The two most closely guarded secrets about the Chevrolet Volt have been its price and its fuel economy while running in generator mode.
Now that we know the price, how about the other secret?
It turns out we may never see an official announcement from GM even after the car launches into retail deliveries.
GM has insisted, rightly so, the Volt should not be compared to other cars, and that its in a class of its own. Without doubt for the majority of drivers during the majority of their drives the Volt will use no gas at all. And although gas will burn at a certain rate while the generator is running, its contribution to overall fuel economy may be minimal.
When GM announced last Summer that the Volt could get 230 mpg on average over time, they took into account nightly recharging and typical driving patterns. It was an illustration but not fact.
The fact is the EPA is still trying to determine the best method for creating a consumer sticker for the Volt. Recently ratified SAE J1711 standard will be used to measure the car’s efficiency and still takes use over time into account.
Because the typically slow-moving bureaucratic EPA still hasn’t concluded what label the Volt will have, GM admits they might not even have one from them come November when the car reaches showrooms.
“Its possible the EPA still won’t have a label when the Volt goes into production,” said GM spokesperson Rob Peterson. “They’re just trying to do what’s right.”
Instead GM may issue its own detailed chart label to go with the car illustrating typical fuel usage in a variety of scenarios that will serve temporarily.
“The VOLT will have a label for launch with a lot of information to assist the customer,” says Volt vehicle line director Tony Posawatz. “It will not be the final label beyond 2011 MY.”
The eventual EPA label “will have a lot of info including a fuel efficiency number if you never charge your VOLT,” he said.
As for who will release that generator (CS) mode MPG, it “wont be GM,” said Peterson. We won’t then likely get fuel economy in generator mode estimates until the cars is driven for extended periods by early buyers and the media.
This entry was posted on Thursday, July 29th, 2010 at 6:22 am and is filed under Efficiency, Generator. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:26 am)Yes, my expectation is that the first we will learn of CS mpg is from customers’ reports.
There does not seem to be any kind of rule requiring that gm give us this number, for if anything the requirement will involve some kind of composite, and we see that gm is not inclined to do so independently.
The good part is that Lyle will have the gm-volt Volt, and there will be lots of independent reports. As few or none of any of the rest of us will have any Volts, we can sit back and judge all of these dispassionately
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:28 am)The wheels of government move at a snails pace.
Rb is correct. I wouldn’t be surprised if the CS mode MPG is posted here first.
+11
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:29 am)Is it even legal to sell a vehicle in the US without the EPA sticker? and GM refusing to inform purchasers of what the CS mileage is? Seems problematic to me ..
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:30 am)What better way could there be to compare to a “normal” car than to drive the Volt like a normal car and see what MPG you get?
+31
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:30 am)Simply tell people this: EV range and mpg during CS mode, it is not that difficult. Why GM keep trying to hide this or trying to cook the numbers for ballyhoo? Answer is very simple: MPG during charge sustaining mode is about 35 mpg under normal driving conditions.
They behave the same way as they did before Chapter 11, with all those said, we must appreciate GM engineers, you are the best, but the top managers are sh*t and will continue to ruin the company.
+6
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:32 am)Who cares the EPA-Number if you regular plug it in?
+12
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:42 am)Why not? How can they produce a chart showing fuel usage under varying situations without revealing this info? They can’t, so they may as well just state what the highway and city CS mode economy is via the current EPA standard. This is going to be derived by many of us and the media in 2 seconds anyway and knowing the media if one notable source makes a mistake it will be reported wrongly thousands if times afterwards (just ask Shirley Sherrod).
When GM feels the time is right, they should absoutely release their CS mode estimates and they should do this before “real” test drives or other deriving info is released.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:42 am)I still think that the volt has a 6 gallon tank. Why? Because back in the design phase the engineers said that they would have to have two tanks if it went over 6 gallons and that added complexity to the design.
I’ve read the Consumer Reports post about a 9 gallon “tank” (note the singular), but I’m still going to wait and see.
A 6 gallon tank with a 300 mile range would give us 50 mpg HWY in CS mode.
+37
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:46 am)This is just silly.
The EPA and the execs at GM are just playing “who has the bigger d**K”.
We really don’t need one all powerful rating number, as this vehicle has two distinct operational modes, battery powered electric, and then gasoline powered electric. So it would be nice for us, the people that will shell out between $40K and $50K for this car, to know what the functionality of those two modes are, don’t you think????
It is a shame that the first buyers will be the reporters on what should be very simple numbers released by GM in advance.
After the pricing fiasco, I guess this is not really a surprise………….
I really like the car. GM management at this point, not so much.
JMHO
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:51 am)The reason I think this isn’t the case is because 50MPG would be something they would love to announce. This is a great number when you’re not using electricity. At some point we’ll know the official tank size, and we can extract the MPG from that since we know they continue to advertise an “up to 340 mile” range.
Side Note: Lyle, the Google ads at the bottom of the screen have been real annoying lately. They go to the advertised website just with a mouse over, and clicking any “Quote” link conveniently puts your mouse over the ad. Actually, it seems like it’s the clicking of the Quote link combined with the ad being there, but I’m 100% certain I’m not clicking on the ad. The last couple days I’ve had to try numerous times to get myself successfully typing in the comments box without being kicked to another site.
join thE REVolution
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:54 am)I would not mind volunteering, but a few problems:
1) Mine does not arrive until March
2) It will be hard to maintain good discipline and drive several hundred miles without charging.
Jul 29th, 2010 (6:55 am)Does anyone know if the Leaf has an MPG rating (MPC) by the EPA yet?
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:01 am)What a joke.
+30
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:07 am)1. Electric only miles per charge HWY
2. Electric only miles per charge CITY
3. Charge sustaining (using ICE generator) miles per gallon HWY
4. Charge sustaining (using ICE generator) miles per gallon CITY
Too easy.
-3
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:09 am)Might be even worse than I thought.
If the number comes out in the twenties I’m thinking GM’s going to have a real “media stink bomb” on their hands.
+9
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:13 am)ATTN GM: Chelsea Sexton was recently loaned a LEAF for a full day and wrote an interesting test review on it. Why not have a fully-charged Volt filled with gas run on a dynamometer at pre-selected speeds and record the mpg registered by the car’s computer itself at arbitrary distances such as the following:
MI MPG MPH
10 —— ——
20 —— ——
30 —— ——
40 —— ——
50 —— ——
60 —— ——
70 -etc -etc
80
90
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
325
350 (or to empty tank)
Note that anyone who has the use of a Volt for 24hrs could approximate & publish the results of this test by simply recording the Volt’s displayed mpg & speed (using cruise control on a closed course) — if I were GM I’d consider having the dyno-controlled test like I’m suggesting done asap and release the results to the press.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:13 am)While in theory, a straight CS number appears simple to calculate, it may not be. I do not know the specifics of how the current city/highway numbers are calculated but consider a few points about our beloved Volt:
1. The generator does not directly power the wheels. Do we know if the generator will keep generating power at a stop thus lowering the MPG?
2. The regenerative braking system. Is it possible that in certain instances, the battery will be recharged enough to start powering the wheels thus raising the MPG?
Just run all cars in a wind tunnel at a constant speed (60 MPH, 60 MPH wind) for x hours or miles to get a highway number. Same idea in some set cycle of stop and go for a city number. Same could be done for BEV’s to get a range number, MBS (miles before stranding).
EDIT: OK I see several others had similar ideas while I was posting
+18
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:20 am)On the day the bubble burst for many here, I was lambasted for criticizing someone’s self indulgence using a doomsday scenario. What I discussed later had to do with pure historical collapses, but I left out the environmental issues that some here deem superfluous. Well, yesterday, news was revealed of something much more serious than a disagreeable sale price. If you think global warming and the environment are not important reasons for getting us off oil, I hope you will start seeing things differently.
The base of the food chain (plankton) is vanishing as we debate Volt’s purchase price
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38451744/ns/us_news-environment
Previously, we learned that acidic ocean environments will cause animals with shells to stop reproducing
http://www.newser.com/story/70941/acid-ocean-will-dissolve-sea-creatures-shells.html
Then, on land, there is the mysterious die-off of the creature so necessary for our food supplies (the honey bee)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_collapse_disorder
And of course, with glaciers disappearing, the reliable fresh water drinking source for 40% of the world’s population will soon be gone
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_people_depend_on_glacial_melt_for_their_drinking_water
The criticism of my comments labeled me a bleeding heart. This is almost laughable if one really knew anything about me. I was a naval officer and nuclear power instructor. I used to think the Greenpeace logo was something to actually set your ship’s heading toward and order “All Ahead Flank” (joking, here). However, recent news makes ignoring environmental issues sheer suicide. Cars, nationalities, trade- none of it matters if we have no water or food. Some idiot had the nerve to state that the real consequence of global warming was that the rich people would lose their waterfront property. My God!
There is only so much one person can do and I am not suggesting anyone here to do any particular thing. But, at the very least, embrace that our home planet, the only one we’ve got, is giving us warning signs. Just because something sucks to think about doesn’t mean you can ignore it, or worse yet, argue against it. The average person here knows that the Earth holds twice as many people as it did when he/she was born. Bleeding heart, my a$$. It’s pure mathematics.
Exponential population increase + collapse of sustenance=massive die-off
(oh, and your 401K won’t be worth squat!)
Quit fighting about Volt vs Leaf, or how much of your lifestyle you have to sacrifice due to purchase price. Please, look to do SOMETHING to make a difference- and suggest to others to do the same. Call me a preachy SOB if you want, but never label me a bleeding heart. As I said on that day, I am a pragmatist.
“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV
will be fought with sticks and stones.” – Albert Einstein
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:23 am)the ad dimension is overlaping the text and anyone who clicks on the link from the center left will get an add come up the first time you visit the site for the day. If you use firefox and download flashblock you can see the outside box size. Pretty sneaky ploy since it pretty much launches the ad when you want to read the new from gm-volt!
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:26 am)How about this for an example (GM can “plug in” whatever the CS mpg is) But simple math; 300 miles extended with 9 gallon tank says it is about 33mpg
MPG
EV Mode = Infinate
CS Mode = 33 mpg
EREV Mode = 110 mpg*
*MPG base on typical user driving 12,000 mile per year. 70% or 8,400 miles in EV mode. 30% or 3,600 miles in CS mode will use 109 gallons of gas. 12,000 / 109 gallons = 110 mpg.
Mileage may vary based on driving habits, weather conditions and your commitment to the environment and/or reducing the need for foreign oil.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:28 am)You’ve got to be kidding. How can you be so selfish?
