.  (Quote)

    AMEN +1.

    I agree with many that GM should have / could have been more forthcoming…. but any government rebate, federal or state, is coming from TAXPAYER MONEY. There is NO REASON to spend additional taxpayer funds on a vehicle that will be in limited supply and sell out every copy for at least 2 years. GM may actually be doing these CARB states a favor.


  237. 237
    Charlie H

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Charlie H
     Says

     

    Jul 19th, 2010 (9:17 am)

    Tagamet: *If* that’s true then CARB just needs to change. Simple.Be well and believe,TagametLet’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS  (Quote)

    Typical Volt fan… the world should change to accomodate the Volt – and GM.

    One important element of CARB’s mission is to ensure that vehicles sold under PZEV or ZEV rules have low emissions during their entire life span. What are the dirtiest cars on the road? The old ones, of course, with failing emissions systems (or systems doctored by the owner because it’s cheaper than fixing them).

    Requiring long warranty is very much in keeping with CARB’s mission. And they provide a significant benefit to the manufacturer, a $5K tax credit.

    Check this doc from CARB:
    http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/factsheets/zev_tutorial.pdf

    Look at page 129; it’s clear CARB thought this vehicle would be certified.

    Yet, it isn’t. Why? The most obvious answer is that GM was unwilling to put a long warranty on the battery. And there can be only one reason for that… GM has no confidence that they won’t end up shelling out a LOT of money for failed batteries if they extend the warranty to meet CARB standards.


  238. 238
    Truman

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Truman
     Says

     

    Jul 19th, 2010 (10:31 am)

    Charlie H:
    it’sclear CARB thought this vehicle would be certified.Yet, it isn’t.Why?

    The most obvious answer is that GM was unwilling to put a long warranty on the battery.And there can be only one reason for that… GM has no confidence that they won’t end up shelling out a LOT of money for failed batteries if they extend the warranty to meet CARB standards.  

    You’ll just have to buy one of those other cars with a 10 year/150,000 mile warranty on their li-ion battery.

    Oh right, there aren’t any.


  239. 239
    RVD

    -3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    RVD
     Says

     

    Jul 19th, 2010 (11:16 am)

    So many and so negative: -49, -43, -36, -24, etc. I did not see you be so negative, voltfans. Bad day, ha? Wait till you see and drive Volt, it is going to be an EPIC FAILURE!


  240. 240
    Impulse power

    -2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Impulse power
     Says

     

    Jul 19th, 2010 (11:18 am)

    That is so weak on GM’s part, I was originally leaning towards the volt at one point but now it will be the leaf that is so dumb how they could not not even get PZEV AT, how hopeless. My civic hybrid is almost 6 years old and it has PZEV-AT, GM couldnt even do this in 2010. I live in Cali so will save a lot more money and getting the state credit for LEAF.


  241. 241
    Charlie H

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Charlie H
     Says

     

    Jul 19th, 2010 (8:14 pm)

    Mike D: Whoever keeps leaving the troll-esqe negative comments over and over under different names is helarious. I think one day after i buy a volt i’m going to make a specific webpage dedicated to showing my exact ongoing cost savings with the car, from purchase forward, just to show all of the people under the “you have to make up the purchase price difference in direct fuel savings” flag that they’re effing retards.You buy a volt with a couple options, 32k out the door after tax credit.You’d pay 20k for a cruze.This is where all of the RETARDS step in and say “ok, now that means you now need to make up $12,000 worth of gas savings, and that takes 345345346 years!!!!!!!!”They’re retards because they don’t take into account the biggest cost of buying a new car, which is the price that you sell it for, however many years later when you sell it. Theoretically, you would be better off, financially, in a car that cost $40,000 and was magically still worth $40,000 5-8 years later, even if it only got 15 MPG.I’m not a psychic and can’t tell for sure the exact market value of what a volt will be when 5-8 years old, because i don’t have a time machine, and neither do you, but it isn’t very hard to forecast. Hybrids hold their value very well… because they last… because that’s the point of having one… so using them as an example, and using the steep value drop of ICE cars after 5-8 years, we know that the 20k brand new cruze will be worth about 3000-6000 when it’s 8 years old. So you’re losing between 14k and 17k on your cruze, mileage aside.An 8 year old volt will be worth what? Let’s see, being that it’s battery warranty is just now expiring, that means it’s still getting 40 miles avg on a charge, keep in mind it’s only the end of the WARRANTY, not the end of the LIFE. (Products don’t have warranties that are only a hair shorter than the avg life of the product, it’s too risky for the business due to too many replacements). So your 8 year old volt is still going to have an average AER of 40 when it’s 8 years old, and slowly degrade down to 30 over the next 5 years, 20 over the next 5. I shit you not, an 18 year old volt will still be able to function, just have a short 20ish mile AER. So what will it be worth when 8 years old? Since it cost $32k out the door after rebate, because you got 1 or 2 options over base price, the effective price of the car was still $39,000ish when you purchased it. The $7500 rebate which still stands (who cares about an extra 5k in 17 states? you people are…yup…..i’m going to say it again….RETARDS!!!) So since you bought a $39,000 car, what will it be worth in 8 years being that it’s electric, very advanced, will still have a 40 mile AER and will still last much longer, and will be just barely out of warranty. $17 to 20k? I think 20 is a very very fair value estimate for 8 years.But you only paid 32k for it, so you only lost $12,000-$15,000 over those 8 years. The 20k cruze owner whose ice car will be worth 3k to 6k after 8 years will have lost $14,000 to $17,000. About the same, but the volt edges it out; and that’s FUEL SAVINGS ASIDE. Which uses less fuel? hmmmmmmmmmmm????Someone please tell me i’m wrong. All of you effing idiots who say the volt doesn’t make financial sense, please read this post SLOWLY and CAREFULLY and tell me i’m wrong. All of the people who say “you have to make up the direct purchase price difference between a hybrid/electric and a gas car in direct fuel savings” ARE RETARTED!!! ALL OF YOU!! THERE ARE SO MANY OF YOU!!!! AND NONE OF YOU USE YOUR BRAIN!!! hahaha. You don’t realize the 5k extra for the hybrid is still going to make it worth 3-5k more than a comparable ICE car when you sell it down the road, so you don’t need to save $5000 in fuel, more like 1-2k!!!! DUUUHHHHH!!!!!Someone tell me i’m wrong. please.  (Quote)

