Last year GM discontinued several mild hybrid models it was offering, including the Chevy Malibu and Saturn Aura hybrids. These systems relied on a stop-start belt-alternator system that improved fuel economy about 10%. Those cars used small 36-v nickel metal hydride batteries and did not have the capability of pure electric propulsion.
The cars were discontinued due to poor sales in the case of the Malibu and the brand’s demise in the case of the Aura.
According to GM’s executive director of hybrids an EVs, Larry Nitz, however, GM will be re-introducing a more powerful second generation of the system next year.
The second generation mild hybrid system uses a larger 100-v lithium-ion battery, regenerative braking, and can provide boost during acceleation. It still cannot drive purely on an elecric motor so in that way is similar to Honda’s IMA system currently in use in the Insight and CR-Z.
Nitz said the application will debut in a mid-size car in the third quarter of 2011 but declined to announce the model. Some experts speculate it could appear in the new Buick Regal.
GM will eventually manufacture its own electric motor for the system as opposed to sourcing it from suppliers as it has in the past. In-house electric motors will first get put to use in the next generation two-mode hybrid system which will appear as an option in future trucks and SUVs. The two-mode system will also have a plugin variant, and are more powerful allowing electric only propulsion and electric assist at both low and high speeds. Nitz declined to say when either would debut
The new mild hybrid design will achieve a 20% efficiency gain over gas engines. In the system, a small electric motor is mated to a 4 cylinder Ecotec engine and a six speed transmission, and the engine will be turned off whenever the opportunity arises. In the first generation system the motor and small battery were bolted to a four cylinder engine and 4 speed transmission which were not optimized for efficiency or regenerative braking.
GM had once considered producing a lightweight highly-aerodynamic dedicated non-plugin hybrid capable of over 50 MPG, but cancelled the program in favor of focusing on the Volt.
Source (Automotive News)
+7
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:19 am)Oh boy more hybrids! What about a Gen2 Volt??
GO EV!!!
+5
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:19 am)“GM had once considered producing a lightweight highly-aerodynamic dedicated non-plugin hybrid capable of over 50 MPG, but canceled the program in favor of focusing on the Volt.”
I would love to see this. I’m glad they (I should say “we” since I work at GM) stayed focused on the Volt, but it seems that there would be a nice market for the car described above.
+4
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:22 am)Maybe gm is looking for just a little bump up in CAFE for just a little investment. Doesn’t sound like there is anything here that people will get excited about, but maybe a small step in the right direction.
If the improvement,though small, affects enough cars it can have a big effect. It can get gm past some paperwork. In the end it’s probably a question of the price and competition.
+5
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:22 am)I really have no interest in a Gas/electric Hybrid. It doesn’t seem to be a good idea to continually stop/start a gas engine while in city traffic. The Volt’s Erev system seems so much more practical. Gas engines are designed to run in steady state; the thermal cycling of an hybrid will shorten its life.
+8
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:25 am)—
My feelings about gen2 Volt are very cautious. It could be a car with all the same great features, perfected so as to be even better at the same or possibly even lower price. Or, it could be a dumbed down version that retains the name and some of the badging, but is only a pale shadow of gen 1. Based on the emphasis on cost reduction, I wonder.
As Tag loves to say “Stay tuned”
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:26 am)They talk of the Volt as having powerful computer capability, but it seems that even more computer capability is necessary for this type of vehicle. The Volt could be considering enabling technology for even Gasoline/electric hybrids since these need capabilities from both pure electric drive trains and from conventional drive trains.
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:27 am)Yawn………………
+27
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:28 am)So nobody wanted a mild hybrid that saved 10% of fuel, why do you think they want one that saves 20%. I think the only way these are going to sell is if like Lincoln the cost is the same or pretty darn close to the base model equivalent. Mild hybrids are so yesterdays technology, bring out some more EREV options and flood the market with them so you can get the cost down.
+15
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:30 am)Would you rather save a mild amount of gas or a lot of gas?
+9
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:36 am)The hybrids are an important component of a car companies near future plans. The issue right now is that E-REVs are expensive and BEVs are limited in range. For the near future, 5-10 year range, many people will not be able to justify buying an E-REV or BEV. That leaves standard gas vehicles or hybrids. One might not be able to afford the Volt but may be albe to shell out for that hybrid option.