Dont you dare complain about the ads…you should all be clicking them all day long. Dont you know those ads are the only way Lyle gets income from his tireless 24 h/365 d effort to bring you the latest inside Volt information that you can quote and discuss.
/rant off
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:29 am)The proper EPA hwy and city cycles test are done on a treadmill and the MPG is calculated by measuring the exhaust in the tailpipe.. the Volt would probably really confuse the machine, but if you ran it long enough you would eventually get a good number.
The number that the media and owners will get will be totally different, it will consist of MPG on the hwy once the battery is depleted.. again if the test is long enough it will be accurate, but only if the drivers maintain a constant set speed. The EPA hwy cycles averages 48mph speed.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:29 am)What is the MPG of the ICE in the Prius, or even the Plug in Prius.. just curious?
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:30 am)Sigh. Please forgive me the tone of the following, but I’m really, really frustrated by the lack of understanding on this topic.
How many hundreds of posts on this subject have used the word “simple”? It’s not simple.
Some poster a day or two ago wrote that he didn’t want to see any voodoo formulas. Sorry, but the Volt’s fuel economy is unlike EVERY other car that the public has EVER experienced. It’s NOT one number. It’s NOT two numbers. It ABSOLUTELY depends on how far you drive between charges. And it’s a continuous function of range where CS mode fuel consumption and battery range are inputs, not outputs.
Sorry for the all caps frustration. I posted the formula twice but it really looks like the vast majority of Americans went through junior high school algebra classes with the mantra “I don’t see how I’ll ever need any of this stuff.” Well, this is where you need that stuff.
If you can’t handle the math, then Rextado in post #6 had the best answer as to the Volt’s fuel economy: “Who cares the EPA-Number if you regular plug it in?” Because nobody but a flaming idiot will ever buy a Volt and experience the CS mode fuel economy by running it on petroleum forever. You want to run on petroleum forever? Buy a standard Prius or Jetta diesel!
Sigh again. OK, rant off.
PS: Yeah, Nasaman in post #14 gets it.
+11
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:32 am)I would still like this official chart from GM. (note this is just something I threw together)
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:33 am)http://speed.pointroll.com/PointRoll/Media/Panels/Ford/700122/FLM_Owner Mike Row Video_728×90_pnl_72110_r04_fh.swf?PRCampID=35096&PRPubID=spcmednw&PRAdSize=728×90&PRFormat=EX
for those users complaining about the advertising link opening:
above is the flash text overlapping the top news link that is tricking users into opening the advertisers link upon first visit to the site notice the size.
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:37 am)This is getting comical.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:38 am)And kdawg in post #23 gets it. Except the Volt’s fuel economy is infinite, not capped, below the battery range.
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:40 am)As others pointed out, the answer is simple and obvious… EV range plus CS mode mpg. Then any consumer can then understand how the car works for them.
Somebody’s dragging their heels on this. Why? The EPA doesn’t care who sells what cars, so they have no reason to be obstructionist.
Michigans Congresscritters worked double overtime shifts to tailor the tax credit specifically to the Volt (note that the credit maxes at 16kwh, rather than continuing the sliding scale all the way to the Leaf’s larger battery size). You don’t suppose the Michigan Congresscritters are on the job, again, bullying the EPA, do you? Noooo…. I’m sure that would never happen…
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:41 am)They kept PRICE and EPA MPG figures secret because they knew those numbers are detrimental to sales of the Volt.
GM must really take the Americans as dumb fools that can be hoodwinked with ease. Hopefully enough people will realize all this deception and steer clear of this vehicle at all costs.
The thing to do is be wise, use your brain, and get that LEAF at a very affordable price.
- Evelyn Salt
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:41 am)GM
Tell me 4 things. How far will it go with the heat on, AC on, and neither on before the generator kicks in, and what mileage does it get in generator mode.
Thats all I need to make a decision.
+4
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:42 am)Words like “testing” “EPA” and “official” are not needed relay the CS MPG. Ask anyone at GM who performs test drives what kind of CS MPG they are getting.
How many times have you spoken with your neighbor and asked, “What kind of MPG did you get on your trip to San Diego?”. Or, “Lot’s of traffic downtown each morning. How’s your MPG?”. GM needs to accept what the Volt gen 1 is capable of doing. Be up front with it. And either go with a lighter design in the future. Or a different form of ICE charge system. It’s okay to be up front and honest with car buyers. We want you to win long term.
=D-Volt
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:51 am)One can make it as complicated at they want.
But it is rather simple… for anyone that will use the car and needs to know miles per gallon for range.
** If charged you know you have 40 miles to start. Assuming the gas tank is full… When the generator comes on gas consumption is happening. Run the car for 200 miles. Refill the tank. Divide the gallons used into the 200 miles and you will have miles per gallon.
That number is the only real number any driver cares about. It will let them know how far they can go on a tank between external charges of the battery.
Any other stuff is for advertising.
i.e. any combinations of mixing battery charge with ICE use or keeping battery charged and never using the ICE = no gas used for miles driven.
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:55 am)Let the EPA do it. If GM does it, they will be crucified again….like what happened last year with the 230 ratings.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:55 am)I have long been suggesting the use of a simple table based on daily charge and usage. Looks like this is what will emerge. The table needs to reflect the sweet spot for this car, which is driving no more than about 50 (30 to 60) miles a day with overnight recharge. In the two extreme driving cases; one much more than 60 miles per day and the other much less than 40 miles a day. The mileage will approach the mpg of ICE vehicle in the former case and a BEV in the latter. A typical customer will probably not want a Volt if his daily driving exceed a certain number of miles or will opt for a pure EV if his daily drive is much less than 40 miles a day.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:56 am)Way off topic.
Toyota has yet another recall:
Toyota recalls 400,000 cars over steering issues
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/29/autos/toyota_recall/?iref=NS1
Jul 29th, 2010 (7:59 am)The EPA is to blame, not GM. Put the blame where it belongs!
+19
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:01 am)Why would I spend $41,000 on a car when I don’t know even the highway mpg in CS mode? Wouldn’t that factor into my calculations for the overall cost savings that would offset the price?
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:02 am)I agree with this. Except if you base it on a yearly basis, then it needs to indicate an estimated number of charges. (365 charges per year.)
+6
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:05 am)Toyota is the company who Consumer Reports has been bragging about for decades. Who helped Toyota get where they are at today? Consumer Reports. Would I ever buy a Toyota? Never! I seen too many of them have major problems, problems that were hidden from the public.
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:07 am)Why not? you ask? Haven’t you ever heard of lawyers? No matter what number GM would release if it doesn’t match what the EPA eventually comes out with then here comes the lawyers and their class action lawsuits.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:09 am)FLMark #16, that was a good post. This is a bit ironic though. The “Father” of the Volt, Bob Lutz doesn’t believe in Global Warming. I believe in Global Warming. Hpwever, I don’t make the money like a lot of people on this site, state, country, or world… If I could afford either car, I would probably purchase the Leaf, a vast majority of the driving that I do is in town less than 40MPH. And keeping in mind, our community is less than 70k.
So many things in our society is so screwed up, the average age of the young kids having sex is around the 7th grade, our prsident may not be legal to be in office, the upper-management at GM is missing a few marbles….. I don't want to go on, but where does it end?
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:17 am)Half of the customers will not believe the EPA numbers anyway, and the other half will swear Moses should carve them into stone tablets.
I like the idea of a supplemental window sticker chart. One of the guys here had a good one started about a week ago. I smell another contest about to start! Best chart design gets 12 FREE Lease payments from General Motors.
Okay…. GO!
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:17 am)GM kind of relays the CS MPG on their webpage. Up to 300 miles of extended range. Looks like this is all the consumer will know for now.
=D-Volt
+4
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:18 am)To whoever gets a Volt first: Please do the following MPG test.
Park your Volt overnight with depleted battery and do not charge.
Next day drive to local gas station near highway and fill up gas tank.
Reset trip odometer.
Drive on highway with windows closed and air conditioner on, 60 mph using cruise control until gas tank indicator drops a quarter of the tank.
Record trip odometer reading and let us know what it is.
This will tell us how many miles the car drove in CS mode on a quarter tank of gas.
If GM is accurate about 300 miles on a full tank of gas, then you should have driven 75 miles.
If the gas tank is 9 gallons, you will have used up, 2.25 gallons.
75/2.25 = 33.33MPG
I’m hoping GM was wrong about the 300 miles on a full tank of gas statement.
Maybe they meant to say OVER 300 miles on a full tank of gas.
Or
Close to 360 highway miles on a full tank of gas.
Let us know all the details too, like was it raining or did you encounter traffic and had to disengage cruise control.
Why GM wont supply this information is very disconcerting.
NPNS!
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:18 am)I’m under the impression the Volt will have a 9 gallon tank that allows for an additional 300 miles of driving distance.
That’s 33.33 MPG in CS mode.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:21 am)From nasaman on #14
— if I were GM I’d consider having the dyno-controlled test like I’m suggesting done asap and release the results to the press.
****************************************************
GM has to step very carefully on this one. They do not want a repeat of the “230″ of last year. I think it is best to wait for the EPA to do their job. If they can not do it in time, then the fault will lie on the EPA.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:21 am)Not only should GM list EV range and CS mpg values (that is so simple I can’t believe there is even a debate about it), but they should list EV efficiency in terms of mpKWH. Electric driving may be less polluting and less costly than gasoline driving, but it is NOT pollution-free or cost-free. Burning coal is a dirty process, and electricity costs money (especially if people start using commercial quick-charge stations).
List EV range, list CS mpg, and list electrical efficiency on a per mile basis. That info will greatly empower the consumer. If electric vehicles ever do become the norm, I imagine some people will want to purchase the more efficient models just as they do with ICE cars and home appliances now.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:25 am)Hey! There it is! I posted my chart contest idea before seeing your repose of your chart. Now that is what I’m talking about.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:28 am)Tables are useless. Give me a function and I can plug in my own values.
Further, when you say “(t)he mileage will approach the mpg of ICE vehicle,” the question is, “Which ICE vehicle?” An Excursion? Or a Yaris?
Baloney. GM is to blame. GM wants a triple digit EPA figure, will lobby whoever they must to get it and they don’t care how misleading it will be (review the 230mpg fiasco for proof of this). The EPA is perfectly willing to provide a function that would tell any customer what they can generally expect; it makes no difference to them whether GM sells Volts or Toyota sells Priuses. But it makes a great deal of difference to Michigans Congressional delegation.
+4
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:28 am)That’s not typically how I calculate my MPG, because i dont trust the gas gauge. I say fill it up, drive for 200 miles in CS mode, then fill it up again. You will know how much gas you used by how much you can put back into the tank.