    OK. You’re wrong.

    The “steep drop” in ICE resale values does not afect all cars equally. Some hold their value far better than others (e.g, Toyota or Honda vs GM). The Prius has certainly held its value v-e-r-y well but the battery in the Prius is only a $2300 part – about the cost of an automatic transmission, which is a price people are often willing to accept in an 8 year old car.

    The Volt, however, is a different matter. The battery’s price is a complete vehicle killer. This will make people extremely suspicious of Volts that are at or near the end of their warranty period. Then, it’s also a GM. GM has, historically, had beaucoup problems with First Model Year cars, never mind the troubles they’ve had with advanced technology. I believe they recalled ALL of the first year or so of both the BAS and two-mode vehicles for battery issues. It’s hard to get firm information on that, of course, because few were sold, so the sample size is small and, frankly, no one really cares about those market failures. There’s a fair amount of other anectdotal evidence of two-mode troubles floating around, too. GM still has a fair amount of trouble getting it right, both in FMY and in AT.

    The resale on the Volt is not likely to be particularly impressive. Ergo, the costs on this thing, even factoring in depreciation, are going to be high.

    Want to save money on transportation? Get a bicycle. You can pick one up at places like Goodwill for a surprisingly small sum. It may need a bit of reconditioning but developing your basic mechanical skills fixing up a bike is a worthwhile thing to do. Once you’ve got it going, the operational costs are negligible. And the exercise is likely to be a good thing for the keyboard pilots around here.

    Don’t draw any conclusions from lease rates, by the way. GM has a long and sad history of playing games with lease rates and credit (see the history of GMAC for further information).


  242. 242
    CarZin

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CarZin
     Says

     

    Jul 20th, 2010 (8:15 am)

    Spectacular. Personally, I’d like all the manufacturer’s to thumb their noses at California regulations. These regulations cost everyone in the entire U.S., not just people in California.


  243. 243
    Jason the Saj

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jason the Saj
     Says

     

    Jul 21st, 2010 (10:00 am)

    This is politics… and politicians are by definition stupid narrow sighted idiots.

    Essentially, they created a law based on one aspect of present technology. The result, the law doesn’t take into account the advancements and is inflexible.

    The same thing happened to the Prius. People couldn’t get registered because the vehicle couldn’t be tested for emissions in some states. Okay, so we have an environmentally healthier vehicle but it fails the environmental test.

    Likewise, the Prius needs to waste gas warming up the catalytic converter so it can meet dinosaur laws. Our legislators need to pass good laws, update the old laws, or get out of their seats.

    California legislators should revise the law to account for vehicles like the Volt. Yes, the engine may not be super-low emissions. But the engine is a partial use drive system. Therefore, what should be considered is whether the vehicle is a lower emission based on expected use.

    For example, what is the emission level per year? This would dramatically affect the eligibility of the Volt. But hey, California has been full of some of the dumbest politicians for a couple decades now. Don’t expect them to do anything intelligent.


  244. 244
    kent beuchert

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kent beuchert
     Says

     

    Jul 21st, 2010 (3:52 pm)

    Don’t you just love the way politicians act as though a tax incentive doesn’t cost anybody anything. I would sooner see tax breaks given to those with real financial problems than some well-heeled drivers given subsidies with my tax dollars to buy a car that they (probably) don’t even need. Nor does the reduced emissions rationale hold any water these days. Only True Believers and the extremely anal still think they are going to save our planet’s future by avoiding carbon.


  245. 245
    ICUR12

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    ICUR12
     Says

     

    Jul 22nd, 2010 (9:14 pm)

    My post is so far down on the list I wonder if it will be seen.

    No one has pointed out that there was only $4.1 million dollars appropriated for the California CARB and it is first come first serve for those who are eligible. So at $5000 for each vehicle you arrive at 820 people who will actually get the incentive.

    Odds aren’t too good for getting it as the funds will be expended in about one month. Leaf buyers have no better chance than a PHEV buyer.


  246. 246
    Pest Control Seattle

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Pest Control Seattle
     Says

     

    Jul 28th, 2010 (6:46 pm)

    Fantastic stuff as always. Keep it up.