If the addon costs of the hybrids can be kept minimal, then people will be able to justify spending up to a few thousand more for a hybrid over a gas only vehicle. For this reason, the hybrids will play a very important role over the next decade.
I hope we can get small batteries and regen braking in a large portion of the fleet as we wait for battery technology, pure electrics, and EREV designs to mature.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:39 am)Or this could be thought of “can you afford to spend 15-20 thousand more on that mid sized car or 3-5 thousand more.”
+12
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:41 am)It all comes down to cost vs. savings for weak hybrids. If they get the goal fuel savings and do it at a reasonable cost then great. I have my doubts it can be done to satisfy consumers when plug-ins and BEVs are starting to come to market.
Since all the people that don’t care about the cost are going to the real electrics, it’s only the money savers that are going to waste time on weak hybrids. So, do you feel lucky?
My guess is that we should have another significant petroleum “event” within one year’s time. We are just about to hit the production levels we reached back in July 2008. One year with current growth and we will be back to that brick wall of limits.
Because of this, I think weak hybrids are a waste of time, engineers and capital. Go electric or go home. This strategy should be clear in a few short years and we all know how long it takes to change model strategy. GM, just jump in… The water feels great.
+6
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:49 am)I like that GM learned from their 1st Gen mild hybrids and developed a whole new mild hybrid with a plug variant. Just as the Volt is GM’s lesson learned from the EV1, this new mild hybrid and its plug in variant should better suit their customer base.
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:55 am)from the post: “GM had once considered producing a lightweight highly-aerodynamic dedicated non-plugin hybrid capable of over 50 MPG, but cancelled the program in favor of focusing on the Volt.”
That’s got to make you wonder… If they can get 50mpg out of a 4 cylinder and a battery that uses regenerative breaking whilst making the car highly aerodynamic, then why wouldn’t the volt be able to achieve those numbers in CS mode?
Are they trying to tell us something? Hmmm…
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:04 am)Or. The glut of oil in Cushing will cause a fire sale on crude short term. Economic growth is not up to the predicted trends at this point and the world view is still iffy.
It’s a real crap shoot. Oil higher. Oil lower. All we know for sure is that oil is not stable. That instability makes alternatives look pretty good. My electric rate is locked in for 12 months. Gasoline, not so much.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:06 am)From the article:
The new mild hybrid design will achieve a 20% efficiency gain over gas engines.
It remains to be seen if consumers will pay the usually high premium for a 20% gas savings.
+4
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:06 am)After reading the post again, I realized that the line of thought is probably this one:
GM wants to make engines smaller.
Smaller engines have weak acceleration, and people do not like to buy them.
A little battery boost provides compensation.
That’s all. Nothing exciting here.
This object is defense, not offense.
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:11 am)I think the cars being referenced are the super-light-weight hyper MPG cars. They didn’t have any safety or emissions equipment and were not built for production. They were all experimental one-offs like the Dodge Intrepid ESX.
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:21 am)I think you have analyzed the “mild hybrid” idea quite well.
Currently the Prius – Hybrid Fusion – seem to have the better solution. Ford states they will not charge a premium for hybrid tech anymore.
Kind of like being a little bit pregnant. Either it is a hybrid with much better mileage or it is not. I believe this is how the new GM products will be judged.
Why not advance Volt’s technology as noted in other posts?
Just my 2 cents and how I would look at these new vehicles.
+9
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:24 am)My suggestion for GM would be to quietly include this mild hybrid componetry into all of their vehicles. Seriously. Figuring the costs spread out across their entire fleet would have to bring the cost in control, and give their whole line a 20% gain in fuel efficeincy off the bat. Just a thought.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:26 am)Now will they price this hybrid version the same as the regular version? (kinda like Ford did)
Not sure what the mpg of the new Regal is, but if they threw this in the Spark it could get some seriously good mpg.
I like the continuing electrification of the auto industry. Now we just need gas prices to go up to really get the ball rolling from the consumer’s end. If you buy them, they will build them.
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:33 am)Once the volt is brought to market, GM’s continued production of Mild Hybrids is a step backwards. From this point on, all GM Hybrids should be Serial Plug-Ins with an eye on the ultimate goal of Pure Battery Electrics.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:33 am)It all depends on 20% of what. 20% improvement on a 35mpg car isn’t much $ savings. But if the car gets 15mpg, a 20% savings = 3 more miles per gallon, or for a 15,000 miles/year = 167 gallons of fuel saved or at $3/gallon , $500/year savings.