Instead of depleting the battery, you could also just put it in Mountain Mode, to prevent the battery from being used.
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:31 am)Dyno-Controlled tests results are always better then real world. No air drag or real road wheel drag to contend with.
NPNS!
+6
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:33 am)This is what scares me.
The ICE doesn’t have to do whole lot as I understand it.
So I don’t understand why it is so low. I agree with your number, I just don’t understand why.
Like the price, the answer to this question is going to sting as well I’m afraid.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:34 am)What a joke.
GM knows how well their cars will do in crash tests well before the NHTSA releases it. Same goes for fuel economy. These test aren’t secret. The car manufactures know them so they can test each car and determine the best way to build in fuel saving and safety enhancing design.
Yes the EPA can’t move fast enough on this, sure thats a given, but GM can release MPG in CS mode by using the current test in CS mode. Not rocket science…
How many Kw per mile in electric ??
How many gallons per mile in CS mode ??
I’m starting to get a bit of a bad taste from GM. They can’t even come clean with the tank size? Now they tell me the VOLT is going to cost WAY WAY more than it should? Things have changed since Bob left…
+8
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:47 am)One more thing while I’m on my rant…
(I missed getting one in 500+ comments on the 27th)
$16,000 Cruz
-$1,000 Cruz transmission and other parts
+$10,000 Battery
+$4,000 Two mode gen/traction motor
+$3,000 Control Electronics
+$4,000 Other
=$36,000
$41,000?? Are we paying $5,000 towards R&D? If you can do a Cruz for 16k then an additional 21k should be MORE than enough for the electric side of the car. Hell the VOLT is two cars in one, yeah I got that, but this is silly.
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:55 am)mpg: How would anyone plan their Vegas trip without knowing CS MPG?
I suppose you would have to assume 40mpg and have extra for CRAPS!
33 mpg -shudder–
For those saying it doesn’t matter — pfffT!!
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (8:58 am)This is very simple concept based on ONE overnight daily charge:
If your drive is less then 40 miles per day your mileage is:
If your drive is between 40 to 60 miles per day your mileage is:
If your drive is 100 miles or more then it will be the mileage of an ICE.
(Of course we do not know what that mileage is yet.)
A daily base calculation then can be converted to yearly use.
A small table like this would tell the customers the suitability of this car for their needs.
Just as an added note. Daily charge provides 14600 miles of yearly gas free driving if under 40 miles per day driving should be included in the table.
-3
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:00 am)Really ? Wow.
How many posts have I put up explaining this?
Are you new to this site?
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:00 am)GM is a very large company. At my workplace of a few thousand employees we require tutorials and classes on how to complete simple questionnaires. We are often not allowed to answer simple questions as “they must be handled by Mr. Dayshiftguy after 10AM”. We are often assumed as doing wrong or as guilty of something unless we can show evidence otherwise.
This partially explains why the parade of GM employees who have been interviewed here at gm volt dot com come across as vague and double speaking. It’s how things are in a very large company.
With this said. Someone at GM (maybe an engineer) should simply provide unofficial test numbers. Example: On a long freeway incline we experience 30-33 MPG. Long flat runs at 45 mph yeild 44 MPG. On our Freedom Drive from Austin to DC we achieved 50MPG overall.
The Volt is a very special vehicle. The first of many EREV to follow. And whatever we wish it to be. It still is what it is. The delivery date is known, December 2010. The first year manufacturing numbers are known, 10k. If the CS MPG averages just 35 there are easily 10,000 buyers for this very special first year vehicle. Even at over $40k MSRP.
=D-Volt
+4
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:05 am)Actually, I could care less about MPG as long as it gets better than 25 MPG in CS mode. And that figure is just a number chosen for the purpose of stating one. I expect to do 95% to 99% of my driving the Volt (assuming, of course, that I ever buy one) on battery power only.
+9
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:11 am)Ya, sorry. I usually skip yours.
Way too much ranker for me to bother reading.
Sorry.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:15 am)9 Gallon Tank and 300 mile range does not equal 300 / 9…
You do not drive until your gas runs out, on top of that your car will tell you it needs gas prior to running out. Consider a 15% buffer (typical in most cars) 9 *.85 = 7.65 Gallons Used.
300 / 7.65 = 39.21 MPG in Charge Sustaining Mode
I would expect close to 40 MPG since this is what the cruize is said to get as well as many other cars with simmilar engine sizes. Yes the volt is heavier, but the ICE is optimized for efficeincy using the battery as the pulse and burst buffer. This engine will not be revved for power to move the vehicle.
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:18 am)When Ford announced the Fusion Hybrid they said we expect a rating of 39MPG. EPA came out with 41. So why can’t GM re;ease a very conservative number. I am afraid it is because CS mode is as lousy as ED’s comfortably under 30k.
On to another problem of mine …. My Dealer called yesterday to come in and order my VOLT. I am supposed to be number 9 on the list. Either he gets more Volts then I expected or a bunch of people canceled after the price announcement. And I am still not sure how I feel about 41K. I know there is a Fed and State rebate. But Rebate means after the Sale or in other Words I still Finance 41K. And in my case the Lease is a non starter.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:19 am)Until they decide one something new, the EPA should just run the highway and city test with the car charged up and tell us the kilowatt-hour consumption. Then they can repeat the the test with the charge depleted and report the fuel consumption. Anyone with brains can do the math from there. I think one of the issues the EPA has is how much time it takes to do the testing. Well right now there aren’t a great number of model like this to test. They should do their job and publish the results.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:19 am)The price was a disappointment.
If the Volt does about 35 mpg in CS mode it would further explain the low production targets.
It would hurt the EREV approach and make Prius look a lot better to Greeniacs. Especially as it seems Toyota can simply add battery capacity to their design incrementally as batteries improve.
I guess we can still hope that GM is holding the CS mpg close for a big splash but the 9 gallon tank seems contra-indicative. If it is around 35, it makes the Volt essentially a commuter, not really suited for longer ranges, except for occasional trips. It would also be a boost to BEVs in my poor opinion, especially for two car families. I think that’s a lot of people at ~25K (with tax rebate) and not so much at 33k.
+4
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:24 am)2011 Ford Fusion Hybrid with all the options $ 39,700 Canadian
Employee discount, rebate on dealer prep brings the price down to $ 35,900
That is for a FULLY LOADED FUSION HYBRID
Spec sheet shows 50 MPG (US) in town and 43 MPG (US) Highway
Thats 61 MPG Canadian in town and 52 MPG Canadian Highway
My 2010 Fusion Hybrid (not quite fully loaded) cost $ 33,800
My LIFETIME average (combined city and highway) is 5.3 L/100 KMS
and it includes our cold winter here in Central Alberta Canada, traffic jams and “normal” real world driving conditions.
Thats about 43.5 MPG (US) and 52.5 MPG Canadian.
Enough said….
Let’s walk on down to your Ford Dealership and take a look at the Fusion Hybrid.
Please note: I am waiting for Gen III as no Volts will get here before 2014 or ???
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:25 am)With 5 years of OnStar included in the price of the Volt, a value-added feature for Volt users (and the general public) could be an on-going study using gas useage and mileage information uploaded from each Volt vehicle and grouped together showing an average MPG equivalent from all 10,000 cars sold in the 1st year and registered to individual owners. It would be crowd sourcing real-use data. That would be a first for any type of car. This data could be made public by Chevrolet – no need to keep it all a big secret.
If Volt buyers are not willing to participate, they could choose to opt-out of the study. The information could also be broken down by geographic location (cold weather vs. hot weather vs. mild weather regions) or by the amount of miles driven daily (light users vs. long distance drivers).
Who needs the EPA to figure this all out? Not the Volt!
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:32 am)Well, I have to admit the Leaf’s price versus the Volt’s price makes the Leaf look good for a second car. I suspect it will appeal to many families for a commuter car and one to run around town in for the weekends. It would fit my life style for that very purpose and save me $8,200 up front. I have a mini-van, a sedan and a truck now. So, I am used to a multi-vehicle situation. There are two drivers at my house – myself and my wife. She sometimes will drive in excess of 100 miles just running errands around town during the week. The Volt would suit her or me, but price will cause me to consider the Leaf. I am in a wait and see attitude at this point. It may depend on which vehicle becomes available for sale in my area first. I am on a Volt wait list with a large GM dealer locally, but have not signed up for the Leaf’s wait list. But, I might.
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:36 am)I have been driving one from MY 2004 and my findings are based on recording mileage and buying gas not looking at the display . Summer with air off 51.2 mpg with a high of 58.8 and a low of 46.3. the air costs 3 mpg on the highway and 9.3 city.
Winter 43.2 with a high of 46.8 and a low of 34.7 with the heat on .This is driveing 2 different prisus the 1st one consistently got 4 mpg better than the 2nd one. These #s are a mix of city and highway and 95,550 miles.
Tom
+4
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:38 am)+1
Didn’t want to copy the whole thing, but thanks for all the links. I know this is OT but it is important. What bothers me most is that I believe we have all the tools necessary to solve our problems, but there is no political will to proceed. The people in control are extremely wealthy and they are more concerned about maintaining their obscene income then saving the planet. During the last 3 years the world’s billionaires averages 27% increase in wealth per year. Think about it, if the working class has less money, where did it go? There are notable exceptions of billionaires who contribute a lot back to society, but in general if as the richer get richer, the poorer get poorer. There needs to be more balance. Governments are supposed to provide this balance by higher taxes on the rich. The very rich should pay more taxes.
We absolutely need to stop pollution. Oil is a wonderful substance, great for plastics, synthetics, lubrication. The most wasteful thing you can do with oil is burn it.
Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactors were invented in the 1960s at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. They ran one for almost 5 years. LFTRs use cheap thorium, are inherently safe, do not produce long term radio-active waste and were abandoned because they are not suitable for making bombs. See:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWUeBSoEnRk
and
http://energyfromthorium.com/
Although the principles are proven, there is still some research required for the best materials to have long 50 year plus life. This should be our highest priority to solve our energy and pollution problems.
LFTRs can power big ships, provide heat to extract oil from tar sands, be used to de-salinate sea water and power all the world with electricity at a lower cost than anything except hydro power, yes cheaper than coal. Replacing a coal power plant with LFTRs is an ideal location and the typical coal power plant has enough thorium in the coal ash tailings to power the LFTRs for a hundred years. Thorium is readily available world wide so no country will have to import it.
All industry and homes that use natural gas or oil can convert to electric heat and power.
Trains can be electrified as many are already in Europe.
Only aircraft and rockets will require liquid fuel.
Our banking system was invented by bankers for the benefit of bankers. Giving banks the right to loan 9 times their assets is just giving them money. Controlling inflation by interest rates is putting the onus on the working poor. In order to reduce inflation they increase interest rates, thus giving banks and the wealthy more money and taking it from the working poor who are in debt. The proper way to control inflation is by controlling the money supply, law of supply and demand. Printing money, giving it to banks, and then borrowing it back with interest is insane. Governments the world over need to take control of their own money system. Proper inflation control would be by governments printing the correct amount of money to maintain inflation at a rate decided by the government. The government should use this money to directly pay its employees and not give it to the banks.
Stock markets are a wonderful way for business to raise capital, but the stock market is now much more than that, it is a way for the savvy to take money from casual investors. Computers have allowed trades in seconds and many take advantage of short term ups and downs of the market. Where does this money come from? It comes from the investors who do not play this high-speed game. This time from the middle to upper working class who buy stocks as a long term investment. In the case of commodities this stock market manipulation results in higher prices of the commodity which we all pay. These stock manipulators do not bring any benefit to society, farmers produce food, truckers deliver it, sales people help us buy, artists entertain, manufacturers make products. What do these stock manipulators do? Just take money, they are parasites. To bring stability (and faith) back to the stock market we should enact a 100 day rule, where any stock purchased cannot be sold for 100 days.
Patents should not be used to prevent progress. Some patents are bought and shelved to keep competition away. Patents should have a “use it or loose it” clause with competitors able to challenge through courts for court mandated royalty rates.
We need much stronger laws regarding pesticides, and farmers have to learn to control pests in a more natural way.
It is possible to have a much better world. We can solve our financial and pollution problems. With these solved it will be easier to solve world poverty, educate the poorer countries about the necessity to be responsible about birth control. Wealthier countries already have zero or negative population growth. If everybody’s standard of living is brought up to acceptable levels, there will be much less desire for war.
All this can be done. The question is how? Why not? Will our grand children hate us or love us?
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:39 am)Hundreds of thousands of Cruzes have been sold before a single consumer vehicle hits the US streets.
The Volt may see several generations and may not even be called the Volt, or could be discontinued for a re-engineered low cost version before those numbers are reached. There is a whole heck of a lot of development cost to be amortized before you can compare the Cruze with a Volt for cost. And development costs are continuing even with the small numbers planned for production.
The irony is the Cruze sells enough to warrant a huge development budget and will only require a few updating tweaks going forward, vs. the absolute requirement to quickly field entirely new generations of Volts to be paid for from zero sold to date, and a much smaller base going forward after customer sales start.
…If a high end Cruze is about 26,000 dollars, add in your 13K Volt parts/battery charges and a destination fee. I’m not an expert but…
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:39 am)Think of it this way: The most direct and therefore efficient way of driving the car would be to have the engine turn the wheels. Sort of Mechanical –> Mechanical. The Volt takes an indirect way of having the engine create electricity which then is fed to a motor which turns the wheels, so you have Mechanical –>Electrical –> Mechanical. Since you have losses every time you do a conversion you have losses, more conversions mean less efficiency and a lower MPG.
+4
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:42 am)Food fight.
Almost anyone “believes” we are in a global warming period. The question is whether it is caused by man and his activities. It is highly unlikely that global warming is caused by carbon dioxide emissions. Please consult the following link before you start the vicious attacks with all your airs of moral and intellectual superiority.
http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html
If you are able, you can calculate what 380 parts per million amounts to as a blanket around the earth or get yourself some perspective by calculating how much area 380 ppm occupies on an 8-1/2 by 11 sheet of paper. These are both pretty easy to do but if you can’t do them yourself, you may not realize what they mean. If you can’t do things like that to get some perspective, you’ll be at the mercy of the emotional charlatans like Al Gore. Mr. Gore has no scientific training and I’m willing to bet he could not perform either of the above exercises.
And I’ll pose this question – If global warming is man made and it is not caused by CO2, what good comes from spending countless billions to eliminate it while the “true” causes go undetected and unabated?
I’m an electric car fan and a nuclear power fan and a solar cell fan – but for what I feel are practical concerns, not overreactions to bogus scientific claims which abound in this age as they have in every other. Hugo Chavez is reason enough for me to like the electric car idea.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:44 am)Back to subject at hand. I believe that GM suffered such a backlash about the 230mpg figure that they have simply decided not to publish any figures. Let the EPA do it. I am sure they have done all the tests and have all the numbers, but whatever they publish, “your mileage may vary” and they could be put down for it.
Since they have announced the use of premium fuel I feel confident that, with premium fuel the CS mode will be 50mpg or higher. Equivalent to 40mpg with regular cost wise.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:48 am)This would only be true if the engine had the same efficiency at all rpm. Fact is engines have a “sweet spot” and that is exactly why 6 and now 8 speed transmissions are popular. The Electric drive acts as an infinitely variable transmission.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:50 am)This isn’t exactly the government. The J1772 standards committee, which isn’t a governmental body, has been at it for years and only approved a proposed standard a couple of weeks ago. So it’s not so much about the government moving slow as it is trying to get private companies with different economic interests on to the same page. Like herding cats?
On the other hand, the end result is usually solid. It could definitely be faster if the government just decreed the standard but you probably wouldn’t like the result.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:55 am)#68 Roy H:
Some how I don’t see anything changing with the way the country is going today. It will take a massive emergency situation to force change. Those with power are not wont to give it up. That includes the so-called rich power brokers, the government bureaucrats and the politicians to name just a few groups.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:57 am)Have you ever worked with a government agency? Believe me, they don’t need anyone to lean on them to take a long time working out how to do something new.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:57 am)It is simple just post 3 numbers:
EV Mode = 40miles
CS Mode Highway = ?
CS Mode City = ?
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:59 am)Just a thought: I wish there was a word limit on each comment for this web site. Some of these posts are too friggin long to sit and read. And the point-counter point is tiresome.
I know, I know: I can skip what I don’t want to read. I get that! But a question for those who write long, windy posts: do you think anybody wants to read all that? I think I’ll start awarding -1’s to each post that goes over say 200 words.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:00 am)The Volt is a pure EV if your daily drive is less than 40 miles a day, so your comment doesn’t make sense to me. An EV like the Leaf would make sense if your daily drive is over 40 but safely under the Leaf’s 100 mile limit. Though really the point of an EREV is less about your daily drive and more about how you answer “do you ever intend on driving this car more than 100 miles a day?”
I don’t want to be constrained by the 100 mile Leaf limit myself even though I rarely drive more than it’s limit. But I do make that sort of drive a couple times a year and I don’t want to have to switch cars to do it. With a Volt 90% or more of my driving would be electric so the CS MPG isn’t really that important.
However I fear a lot of people are going to get hung up on that CS MPG figure, whatever it is. All the charts in the world won’t help numerically disinclined. We’ll hear “the first 40 miles electric is nice but less than 50 MPG isn’t good enough, I’ll just buy a Prius since I have a 45 mile round trip commute”. Maybe they’ll get it once they start hearing from neighbors with similar commutes that only buy gas for their Volt every couple of months when the have a long trip to make.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:01 am)Chelsea did write an interesting article on Leaf – but she didn’t have a full day. She had the normal 1/2 hour or so like others did.
Getting back to OP, there is no way Volt can give a lot of details about range etc without us easily deriving the cs mpg. Anyway, everyone now thinks it is not great and thats why GM is hiding it. Just the way they delayed price announcement.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:07 am)Dream on. NO Detroit manufacturer has EVER published a range figure that left a reserve in the tank.
And, when conditions are right, Detroit loves them some range figures! When gas prices went up and gas lines began, Detroit’s super-sized tanks made for some great range figures on cars with mediocre mileage. So the range figures were plastered in giant type across the top of the ad and the mediocre mileage ratings were in a footnote.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:08 am)This is exactly what I mean by an inability to understand the Volt’s fuel economy. The method cited only gives the Volt’s fuel economy AT EXACTLY 200 MILES. “Rather simple” but useless to the person who drives 150 miles and then recharges. Or to the person who drives 100 miles and recharges. Or to the person who drives 50 miles and recharges. THE NUMBERS WILL ALL BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE VOLT IS AN ELECTRIC CAR THAT USES ZERO FUEL FOR THE FIRST MILES TRAVELED AFTER RECHARGE.
“One can make it as complicated at they want”. An exact answer to “what is the Volt’s mileage” is not complicated at all — to someone who paid attention in algebra class.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:09 am)Agreed. (And +1) I’m at a loss for why people are annoyed with GM that the EPA is taking their time. Yes. GM could release a figure. But that’s won’t be the one that the EPA uses. And that’s the one that people are waiting for. It’s like getting annoyed with Amgen that the FDA is taking a long time to approve denosumab. Do people really want GM to hold up the launch until the EPA comes up with a figure?
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:09 am)True – but in this case you are blaming the wrong group. Just look at SAE – they are taking forever to decide on level 3 standard. Level 1-3 they would have taken FIVE years to decide.
BTW, all large organizations take a long time to decide – they just aren’t agile. Whether they be government or corporate. This is my experience working in large and small companies the past couple of decades.
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:12 am)Are you for real?
“Hey Lyle, the placement of the ads might prevent users from being able to post comments on the blog you’ve created for everyone to post comments.” Wow, how rude of me.
If I literally cannot post a comment because the combination of an ad and clicking the Quote link on someone’s post kicks me off this site, how do you expect me to react? Each time I click back and try it again, the same thing happens.
Bringing it to Lyle’s attention that the particular placement may create this bug seems quite reasonable, and I certainly wasn’t complaining about the ads themselves.
On a side note, for some reason installing Adobe Flash as an add-in seems to have fixed the problem.
join thE REVolution
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:12 am)Interesting theory.
Of course, if the CS mode mpg for the 3800lb Volt will be 50mpg, why not use the drivetrain in a car with a much smaller battery just to get the efficiency of that electric drivetrain? Losing a couple hundred pounds of weight would further improve the fuel economy and by shrinking the battery, GM would be able to offer a 5-seat car, rather than a 4-seat Volt, with more cargo space or maybe shrink the whole car to further improve the fuel economy. With a much smaller battery, the car would be easier to engineer and package.
But… they aren’t doing that. I wonder why? Well, no, I don’t really, but I’m wondering if you’ll figure it out.
-3
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:14 am)Yes, and they have the most trouble doing their jobs when Congressmen and lobbyists interfere.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:16 am)Then why did GM tell us, some time ago, that they are going to run the engine at multiple different RPMs and workloads?