15mpg is an extreme example, but you see what i’m saying.
+5
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:35 am)Some on this forum have stated that if we as a country can reduce oil consumption by 10%, it would change everything. So if this technology reduces consumption by 20%, why not?
I think this is all part of GM’s strategy to offer fuel savings at different price points.
Option 1: A mild hybrid, get a 20% increase in mileage for low cost
Option 2: 2-Mode, A 50% increase in mileage, but for a higher cost
Option 3: 2-Mode with plug-in, an apparent 100% increase in mileage, but for a much higher cost
Option 4: E-REV, an apparent 400% increase in mileage (gasoline), 2nd mortgage required
So let’s look at an average car, like a 4 cyl Malibu. It is rated 22/33, or about 27 average. Since the mild hybrid will likely help city mileage more than highway, the new ratings might be 29/36, which averages to 32 mpg, or about a 20% increase.
If the option price is right, this could be worthwhile.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:38 am)I read this as ” We wanted to make something like the Prius, but better than the Prius. So instead of using the same existing technology, we leapfrogged it and came up with the Serial Hybrid, AKA the Chevy Volt, and this is what we are concentrating on now.”
+5
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:38 am)Message to Larry Nitz!
If it doesn’t plug-in to start the day with a full charge, don’t waist GM’s time and money making it.
NPNS!
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:41 am)They could even sell it in Camaro’s & Vette’s as a electro-boost for taking off at the line to beat their buddies. I know, this doesn’t help fuel economy, but it would open electric technology to a new segment, and also help drive the costs down.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:44 am)Ford’s decision to charge no premium for at least some of their hybrids removes the “will this pay for itself with gas savings?” calculation. Now customers can get on to the “can I tweak OPEC with this car?” question. For those who can’t afford the large batteries in the Volt, or the huge batteries in BEVs, a mild hybrid without a cost premium is a step in the right direction for the nation. So GM, can you sell this mild hybrid for the same price as a conventional V-6 model?
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:49 am)It’s too bad that GM is 10 years behind in this IMA set up that is almost identical to the Gen1 Honda Insight that came out in 1999.
I can’t believe they put a 36volt battery in those “hybrids”. My dinky little electric scooter has a 36v battery pack in it. No wonder those cars sucked.
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:51 am)For a small gain a tremendous increase in complexity. If GM promotes this type of approach vs. EREV, the battle is lost for GM. Ford will eat their lunch. GM should build on the Volt concept instead where they have huge advantage. If EREV cost is the main factor here, GM should offer AER in several flavors besides the 40 mile range such as 30 and even 20 miles instead of all these hybrid flavors. People will find their own sweet spot with those ranges and flexibility For larger vehicles hybridization may be the best short term answer.
GM needs to remember *KISS*.
As battery capacity improves the whole EREV fleet would improve with it. Diversity if resulting in increased complexity is not GM’s or any mass producer’s friend.
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:52 am)I guess when I meant “event” I meant another skyrocket price increase followed by another recession. Just like a bouncing ball. If the economy falls more then yes, oil will get cheaper because economies are fueled by petroleum. You can’t have working economies without energy. Economists who like to separate the two have no idea how things really work. One only has to look at human population graphs vs. energy production to see just how close they relate.
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:59 am)The Insight used NiMh batteries. GM is using Li-ion. Statements like ‘so and so’ is 15 years behind ‘so and so’, gets kind of old, esp. when we all know electric car technology has been around for 100 years.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:01 am)Because, as I keep saying, a weak hybrid has a simple mechanical link during “CS – highway driving”. That mechanical link is more efficient than the ICE – gen – controller – electric motor – transmission link of a serial hybrid. It’s that simple. The Volt has a tremendous drivetrain and I hope it’s a huge hit due to its strengths. However, driving long distances on the highway is not one of them. If you do that, get a diesel (and move closer to work).
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:06 am)The problem with say a 10 mile EREV is people may not bother plugging in for that short of range (and some people may just not want to plug in period), but even if they do, I dont think the cost savings is that much. Removing just X amount of lithium battery out of the car isn’t going to shave off that much money. A lot of the cost is the technology development and the battery conditioning/monitoring system.
+6
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:07 am)I think OPEC learned their lesson from the last run up in oil. $150/barrel was great short term (for them), but it woke up a sleeping giant of innovation. As long as they control the range between $65-$95/barrel, the giant goes back to sleep.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:13 am)GM has been saying (and repeating) for some time that the Volt gets 50mpg in CS mode, it has become fashionable by all the “experts” in the internetz to scale that down to 35mpg or worse.. that 35mpg number is starting to show up mentioned everywhere like a mantra.. mostly by people that dont like GM, the Volt and/or electric cars.
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:20 am)The idea of a mild hybrid sounds really good on paper. Unfortunately, as GM found out with the discontinued first generation, the small economy gain didn’t out weigh the added cost in most people’s minds. This 2nd gen. system sounds more robust. If GM chose to install this system in every vehicle they make, mated to every engine and transmission combination, I think it is conceivable to achieve a 20% efficiency gain across the board, and not a stretch to engineer either. That would go a considerable distance towards their CAFE goals. Now throw in some more Voltec vehicles and a few PHEV’s getting 70 mpg, and they would be in really good shape.
A move like that could go a long way in planting in people’s minds that this company is serious about getting everyone the most efficiency available in their new GM vehicles.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:37 am)You assume OPEC can do anything about it. The point is, they were unable to back in July 2008. They were at full throttle. I’m surprised people still think there was a lot of extra capacity back then. I guess most Republicans still think America did not peak in 1970 and that we are just keeping our reserves secret.
You speak about innovation. Oil extraction innovation or renewables? America has the most technology in the world trying to get the most oil they can out of depleting wells. Guess what, America is still pumping less than it did even 5 years ago and much less than in 1970. When is all this new technology going to turn the tide? When it happens, please let us know.
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:38 am)Four key components above the old system.
First is the lithium ion battery (from Hitachi). Second is regen braking. Third is no licensing fees that both Ford and Toyota pay to Paice (yet). Fourth in that it’s still the cheapest system out there but also with the least effective return (similar to the plugin Prius vs Volt argument).
Compared to the dramatic changes in EV vehicles coming up this is nothing.
I’d rather argue self supporting hybrids versus short range plugins to decide real world sales volume and effectiveness. BEV’s aren’t ready for prime time and EREV’s will always have a premium price tag in whatever market they’re in.
Seems that GM has a few market segments covered with the hybrid V-8′s and the Volt. Now they’ve improved an application that is equally volume insignificant.
What is GM waiting for to get into the volume hybrid game?
+4
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:39 am)This whole thing got me thinking about MPG in CS mode again, so I’m going to post some numbers here, even though it’s a bit off-topic. I normally work in metric, but power is in “hp” since I still think in those terms. Required hp was converted to BTU/hour, then gallons of gasoline per hour, gallons/mile, etc.
Assumptions:
Cd: 0.28
Frontal Area: 2.23 m^2
Coeff. of Rolling Resistance: 0.01
Weight: 3500 lbs
ICE to Battery Charge Efficiency: 95%
Battery to E-motor/trans Efficiency: 95%
E-motor/trans to wheel Efficiency: 90%
Calculation:
Instantaneous power required at speed (steady state):
50 mph = 6.6 hp (at the wheel), 8.1 hp (at ICE)
60 mph = 11 hp (at the wheel), 13.5 hp (at ICE)
70 mph = 17.1 hp (at the wheel), 21 hp (at ICE)
80 mph = 25.1 hp (at the wheel), 30.9 hp (at ICE)
Instantaneous Fuel Economy of ICE:
50 mph = 69 MPG
60 mph = 49.7 MPG
70 mph = 37.3 MPG
80 mph = 29 MPG
I thought these numbers looked pretty darn realistic, so that’s why I’m sharing.
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:42 am)Without reading comments above. My reaction is this system should not be pursued. Just stick with the 2 mode as the Hybrid (plugin and non plugin) configuration.
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:42 am)Correct. This Prius clone would also have been a lot lighter than the Volt.
Small correction, though, it would not have been a weak hybrid. Good move to dump it in favor of the Volt, though.