+9
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:17 am)The problem is that you’re confused about what the editorial you’ve cited says. That greenhouse gases cause global warming is just a fact. It’s not open to question. Why do you think the earth is warmer than Mars? Mars gets the same amount of energy from the sun as the earth. So what gives? Green gases are what gives. Without greenhouse gases the temperature of the earth would be -4 degrees F (that’s 36 degrees F below freezing). Because of greenhouse gases the earths average temperature is 60 degrees F. So the 64 degrees F is the warming attributable to greenhouse gas emissions. This is what we’ve known for something like a hundred years.
Since greenhouse gases increase the average temperature of the earth it’s not exactly a leap to figure out that adding more greenhouse gases increases the temperature more. Think of it like salt. Adding salt to water increases the boiling point so adding a lot of salt makes for water with a higher boiling point than if you added less salt.
The big question isn’t whether activities that release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, it’s how large the effect will be. A planet is not a simple one dimensional system like a pot of water so it’s difficult to guess. It could be one degree, which would be no big deal. It could be ten degrees which would be a very big deal. Hard to say.
The opinion piece you’ve cited actually relates to something entirely different — whether there may be other contravailing effects that will either swamp or cancel out the man made greenhouse effect. Greenhouse gases aren’t the only thing that effects global temperature changes. Volcanic eruptions or particulate pollution can lower the temperature by effectively reflecting the energy of the sun. Or, as this opinion notes, the sun itself can emit more or less energy. And if the sun were to emit less energy injecting more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere might even be a good thing. But that would require that we be able to predict what the sun is going to do, which at the moment we can’t.
In a timely way, the lead article in the Financial Times today was that the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released a new study done by a team of international scientists that finds the evidence supporting the thesis that man made greenhouse gases have increased global temperature to be “overwhelming”. As usual the study was immediately dismissed by paid lawyers for various business groups.
It would be funny if it weren’t so sad.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:18 am)This just in from the Department of Transparency: Nissan Reports LEAF Range Will Vary From 47 to 138 Miles (12-Jun-2010).
Note: The Department of Transparency was invented by GM after the EV1 fiasco, but made real by Nissan.
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:20 am)Well, this problem was persistent every time I clicked on a Quote link, then having my mouse go over the ad. I think the problem is a combination of things. I use IE8 here at work, and installing Adobe Flash ‘fixed’ the problem, but I still get a Javascript error on the page. I’m already using compatibility mode to prevent some script from burning my CPU after posting a comment. Dang Internet Exploder…
join thE REVolution
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:22 am)I am sure that is what they are doing. It is called the two-mode hybrid.
+4
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:22 am)If the CS fuel economy is bad, it works in GM’s favor to release the car without having to put a discouraging EPA sticker on the car. It would be a great tactic for them to obfuscate, lobby and delay.
If the CS fuel economy is good, they’d have been more anxious to tell us how much fuel the vehicle used on the “Freedom Drive” than which tourist traps they visited. Checking back through the reports from the “Freedom Drive” I find tourist traps mentioned but no gas consumption.
Draw your own conclusions…
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:23 am)In that case, please explain to me why our wonderful federal highway authorities aren’t doing anything to prepare our infrastructure? That are a lot of possible changes that we need to be ready for. Thermal expansion of bridges, highways, and railways. Overloaded drainage systems, increased droughts, etc.
There are a lot of things we can do to ameliorate the problem. But we aren’t even requiring new bridges to reflect possible climate change!
“That means rethinking standards for design elements: For example, increase drainage capacity to accommodate storm surges; tie bridge decks more securely to the substructure to weather hurricanes; use more continuous welded rail lines to prevent heat deformities; and elevate bridges, streets and rail lines to adapt for changes in sea levels. Long-term, engineers should work toward developing heat-resistant materials and shallow-bottom vessels. ”
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/4254048
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:25 am)I know, this puzzles me too. They were very concerned about noise and vibration, so decided to have two or more speeds. A compromise I am sure.
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:26 am)How can I put this politely?
Bzzt… Wrong. The two-mode has direct mechanical linkage from the ICE to the wheels.
Also, the two-mode GMT900 ICE hybrids have VCM and better aerodynamics than the standard vehicle. These mods provide much of the improved fuel economy on the highway over the standard vehicle.
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:30 am)Rashiid, I smile as I write this, so don’t think I am nitpicking on spelling (we all screw up spelling). I expect that the word you wanted was ‘rancor’. To me this word sounds like it feels- harshly bitter- appropriately used here. However, as spelled, with the implication of smelling bad, seems to fit, too. Your desire to not engage folks who spew venom is good. I usually skip the posts where people banter over a post that seems purely intended to incite a reaction. As I wrote a couple days ago. Don’t worry. Be Happy. I know this seems to conflict with my #17 post here today, but an extrapolation might be- there is enough REAL crap to care about without getting caught up in the small stuff. As you quoted of me yesterday, “move on”. Your terse reply to this person’s sarcasm is what created my smile. I see that the ‘regular’ Rashiid is back after a momentary lapse
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:30 am)The thing about global warming is that it’s slow. Since it’s slow people can’t see it. Now you’re asking them to expend time and money in order to avoid a problem they don’t see any evidence of. Hard for them to do. Think of a frog in water that is being slowly heated. Same result.
-8
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:32 am)Why so low, because it is still gas engine, unlike the Atkinson cycle Prius/Fusion engine, Chevy Volt use an engine with Otto cycle, it has more power per volume, but fuel economy really sucks. Why they use Otto cycle? because if they use Atkinson cycle, it will have to be 1.2L and it is still underpowered.
Kudos to all GM engineers, we feel sorry for you for all the stress, hard work and love for the new auto technology, but this Volt will not be a success, and you know that, you guys are simply the best, and shame to that crappy Whitacre, he deserve nothing but shame!
Chevy Volt is another illicit child f***d by GM top brass for ballyhoo, nothing else!!! That Bob Lutz deserved to be spitted on!
All you GM top brass, please go to hell!!!!
Rashiid Amul:
This is what scares me.
The ICE doesn’t have to do whole lot as I understand it.
So I don’t understand why it is so low.I agree with your number, I just don’t understand why.
Like the price, the answer to this question is going to sting as well I’m afraid.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:34 am)Yes the two-mode has a direct linkage. The Volt would probably get better MPG if it used a direct linkage. But then it wouldn’t be an EV, would it? It would just be a serial hybrid like the plug-in Prius. Not a lot of excitement in that, so it was probably a better decision to go with the marketing message than with higher efficiency.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:37 am)Not me. I think it will be great. And let the controvesy swirl. The Volt will be its own best defender — but only if enough people get to drive it.
I do sincerely hope that GM makes enough available for test drives in the coming months.
-2
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:37 am)Congressional intransigence generated by fossil fuel lobbyists.
And people just don’t care what may happen to their grandchildren enough to give up driving a gas hog and pay attention to the environment.
For a significant part of the electorate, this may actually accelerate our reaching the “End Times,” and that’s a good thing because they’re all going to get sucked into Heaven and us sinners (who believe in Evil-Lution and the like) will be left behind to enjoy Armageddon.
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:38 am)I mean w/out the battery powering the car at all. I would like to know how the ICE performs in that size car w/those aerodyamics, etc. It would help me get an idea of the Volt’s efficiency and MPG. I know the Volt weighs more, that’s why it would probably be better to compare to the Plug in Prius, whenever we get that info.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:38 am)Shawn Marshall Says
Jul 29th, 2010 (9:19 am)
The price was a disappointment.
If the Volt does about 35 mpg in CS mode it would further explain the low production targets.
It would hurt the EREV approach and make Prius look a lot better to Greeniacs. Especially as it seems Toyota can simply add battery capacity to their design
incrementally as batteries improve.
I guess we can still hope that GM is holding the CS mpg close for a big splash but the 9 gallon tank seems contra-indicative. If it is around 35, it makes
the Volt essentially a commuter, not really suited for longer ranges, except for occasional trips. It would also be a boost to BEVs in my poor opinion,
especially for two car families. I think that’s a lot of people at ~25K (with tax rebate) and not so much at 33k.
I agree, I was hoping the CS mpg was going to be 38 however I think GM even stated that the CS mpg would be about the same as a Corolla. Using the series hybrid approach is simply not the most efficient in this case. I’m very interested in what changes will be made for Gen. II & III. I’m sure the Volt is a fine car but we need something more affordable and no lease.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:40 am)No it’s not. You understan these things because you’re smart and you’ve been looking at them for years. Most people won’t have that background to help make their decisions.
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:41 am)I’m still sticking by my ~30 mpg at 70 mph continuous highway driving.
I always get negatives but many of you are starting to realize I’m going to be right (or far closer than you estimate).
Again, the EREV drivetrain is less efficient than a direct mechanical connection at highway speeds. When you driving at 70 mph a normal ICE car can be thought of as having a direct mechanical connection and the rpm is optimal. The EREV drivetrain must go though more energy transitions (gen – controller – electric motor – driveshaft). Therefore, it will be less efficient. Sorry. You can give me negative point, swear, jump around the room but you can’t just wish away the laws of physics.
Once more, I claim this does not matter and that the Volt drivetrain is pure genius and will reduce the amount of gasoline used by most drivers by multiple amounts. If you are a big highway driver (long distance to work) then get an excellent diesel like a VW. Better yet, move close to work because the long suburb distance is going to be a killer after Peak Oil is recognized. Move closer to work and get a plug-in. Your welcome.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:45 am)can you explain how the gas mileage will be different if you drive 150, 100, 50 mile with CS mode? I think your having an inability to understand. If a person did several 200 mile drives without recharging and calculated gallons used by mile driven that will give you an average mpg when in CS mode. It doesn’t matter if you drive 5 or 500 miles you will get x number of mpg is cs mode.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:46 am)That sounds comprehensive as far as vehicle specs. But couldn’t all this would turn out to be a red herring for most drivers? Listing Volt gas mileage specifications, in the abstract, will actually tell you very little about how the car will perform in consumer hands.
The Volt may require a new approach at a different scale. The mysterious GPY measure.
LOL and great points.
I don’t know who may have said it earlier, but Dave G, solved it a few years ago, GPY. MPG does not work with this car. Make as many attempts to illustrate it as you like with miles per gallon. Top notch integration skills and some statistical sleuthing will help you build a picture that will confound and confuse everyone.
Gallons per year is much easier to understand. Compare gallons consumed per year by make and model. Simple, easily understood – gallons per year.
I believe I will need at most, about 38 gallons of gas a year. That alone makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.
I could go on and on about how I think that makes a huge difference. But I’ll just stop and say sorry for such a long comment to post.
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:47 am)============================
I had all kinds of problems on this site using I/E-8. It would lock up when I made a post, just freeze for no reason, and display errors, even after I installed the latest Adobe FLash updates.