+5
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:43 am)Attn GM: Place this new system into a new model car with a new model name. Don’t place it into an existing model for $x,xxx dollars MORE. Eliminate the cost-benefit argument on the old model and turn it into an exciting ‘new concept’! Make it easier to sell. Thank you.
-2
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:43 am)GM never said the Volt get 50 mpg in CS mode. Also, you need to put conditions on that. Is it some combined test? Do you have their specification for 70 mph full out in CS? I say around 30 mpg for reasons I have stated dozens of times before. I’m all for the Volt and hope it sells better than crack. However, I follow science much more than emotion.
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:48 am)What OPEC learned is that they are no longer in control of the price. When OPEC is at 100% production, they can’t possibly put more oil on the market to lower prices.
It’s the post-peak oil scenario. Demand outstrips supply and the price skyrockets.
I don’t think that happened with this last bubble or we would still be there. I think it had more to do with speculation in oil futures plus dollar tied to commodoties.
Peak oil will happen eventually. It’s either very close or we already passed the peak and don’t know it yet. The temporary lower demand due to tanked economies is skewing the view.
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:51 am)“Mild hybrids” are as much of a joke as “Flex Fuel.”
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:53 am)I hope this is a given after what happened before (customers just taking the difference and wondering if it’s worth it… They decided it was not).
However, Honda tried to slide an extremely weak hybrid (around 15 kW motor – toy) to customers with their “new concept” Insight. Shame on them but I’m glad customers were too smart for them. Heck, just go to your local hobby store and get a lithium powered RC car and you would just about have the same capacity (I’m exaggerating – no, not really).
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:54 am)We need to put speculators to sleep, JMHO
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:55 am)I’d hope the gen2 Volt could be:
5 seater (locate the batteries in the same place as the way the Nissan Leaf does so as not to compromise the passenger compartment, ie. under the rear seats, rear passenger floor and front seats) and not have a T shaped battery.
Smal diesel engine for greater mpg.
Smaller front end.
Still 40 mile range.
Not have that silly jump/break in the black line that runs along the bottom of the passenger doors. It jumps when the door ends and for the wheel arch.
Solar panel trickle charging (like the Leaf)
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:55 am)I’ve said it before (and likely will again); the way for GM to make hybrids sell is to not offer a non-hybrid version of the same car (as Toyota did with the successful Prius, and failed to do with the disastrous-selling Highlander).
OK, I’d rather have the Volt.
Well then, GM should at least address the other issue with past disastrous-selling optional hybrids: offer them separately from any other L LT LTZ styling/luxury option packages. Ditto the plug-in version of the hybrid option.
One of the biggest reasons that the original 2-mode failed to sell was that it was offered only with the most luxurious (highest ticket) package; to people who would likely not care if they saved 10% on their gasoline purchases. In practice, I would think the opposite true: people (including some actual millionaires I’ve known) who would stoop to pick up pennies and nickels, tend not to care for status-elevation through unnecessary frills.
I still think that ideally, a model featuring a hybrid should not be made available as a non-hybrid.
It will probably be necessary to offer the plug-in variant at a fairly decent premium. GM has to look at Ford when it comes to hybrid pricing, and to Toyota for plug-in pricing (hopefully to better; but at least to equal).
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:57 am)Paice patented the use of “high voltage” in a hybrid. Don’t ask me why the patent office allowed such a thing or why a Texas jury found in his favor. Also don’t think a Chevy hybrid or EREV which uses high voltage is any less liable than a Toyota or Ford.
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:00 am)I think oil peaking helped cause the recession – as $100-145+ oil pushed up all commodity prices and completely killed demand by causing rapid industry price inflation. When oil goes up so does food, and precious metals. Precious metals went through the roof as energy is used extensively in resource processing. It shocked consumers and construction and started the collapse – financial over-stretching by consumers on housing made it worse – but consumers were being stretched by inflation on everything (fuel, food, consumer products).
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:07 am)While I agree with this logic, it just does not make sense to have so many options. Option 1 needs to be eliminated.
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:09 am)I’m actually referring to the $98 Toyota pays to Paice for the hyperdrive patent. This was a settlement reached between the parties. Not the Texas jury decision. I have not heard of any litigation involving GM yet.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:10 am)I think the jury is still out on this one. Serial hybrids (such as diesel-electric trains) have a much higher efficiency than just burning the fuel directly. Volt may be similar, but, we don’t know yet. Since the scale is way smaller, it could be better or worse. You can’t really scale the same molecules.