I switched over to FireFox, and have had no problems since.
I do not know why, but it is only this site I had problems with…
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:48 am)I have never driven a vehicle GM or not that had a Range to Empty display that used the entire tank… The truth is we dont know all the details and to assume that the 300mi range consumes the entire volume of the 9 gallon tank is only speculation… Until we know for sure it is pointless to post an mpg with a simple 300/9
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:53 am)#13
Yup. 10-88. +1
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:54 am)Good for GM – not heeling to EPA’s incongruent policies. Now I’ve carped here about EPA’s having three years to think out a policy fitting VOLT. Nada.
That’s because EPA has designated Argonne Lab to carry the EV evaluation ball. http://www.transportation.anl.gov/phev/ This page being absolutely outdated Nov 2009.
…”Argonne National Laboratory, working together with Idaho National Laboratory, leads DOE’s efforts to evaluate PHEVs and PHEV technology with the nation’s best vehicle technology evaluation tools and expertise.”…
But–Idaho National Lab. (INL) hasn’t published a PHEV report since 2008.
So… there’s no VOLT EPA sticker.
Prediction: We’ll see EEProm propulsion before EPA figures out how to get hold of itself.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:55 am)Your right, GM didn’t produce this chart. YOU did! And is in clearly wrong to me.
For the situations where drivers go 40 miles or less they will use an extremely small amount of gas; essential zero. Therefore, your graph should go to infinity at the y-axis of the chart for the MPG Fuel Economy. The green line should continue to rise for miles driven. No leveling off! Off course, I am Chinese (not); I’m reading from right to left, bottom to top.
If you post your chart again, I suggest you correct the error.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
P.S. My original guess for MPG fuel economy was closer to 60 but I, too, now believe (that the engineers, as stated, intended to use a six gallon tank) is what we will see. That means in CS mode, you would get 50 mpg: Note: The picture at beginning of this article shows 5.3 gal. That’s just another reason I think it will be six gallon tank.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (10:58 am)Thank-You Ray for your post , I was just wondering what the Ford got in terms of mileage .
There just are too many things that don’t seem right to me about the Volt to even consider it now .
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:00 am)For the Gen 2 Prius look at the Yaris, the echo, the Scion XA, and the 1gen Scion XB. Same engine was used so probably 30’s city low 40’s Hwy. Im not sure what the Gen 3 prius engine is also used in.
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:00 am)I apologize…Edit for #108, related to nasaman’s comments. The top part is added the bottom is the same.
Does charging even make a difference with those CS mode make or break assumptions? Looks like a lot of folks feel that CS mode is that make or break issue? Is that really such a huge part of the Volt’s capabilities. Isn’t the Volt is a leapfrog exactly because of it’s ability to reduce, replace or eliminate the use of the onboard ICE. It’s a different “paradyme.” The question is not what mileage does the car get in CS mode, but as an electric car driver, how much gas do you need with your driving habits?
That sounds comprehensive as far as vehicle specs. But couldn’t all this would turn out to be a red herring for most drivers? Listing Volt gas mileage specifications, in the abstract, will actually tell you very little about how the car will perform in consumer hands.
The Volt may require a new approach at a different scale. The mysterious GPY measure.
LOL and great points.
I don’t know who may have said it earlier, but Dave G. solved it a few years ago. MPG does not work with this car. Make as many attempts to illustrate it as you like with miles per gallon. Top notch integration skills and some statistical sleuthing will help you build a picture that will confound and confuses everyone.
Gallons per year is much easier to understand. Compare gallons consumed per year by make and model. Simple, easily understood – gallons per year.
I believe I will need at most, about 38 gallons of gas a year. That alone makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.
I could go on and on about how I think that makes a huge difference. But I’ll just stop and say sorry for such a long comment to post.
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:04 am)I think you are making GMs point. CS mode by itself will be used very very rarely.
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:07 am)OT:
I just received another call from my local Chevy dealer. At least he seems interested in selling me a Volt!!! I am #1 on the list.
He said they still have no word from GM on when Ohio dealers would get authorized to sell the Volt. He is not happy about the limited release area either. He wondered why we keep getting beat with the big brown stick in Ohio all the time…..
He also said they have no information about servicing any Volt that might show up at the dealership for repairs.
And BTW, this is not some small dealership.
Doesn’t this contradict what GM is saying in all these press releases?
So I kind of get the feeling that the information flow from GM to their dealers is not all that good.
They really need to get their act together. After all, they have been doing this for quite a while, and you would think they already have procedures in place for this…..
JMHO
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:10 am)In an official White House announcement earlier today, GM has received an court order to stop sales of their upcoming electric car, the Volt. The cease and desist order was issued at the request of the EPA, due to the fact that the Volt’s official MPG (miles per gallon) has not been determined. An official spokesman for the EPA said “We cannot allow the sale of any car which has not been properly classified. Until we can find a formula for a direct comparison with gasoline powered automobiles, we cannot allow the sale of the Volt at this time.”
The President’s spokeperson told reporters “President Obama has no comment at this time”.
———————-
Hey, it could happen ! I’ve worked for the federal gov’t for 29 years now. This could actually happen. After the EV1, you can’t blame me for being a little paranoid. The EPA classified C02 as a pollutant, so anything is possible.
That’s why I’m BUYING a Volt instead of leasing. Yeah, it’s expensive, but at least it will be MINE ! You never “own” a leased car.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:11 am)Airs of superiority?
Your last few words negate most of the reasoning you might put forth (even if it WERE valid)- which is absurd for reasons some have already responded to you with today. [You stated that ppm thing a few days ago and someone beat me to the punch. I wanted to bring up cyanide in the bloodstream.] You demonstrate a continuing pattern among the naysayers of global warming- an emotional response. And it doesn’t take long into your (or all the other) putrid diatribes before you bring up Al Gore’s name. I wish, for all of our sakes, that some less controversial character had been a flag bearer, but whatever. Reason has to rule emotion.
Fact: CO2 causes global warming. Fact: Conservation of Matter. Fact: You put approximately 100 pounds mass (in the form of liquid) in your gas tank and drive around till it all has left your car in gaseous form (CO2 being a large part). Fact: There are hundreds of millions of us doing the same thing every day of every year. Then there are the users who support you (shipping, transportation, etc). Fact: Man cuts down rainforests and we lose large ABSORBERS of C02. The only people who can’t conclude that man is creating his own simmering stew of greenhouse effect are the ones who use emotions to make decisions instead of reason- and I don’t care if they have a PhD or not. Now put away your pouty face and use some logic. Even if you are not satisfied that ALL signs don’t yet point to a perilous conclusion, a smart person avoids the waterfall BEFORE he gets to the rapids in front of it.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:15 am)You’re correct and Baltimore pointed that out earlier, and when I originally posed this chart a week or so ago, i noted that betlow 40 miles it would be infinite. However Excel doesn’t like dividing by zero, i had to limit the range on the top of my chart, and i was doing this during my lunch time for 5 minutes. BUT, since it appears to bother so many, i will touch it up w/some paint shop pro, so next time I post it, it shows infinity. (OR GM could just make it).
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:16 am)A suggestion for a series of advertisements:
- start off by comparing the Volt to a “normal” car. It has a 75 HP engine. It can go 300 miles on x gallons of gas. But wait! The 75 HP engine is connected to an electric generator. And that is connected to a 111KW electric traction motor with a battery as a buffer. And that lets the traction motor develop more power than the generator. And the traction motor has the equivalent torque of a 200 HP engine. And the Volt has a smooth ride like a German import….
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:18 am)“Someone at GM (maybe an engineer) should simply provide unofficial test numbers. Example: On a long freeway incline we experience 30-33 MPG. Long flat runs at 45 mph yeild 44 MPG. On our Freedom Drive from Austin to DC we achieved 50MPG overall.”
That someone would be a former GM employee 15 minutes after the information was released. We need a “GM deepthroat” to release the information under a freedom of information act request.
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:20 am)Thank you, DonC. I get it now.
So we need a fusion reactor in the car so that we have less conversions.
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:21 am)Very interesting, Tom.
I knew that cold weather affected mileage, but I didn’t realize that it did it by the amount you have experienced.
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:24 am)They really do seem to be hiding something. If it’s something good (better than expected) that could make for some great buzz leading into the first month of sales. If it’s something bad (less than expected) it could really give this program a black eye. If it’s in the 30’s I’d definitely consider that pretty bad (mostly affecting those consumers with significant highway driving). If it’s in the 40’s, meh to somewhat bad. If it’s in the 50’s, meh to good. If it’s in the 60’s, awesome! I think it’s ridiculous if GM doesn’t tell people what CS MPG is before selling it… so I assume it will be on that damn chart but they’re making it sound like it won’t???
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:29 am)Would’t it give you a little higher efficiency in just one mode of operation. To me it would be a little like optimizing everything I do to be most efficient during my two week vacation( The two weeks when I may be driving the farthest and can’ use my home charger). And suffering through lower efficiencies for the other 50 weeks of the year. I’m guessing two mode would not give me overall higher efficiencies than Voltec.
If I’m going to compromise I’d rather it be something I spend the least amount of time on. 40 miles of AER makes it possible.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:29 am)I’m not talking about “Range to Empty” on the instrument panel, where some degree of caution might be useful, I’m talking about published figures for the vehicles overall range. This has always been tank size * mpg.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:32 am)Simple lesson for GM:
Don’t beat around the bush. The CS fuel economy is what it is. You will not pi$$ people off if you provide that number. However you will definitely turn people off if you don’t. There are enough conspiracy theorists out there criticizing GM over electrification of cars that you shouldn’t be adding fuel to the fire, looking like you’re hiding something.
GM also should have learned something with the pricing game. I feel the volt price is reasonable given the amount of new technology and the low production and risk involved to GM. If they had been more transparent about price I don’t think there would be all these angry and disappointed comments over the last few days. However with that said, GM left that price question twist in the wind for so long, and came out with so many vague statements which people interpreted 1000 different ways, that it pretty much bit the General in the a$$ afterwards.
CS fuel economy better be near 50mpg (the number @ which they left twisting in the wind)… and if it’s not come out and say so or it’s only going to be worse when people eventually find out.
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:36 am)I’m laughing. You are correct. I used the wrong “ranker”.
Well, I do try to be perfect. I usually don’t succeed. At least according to my wife.
Enjoy you day, flmark.
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:36 am)But I’m not asking them why they’re not giving up their gas hogs. Or even to cut carbon emissions. (Well, I am, but not here.)