The design parameter was for 50mpg. I think GM will do everything they can to beat Prius’ mpg ratings and already have such as specifying premium fuel, extensive aero engineering and other efficiencies (tires, radio, electric a/c, etc.).
We may be in for a very large surprise.
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:10 am)From what has already been said, we know that two of these things are planned for Gen II:
*Seating for five
*Still 40 miles AER
(both made possible by better batteries in smaller packs)
… and the biggest thing not on your list:
*Lower price.
It is possible that in Gen II or III, a 20-mile AER version will be available for a lower cost; but not at the exclusion of the 40-mile AER model. GM has so far given a thunderous “NO”, but I hope that at least by Gen III there will also be a model with higher-than-40-mile AER.
+8
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:15 am)===========================
Or:
Raise the price of every car by $500.00 to $750.00 and put it in every car made. Then, you have a 20% fuel efficiency improvement across the board, and have taken the price out of the equation because there is no hybrid vs non-hybrid model. And then you advertise it to the world that you have taken the position that you will lead the world into the future with this technology, along with Voltec, and future BEV cars…
JMHO
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:18 am)The premium fuel requirement was quite a surprise. How many more “surprises” do you really want?
The drivetrain in a diesel-electric locomotive isn’t set up the way it is for efficiency; it’s set up the way it is to manage the torque effectively.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:19 am)===========================
You mean like with the pricing?????
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:20 am)This would have worked great for the developing markets very well as a main stream car. I think Cruze with BAS+ should be able to achieve 50 mpg.
Is the BAS+ contains battery or Ultra capacitors ? Some where i read that some experiments reveled ultra caps proved better than batteries for BAS and ultra caps are cheaper and more life than batteries.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:23 am)Agreed,
Any cost savings will be offset by the expiration of the Federal Tax Credit. I highly doubt that prices are going to come down much on any variant that has a 40 mile AER….which is why people shouldn’t sit around and wait.
GM isn’t going to release a Gen II version any time soon. They have a lot of R&D to recoupe on the Gen I. Seating for 5 could require pretty significant changes to the chassis. I bet we’re looking at 2015 or later, so don’t hold your breath people.
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:25 am)“It still cannot drive purely on an elecric motor so in that way is similar to Honda’s IMA system currently in use in the Insight and CR-Z.”
Minor caveat; Honda’s IMA can operate in a sort of electric mode when it is already at speed within a certain speed and power input range (and depending on the charge state of the battery). In this mode the battery/motor can be the sole source of input power while the gas engine remains rotating with closed/sealed valves; no fuel being consumed. It can’t do this from a dead start because the power requirements exceed the capabilities of the electric drivetrain but when you are cruising you are in this mode quite a bit.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:28 am)Has Ford said they won’t charge a premium for hybrid tech anymore or just the Lincoln MKZ which is already such a high margin car that they don’t need to mark up the hybrid version any further? When I see the gas only Ford Fusion the same price as the hybrid Ford Fusion, I’ll believe it. I probably am wrong, but it seems like GM marks up hybrids too much because they figure they’re saving you gas, so they should be able to charge you ‘that much more” which obviously defeats the purpose of buying a hybrid, so people who want a hybrid go to Toyota (as they’re making the Prius at cost parity with the gas only Malibu, and even that after they marked up the price nearly $2,000 when they realized the Honda Insight wasn’t a competitor). I think the real revolution in hybrids will be when auto makers realize they defeat the purpose of hybrids for the majority of the population when they charge more. It’s pretty obvious that Toyota could lower their price even more if they wanted (as they did have lower for a while) and so if Toyota can sell a Prius for under $20k, I’m sure GM could’ve competed in some small way with an ultra efficient Cruze with a DI engine (they currently do not have DI) and this type of technology. It seems like they would be able to improve efficiency from 40 to 50 mpg with that combination.
That being said, if the Cruze can get 40 mpg already, you’re really only saving about 75 gallons of gas a year by buying a Prius that gets 50 mpg. It might not be worth all of the hybrid tech.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:34 am)By peak oil, I’m not talking about the price.