If everyone agrees that global warming is happening, and they only dispute the cause, why not make sure new bridges are more heat resistant? Or build more drainage? We have the technology. It can’t be that expensive.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:37 am)I think the solution is simple. Since the Volt runs in two modes, battery or gas assisted then the label should appear with two numbers. First would address battery operation and would be in Kilowatts per mile with appropriate cost for electricity. The second mode range extender would show a miles per gallon and supporting cost data. Cost would be added together for a cost per mile of energy used. Putting a listing that tries to give a miles per gallon for combined is a misleading number at best, because there are to many variables. So just stick to the basics and the numbers will add up properly.
-2
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:39 am)I disagree.
Look how much trouble GM is having in trying to explain the car as it is. There’s a recent post in the forum about some CNN report “getting it all wrong.” Nobody knows it’s an EREV, nobody knows what an EREV is and GM’s not having much success explaining it (never mind the particulars of the car seem to shift mysteriously from time to time).
The Volt must compete with the Prius. Better numbers, all around, are the best marketing message they can send. If a direct mechanical linkage would get them there, that’s what they should be using.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:43 am)I’m one of those people who believe in Global Warming, but have no idea what is really causing it.
However, putting less pollution into the air we breathe helps everyone.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:46 am)WTF EPA? You’ve known about the Volt for 3+ years now and you STILL can’t decide how you will rate it? That is seriously lame. Just pick something.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:48 am)No manufacturer provides the estimated fuel economy of their vehicles. The EPA is a government agency charged to do so. From experience, it is hard to regulate the government to do their job….. thus when the government fails to do their job there is no reprecussions.
+7
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:49 am)Yes. Education is the key. The VOLT represents technology in a combination not used before. So, how does this look?
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:55 am)Flmark, I agree with you about global warming. I take it very seriously. But the one thing I’ve learned in my quest to cut my personal carbon footprint, is that, ultimately, we’re all hypocrites. We could all do more than we’re doing now. Me included. It’s all a matter of degree. There are things I’m not willing to give up. And that’s true of pretty much everyone.
On a personal level–I gave up beef. And lamb. And pork. I will not give up chicken. Or dairy. I try to buy from (relatively) sustainable producers. But that’s not always possible. I will not give up traveling. I try to carry a reusable bag for groceries, but for takeout I still get plastic bags because I’m not willing to risk a leak. I try to reduce my use of airconditioning. But, I still need to sleep. I take the subway to work. But, sometimes, to get someplace quickly, I take a cab.
I could go on…Basically, no one is going to give up the aspects of modern life that matter the most to them. And, any solution that requires people to do so on an individual basis, is flat out not going to happen. At some point, we need the government to step in. Grass roots doesn’t cut it.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:55 am)Maybe i’m a SIMPLE guy but all i need to know is:
How far on a full charge: 40miles depending on driving habbits
How far on a gallon of gas after battery is depleted: (XX) mpg depending on driving habbits
They just did the Freedom drive, they know exactly what type of mpg the Volt is getting. The fact that they aren’t releasing it is very concerning. They did the same thing with the MSRP and look what it came in at…..
It doesn’t have to be official, they could say something like ” In our test drives we have been achieving mpg of XX during charge sustaining mode. That number isn’t offical till verified by the EPA”.
In all honesty i can’t believe all the people at GM involved in this and we can’t get a tester, or engineer to leak this info….
As has been said here already the fact that their not saying coupled with the fact that their trying to come up with some crazy formula that ties the all electric & gas miles used together makes me think it’s not very good. Which i can’t understand for the life of me since the ICE Cruise that is on the same chasis and has very close dimensions, and a worse drag is gonna get 40mpg
Now i know why Lutz and the rest of the origional Volt team is gone, because so is the vision for the Volt that they had originaly. Now its a Halo car to get people to buy Cruises & Malibu’s and help with their fleet CAFE average.
+5
Jul 29th, 2010 (11:59 am)I’m guessing right about now there is quite a bit of wrangling between GM and the Feds about what the “gas” mileage is, because it could have a potentially big impact on the GM’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) rating. GM is going to want a formula that makes the MPG as high as possible, which takes pressure of its other units, particular those that make trucks and SUVs.
The logical thing, as many have pointed out is to list just EV range and CS MPG, but the CS MPG alone won’t help the CAFE rating as much as the formula that gave the Volt 230 MPG.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:01 pm)Ow ya as far as the price….
You can buy 2 Chevy Cruise’s and still have 8K left over to put 3,077 gallons of gas into them.
$8,000.00 / $2.60 = 3076.923 gallons
Hard to justify this…..
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:03 pm)Couldn’t have said it better myself……. This is about alot more than CS mode MPG.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:04 pm)Global warming is not per se the primary issue. We are destroying the planet with pollution.
Your link argues that scientific data is flawed and cherry picked and denounces the “hockey stick” graph as unprovable as we don’t have actual reliable records. However the same article uses sediment data strata and ice cores to support their claim about sun intensity fluctuations. They say that higher temperatures are causing more CO2 to come from the ground and mostly from the oceans. If this is true how come coral, algae, and fish are dying because of measured increases of acidity caused by increased CO2? They cite many glaciers that are increasing, however more than 80% are decreasing. But to give them some credit, they are not arguing that global warming does not exist or that pollution is good, just that they believe global warming is natural and not caused by man.
Aside from global warming issues, we still need to stop pollution and save our sources of oxygen and food.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age for hockey stick temperature graph
See: http://psc.apl.washington.edu/ArcticSeaiceVolume/images/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrent.png for Arctic Ocean ice volume trend.
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:12 pm)What does a Prius get at a steady 70mph?
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:15 pm)Chevrolet needs to use a “Horses for Courses” advertising campaign, rather than shouting “You will get infinite gas mileage [whisper] if you go less than 40 or maybe 30 miles, or is it 25 [/whisper]”
They could be having CARB problems with the range extender part of the equation. Funny thing happened to the CARB approved Hymotion plug-in Prius. CARB took a look at it and made them modify the thing (Which some folks promptly un-modified) so that the ICE was forced to warm up so that it could have lower total emissions.
The mileage test that should be keeping Volt fanciers awake nights will be the one that some wiseguy will perform using 18 gallons of gas. Nine will go into a fully charged Volt, the other nine into a similarly charged PHEV Prius. Both cars will start from the Ferry Building in ‘Frisco (sorry, couldn’t resist) and head towards Salt Lake City over the Sierras. I shudder to think about the results.
The Volt is a perfect car for some people. The Leaf is a perfect car for some people. The PHEV Prius will be a perfect car for some people.
Competition is good.
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:16 pm)Yes, the list of problems is enough to make one need a tranquilizer. One can only control one’s own a) actions, b) communications, and c) purchases.
A) Walk, bike or car pool when possible. Drive efficiently, without jackrabbit starts and delayed (full force) braking. Utilize Reusable bags for grocery store trips (they aren’t just practical; they make a statement when you pull them out). Check out something like http://www.amazon.com/Envirosax-Candy-5-Pouch/dp/B0027CT2JE This pouch will easily fit in most women’s handbags. I leave the pouch in the car and stuff a few bags in my pockets before I go into the store. Each bag holds 40 lbs. Recycle everything you can. The list goes on and on and once you start down the path, you actually become obsessive-compulsive in self-examination.
B) Educate yourself and tell as many as you can about what can be done. When I told my son-in-law about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a area of plastic the size of Texas, he replied, “Why don’t we ever hear about this stuff?” Well, now he has heard. Maybe he’ll use a bit less plastic and recycle. Write your representatives. The environmental regulations of the early ’70s happened because grass roots folks used politics as a tool to get rid of some of the worst and scare the rest (for fear of being voted out of office) of our politicians into action. http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/011085.html
C) This forum is about the right kind of car, but our purchase decisions run the gamut from the obviously green (solar panels) to laundry detergent. The very fact that wholesale clubs are offering up green alternatives is a very positive thing. Buy them!! Tell others to buy them!! Any product needs word-of-mouth support from a satisfied customer, so much more so for these green products. LED bulbs use 90% less electricity and (should) last for decades. Buy a UPS (Battery back up) for your home entertainment center. Not only does this protect the equipment, it also gives you an on-off switch for several energy sucking vampires to kill all at once. In the market for a new cooktop? Buy an induction cooktop which is generally twice as efficient as alternatives. I have gotten rid of my lawn and planted shrubs, beds, etc and installed a limited amount of artificial turf. This is not your father’s astroturf, it fools even the lawn care specialists. I now have NOT ONE gasoline powered tool in my garage. And now I have come to get annoyed with the sound (and smell) of lawn mowers in my neighborhood. Another discussion that could continue on and on.
While your discussion goes on into other societal issues, I am discussing Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow’s_hierarchy_of_needs My discussion lies with the very base of the pyramid. You can’t solve ANY other problem if you first have to figure out where food and water are coming from. This is the seriousness of the issue as pointed out with my first post. If the very bottom of food chain is in peril, health care, financial reform, etc is a ridiculous preoccupation. It is not just a WAY of life that is at stake, it is the LIFE itself.
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:16 pm)this quote is an example. but applies to any thinking GM is hiding something.
READ MY LIPS.” the EPA makes that tag, not GM” if the EPA has nothing for GM to use, then there is nothing to use. GM will make an info sticker until the gubermint has something. Yes you can sell without an EPA sticker, its not like GM hid the launch date, or hid how it operates (40 miles AER rest in CS mode) its just the EPA did nothing to address how they can evaluate it. Shame on them. you want a number? 230mpg. assuming regular driving patterns and full nightly recharge. EPA may be less as will your daily driving habits affect this number.
no secret. so STFU
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:25 pm)Wrong way Nelson.
Deplete the battery, fill the tank, drive 100 + miles, stop at gas station, refill tank. divide total miles by number of gallons used to refill tank. THAT is your actual MPG.
your way only works if a) you KNOW the total volume of your tank, b) the guage is calibrated that way (my equinox deplets the bottom 1/2 faster than the top because of its shape, so 1/4 on the gauge is not 1/4 of the volume)
My way measures the gas consummed
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:26 pm)No, it cannot be simply added together, to do so would capture only a slight portion of the spectrum Volt performance during consumer use.
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:29 pm)That’s the trouble, LauraM, not everyone agrees. Almost all of those who actually study climate agree that AGW is real and probably a significant threat:
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/evidence-for-a-consensus-on-climate-change/
There are a few holdouts with some significant credibility (which, by the way, they are losing), Pielke and Lindzen for example, but none have published any research that actually refutes the consensus opinion.
There’s a good article on the origins of climate science over on RealClimate.org today. I highly recommend it. The comments are good, too. Then check out a slightly earlier article, “The Montford Delusion” to learn why the idea of fixing AGW gets no traction.