I’m talking about the ability to continue to pump enough oil, worldwide, to supply the raw demand. We are at or past the point where there is enough pumping capacity to sustain the 2007 levels of consumption. New capacity coming online is not keeping up with old capacity going offline as oil fields are depleted. That point is called ‘peak oil’ where we reached the peak of ultimate capacity to pump oil. From the peak going forward, capacity decreases.
Mr. Texas thinks that was in 1970 (as do a lot of others). I think it is a little closer to 2007, but, that’s just a small time differential. Ultimately, the entire world does not have enough oil to sustain consumption.
It’s just like any other bell curve.
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:37 am)It’s amusing how many EV people seem to hate mild hybrids even more than conventional cars…
Good mild hybrids are available to most everyone right now, with a good selection to choose from, at reasonable costs, with no range anxiety, with rapid refueling capability, with a nationwide refueling infrastructure in place, and provide significant fuel consumption reduction.
Mild hybrids will have their place for the next 5-10 years at the least. I can’t wait to have my first affordable EREV or EV or PHEV, but I realize it takes time for that market to mature and I’m not going to hate on mild hybrids before then.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:43 am)Exactly. To get the same torque out of a direct diesel would require a MUCH bigger engine. Therefore, diesel-electric is more efficient than direct diesel with the same torque capability.
-4
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:55 am)THose were the FAKE hybrids,a lot of new jokes were born out of them,who wants a car that the engine shuts off at every stop light,can we say wear and tear on a starter! SO now its a “Not as Fake hybrid” THey should just concentrate on making the 2 mode system (A real Hybrid) Not so expensive and give up on the FAKE hybrids.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:55 am)Hi Lyle,
Do you know where I can see pictures of the Volt wheel options?
Forged aluminum painted vs. forged polished aluminum?
NPNS!
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:01 am)It’s because mild hybrids are a baby step for EV folks. If you can do it (deal with the decreased capability) you should jump to an EV out the gate. Some in EV world even advocate changing your lifestyle to fit the car.
I think we have a little time yet to get off of our oil addiction. Just not a lot of time (like 100 years as some say we have).
Do you take the bandaid off slowly, or rip it off all at once?
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:05 am)To Zachary Taylor (#56): I agree with your various suggestions about improvements for the next Volt generation. However, the most important thing by far is to reduce the customer’s initial investment. But this should NOT be done by reducing the all-electric range of 40 miles. This “magic number” was based upon eventually eliminating the import of foreign oil. (Based on the fact that the average daily mileage driven by 80% of drivers is less than 40 miles plus that 80% of oil presently required by cars is foreign–very roughly.) This consideration may not be of interest to many drivers but it is vital to our NATIONAL interest. The purchase price should be reduced, but by means of a more efficient, therefore less expensive battery, NOT a smaller battery.
Incidentally, speaking of the sales price, it is beyond me why GM chose to recover an additional $1,000 of development cost from each sale by charging $41,000 instead of $39,995. A sales price starting with a “4″ puts the volt in competition with luxury cars and makes it that much harder to achieve volume. From what I’ve heard, they will eventually have to recover many hundreds of millions in development costs, so the extra $25,000 or $50,000 total short-term recovery they’re pulling in is negligible. Sounds like a real dumb marketing decision.
Albert Z. K. Sanders
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:06 am)$98/car was the Texas jury decision. The settlement was not disclosed but was certainly for less and probably much less. I’m sure Paice sent GM a letter but there’s no reason to sue until GM ships high voltage hybrids in non-trivial volumes.
No, direct mechanical connection is more efficient. Trains use use electric transmission because they need enormous standstill torque. This was not an issue for steam engines because they provide max torque at 0 rpm. Diesels provide 0 torque at 0 rpm. A car-style clutch or torque converter would burn up long before the train got to speed and you’d need a ridiculous number of gears to keep the diesel at the sweet spot of the power band during the extremely long acceleration run. Electric transmission was simpler and more reliable. (Note, there are a few hydraulic train transmissions out there but they are big and complex and thus never caught on).
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:10 am)Where did you come up with this? References?
Fact is, that is totally false. The reasons for using a serial electric design is due to the massive torque electric motors can generate (max torque a 0 rpm) and the reduced complication of having a mechanical transmission that can get a massively heavy train up to cruising speed. Can you imagine having to shift that sucker or fix it? The genset configuration is brilliant in its simplicity. They are also starting to put battery packs on them to increase efficiency by having regen (which will also help with braking and acceleration tasks).