+2
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:31 pm)EPA should read like this..
PHV PRIUS:
EV Range: Up to 13 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 60mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
Chevy Volt:
EV Range: Up to 40 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 90mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
LEAF:
EV Range: Up to 100 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 90mph
Hybrid Mode: N/A
All depending on driver and driving conditions.
Don’t try and blend the numbers.
Keep it “KISS”.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:32 pm)Mine gets 48MPG @ 70 MPH
I typically drive at 63MPH and can achieve 58.8MPG
At 55 MPG for 2 hours I have clocked in 64 MPG
And these values are all on E-10, on Gasoline without Ethanol probably a 3-5% improvement
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:36 pm)I understand it but it looks like the Leaf is going backwards.
Have them both start from the same point at the left and just color the extended range-bar a different color. It should be obvious that the Volt runs out of juice first but keeps going and runs out of gas much, much later.
I wonder how it would work to try to show charge time as part of the chart? Maybe something like a Gantt chart would serve.
It’s still going to be hard to communicate this. Look on the bright side – they only have to educate 10K people to sell out in 2011. That’s doable.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:42 pm)The GM Volt test engineers doing the cross country drives surely know the amount of gas and CSM MPGs under a wide range of road conditions.
With the Volt only weeks away from dealerships why not share some of the CSM MPG test drive results with us, the customers, before we decide to buy or lease?
Example, “During our freedom drive from Austin to New York City we only used (fill in the blank) gallons and averaged (fill in the blank) MPG”.
Early adopters will provide more CSM information but it’s no substitute for providing customers upfront with results from GM’s own Volt test drives.
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:42 pm)Hey, that’s a good point. I dunno if that would be possible though. Unless ALL the mfgr’s like Coulomb, Ecotality etc….standardize on set wattage. I think right now, some Level I use 9A and some might use 12A. No standard was really applied so sh|ts gonna be everywhere.
But I think that might be a good idea.
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:43 pm)Not hard to justify at all – just depend on your priorities…
Assume 38MPG combined on the cruize.
3076 gallons * 38 combined 116888 miles or about 58444 miles each.
3076 * 19lbs of CO2 58501 lbs of CO2 emmitted in 1/3 of the cars expected life.
3076 * 3 (expect 150k miles each) 9228 Gallons total over life of cars
9228 * 2.60 = $23,992 spent in gas assuming price never goes up / 2 or $12,000 in gas per car.
175332 LBS of CO2 emitted combined in gas emmissions over life of the 2 cars.
My chevy volt 28 gallons per year at 18,000 miles. 8.3 years to 150K miles (at 40MPG CS Mode)
8.3 * 28 = 232.4 gallons over life of car 4415.16 lbs of CO2
175,000 lbs of CO2 for your 2 cruises or 87,500 each
4,500 lbs of CO2 for my volt
Spending $12,000 in forign oil for each cruize
Spending $ 605 in forign oil for my 1 volt (E-85 on Gen 2)
Thats how I justify it
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:43 pm)If you’re looking for suggestions, a native plant garden is much better than artificial turf. It doesn’t require any fertilizer or extra water other than rain. You could also grow some of your own food. Organically. And, since you have a garden, you could compost a lot of your waste. (I live in an apartment building, so none of this is an option for me.)
As far as carrying a reusable tote–they’re available at most supermarkets. And, unlike Amazon, buying it there doesn’t involve personal shipping.
As far as the eco-friendly laundry detergent (or any other kind of detergent for that matter)–some of them are more eco-friendly than others. For example, how eco-friendly is it to ship laundry detergent (which is mostly water) from Belgium? Or worse, China? Buy the powdered kind. Made as close to you as possible.
I recently heard that so called “natural” sunscreen ingredients (zinc oxide and titanium dioxide) are generally used in the form of nano-particles that are actually worse than the chemicals..
Oh, and forget “organic” dry cleaning. Apparently, it’s made from oil. You have to find a place that does carbon dioxide cleaning. Which, at least in NY is rare. Some places do wet cleaning for certain pieces, you have to ask…Better yet, don’t buy anything that requires dry cleaning…
And then there’s the whole mass produced organic debate. Is it really better to use copper as a pesticide?
My point is that it really does never end…
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:44 pm)This is news? Ever seen government accounting. I wouldn’t even call it accounting, just incredibly boring narrative accompanied by some numbers.
In a way it makes sense though, when you run a monopoly organization, the standards setters are elected by popularity contests, your disclosure standards to lenders consist of only an interest rate quote, you lend trillions with no collateral, your budgets are ignored, you’ve been running since day one at a loss, and profits are never, ever expected.
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:47 pm)This is what intrigues me most about the CS mode for the Volt.
If, somehow the Volt is able to increase the mpg in CS mode relative to an equivalent pure ICE, then I would really press that someone build me a “cheap” EREV, that uses a 20 HP (I calculated this out before, but 20HP should be sufficient) on-board generator that runs nearly constantly to charge a “small” battery (4-6KW).
This solution does a few things.
One, is price reduction would be fairly good. You have reduced the engine size and all its supporting components significantly (Possibly air cooled..?).
Also, you cut your battery pack in 1/2 or more. I would guestimate the GM or other big car maker, could build this car for about $23-27k.
Another benefit is the weight reduction will be significant, therefore helping with mpg.
And you also get more room, so adding that 5th seat back in should be a piece of cake.
This was my original concept of the Volt from day one, but soon learned that this was not the idea behind the Volt.
If you could squeeze 50mpg using this type of design, which I believe is very possible, I would expect them to sell like hot cakes!
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:48 pm)Nick.
That is simply beautiful…
I love you man!
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:54 pm)============================
The problem with your logic, Laura, is that governments at all levels do not even have the funds to repair what exists today, let alone try to over-build for a problem they do not have yet. I may be completely wrong about this, but IMHO, governments are reactive, not proactive. Once there is an oil spill, or a bridge collapse, the elected officials all want to be on TV, so they wring their hands and say “How did this happen? But don’t worry, we will fix it so it never happens again.” Then they have the hearings, and pass legislation ends up so diluted that it changes basically nothing. Just look at the financial meltdown, and what was done do “fix” it, and what is going on now with the oil spill in the Gulf. The MMS did nothing to make sure that BP was prepared for a catastrophe, even though that is part of their mandate. And the hearings are going on now…..
And as far as the EPA figuring out how to rate the Volt, I just want to say this: They are overseeing the “cleanup” of the Gulf. Need I say more????
Sorry, I really try to stay out of political discussions, but sometimes I just can’t help myself!
+3
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:55 pm)Check out my house I made my green statement!!!!!!
It was supposed to be my VOLT gas station
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:55 pm)60 mpg ?
-1
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:56 pm)What year is your Prius? Thanks.
Jul 29th, 2010 (12:56 pm)Once the interested potential buyers and lessees are done playing musical chairs to find a dealer that still has Volts allocated, there will be no one left to educate
They will sell out the first years production allotment without any consumer education.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:02 pm)I tried that, but I think this chart highlights the fact that the VOLT has extended range capabilities where the Leaf does not. At least a little better.
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:03 pm)Its a 2010 on lease until 2013 at which ponit it will be traded in and i will be purchsing my Volt if available, otherwise I will buy the car for the Residual.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:11 pm)Well, in my experience, people generally live up (or down) to people’s expectations. In other words, since we expect complete government incompetence, why are we surprised when we get it? Maybe if we started expecting them to be more competent, they would be.
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:13 pm)Overbuild? If they’re going to build a bridge anyway, it doesn’t cost that much to make it stand up to a wide range in temperature. They already do it in areas with more widely ranging temperatures. It seems like a sensible precaution.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:14 pm)They behave the same way as they did before Chapter 11, with all those said, we must appreciate GM engineers, you are the best, but the top managers are sh*t and will continue to ruin the company.
+1
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:17 pm)I’m with the posters that could care less, personally, about the mpg in CS mode. However, I must acknowledge that there seem to be a lot of posters that do care, so I hope GM does not disappoint them.
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:24 pm)I don’t disagree with anything you said. I haven’t given up beef and heck, we are all here discussing something that still burns oil. I am not a Haite Ashbury lunatic. I get a kick out of the extremist types who live in communes and condemn us all (where do they get the glass from, solar panels, etc?). They are the hypocrites who still use industrially produced goods and act like they don’t.
I believe self examination yields self improvement to some similar threshold that you strive for. At some point though, it MUST become outward activism (or you end up in a commune). And that outward push inevitabley starts with the visible excesses of the clearly self absorbed who put societal needs nowhere on their agenda. (The Hummer ought to be the logo for this group). Unfortunately, I believe they are the last ones who will get it. We should really focus our influence on the moderates to start the self-examination process. Society can migrate its viewpoints- hopefully soon enough to head off calamity.
The ‘N-word’ (of racial division) always disturbed me as a child, yet it was ubiquitous. If you had said to the average American in 1965 that a [N-word] named Barack Obama would be president within 50 years, they would have put you in a straight jacket and locked you away. It is this change in my lifetime that gives me hope that we can save a semblance of the very comfortable lives we have now and deliver it to our descendants.
However, I think it unlikely that Americans will lead the charge or really take action until challenged (as with Sputnik). We seem to be complacent until it is too painful to not be. It may be a blessing that the Chinese were the have-nots until it was becoming clear that fossil fuels would not help them continue with their progress. They have realized that to CONTINUE to improve their lifestyles, renewable methods are the only route to pursue.
Larry Hagman is noted for having the largest residential solar array in the country. He did it not to change the world, but to remove his negative impact from the world. If we all took that attitude, I whole-heartedly believe that we could keep enough of our ‘vices’ that our lives wouldn’t seem draconian at all. The attitude that must prevail though is that all of our consumerism must be SUSTAINABLE. You should be able to have your ’steak’ (well it rhymes with cake) and eat it too (but not at every meal).
There is an interesting show on the Planet Green network called ‘WA$TED’. It is a reality show where the biggest wasters are counselled and try to reform themselves. The usual starting point seems to be, “if everyone lived this lifestyle (analyzed at the start of the episode) we would need 3 planets”. Society should/will get to the point that our free choices will not be tolerated if personal excess results in inequitable resource consumption. If this does not happen, Albert Einstein’s quote about fighting future wars with stones will become truth.
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:31 pm)Agreed. The Volt requires a new “2-mode” classification. 40 miles on battery power, 50 MPG using gas.
A combined MPG is simply impossible because a 42 mile trip and a 360 mile trip will yield totally different MPG results.
Jul 29th, 2010 (1:39 pm)Real World Leaf Test Drive
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/27/2011-nissan-leaf-first-drive-road-test-review/#comments