So, if that big diesel had a mechanical transmission directly connected to the wheels, it would be more efficient than the Diesel-gen-controller-electric motor – wheel configuration. But, you lose all the other benefits. I’m guessing we will see many new hybrid systems in all of our transportation systems in the very near future as we start to unwind from fossil fuel use and on to the next big thing (or many smaller things).
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:15 am)My post in #30 did not include 10 miles. I listed 20 and 30 as alternative to just 40 AER. Many of the existing hybrids can offer 10 miles in AER. So theere woulrd be no point to that.
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:15 am)I agree with those who suggest creating a new brand dedicated to cutting edge, high efficiency technology. Minimize the gingerbread style & ‘convenience’ excesses yet retain a feel of basic comfort and luxury. In short, it should allow its owners to let the world know that they are doing their part in being (either/or both) environmentally and politically responsible for the world, much as the uniquely styled Prius does.
Maybe have this brand a spinoff of the GMC truck division, and be sold through existing GMC dealers who I think tend to be also selling Buicks and/or Cadillacs.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:18 am)Loboc,
As Dirty Harry said: Feel lucky punk??
Here’s your chance to show you were correct about CS Mode MPG.
Join the betting pool in the forum:
http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4177
Come get in the betting pool.
So,
feel lucky?
Well do yah??
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:18 am)Um, the 1970 was the date the U.S. peaked. This is well documented. The most crude oil the world ever produced was in 2005 and the most crude + condensate was in 2008.
Can you imagine, the most crude the world ever produced was in 2005 and most people are not even concerned about even the possibility that we are close to peak! Or they don’t even know what it is or what the ramifications could be. I guess ignorance is bliss.
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:23 am)When it comes to GM, hybrid means it cost you more and doesn’t work. The hybrid Chevrolet Tahoe cost $4,000 more and on a very good day provides an extra 4 MPG, usually you only get 2. The car will be totally worn out before you see the payback. GM disguises this failure by calling it a “mild hybrid”.
So buyer beware. Just because it says hybrid on the side doesn’t mean it will save you any money. So far the only hybrid I’ve seen work is the Prius, where the additional money nearly doubles the expected city mileage for a car that size.
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:40 am)See post #67 in that thread.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:47 am)I agree; GM made this a serial hybrid simply because that optimizes the EV mode range (less weight), not because it optimizes the CS mode efficiency. That is the focal point of this design. I don’t have to wonder much why GM has been (and still is) so secretive about CS mode… It is unappealing
Still a great car with EV mode most of the time for most of the people, but I bet it’s a dog over 40 miles (though still gets you where you need to go).
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:51 am)I was talking renewable energy innovation. Oil drops in cost and interest in renewable energy/technology drops. OPEC controls the prices. If you and lobac believe they are pumping at 100% capacity, then why is the price half of what it was a few years ago? Peak oil my ass, give it 50-100 years.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:55 am)As someone mentioned a while back. We need to firmly, quickly and respectfully refute any discrepancies posted by anyone on this forum. In that way we can help to educate people about Volt and reasons for her existence.
I stand corrected on the 1970 date.
We are saying the same thing. It’s pure denial to think an oil-based economy is sustainable.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:57 am)A 20~30 mile AER Volt will have such little cost savings IMO that it wouldn’t be worth it. Esp. when 40 miles covers 75% of drivers. I think some people would actually like GM to dive a little deeper into the reserve battery and kick the AER up to say 50miles. That would increase the cars coverage to maybe 85% of the population.
Just some additional thoughts, but if I knew I only needed 20 miles of AER (10miles away from home, 10 miles back), i would consider a LEAF. Currently, I don’t trust the Leaf on trips further than 25 miles from home in Michigan winters, which I consistenly take.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:58 am)Sorry about the typo in my post #70. GM is recovering an extra $25,000,000 or $50,000,000 of development costs by charging an extra $1,000 per car, short-term. It’s still negligible compared to their total development costs. A $39,995 price instead of $41,000 would be a much better place for them to spend the extra $1,000.
Albert Z. K. Sanders
-12
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:00 am)(click to show comment)
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:02 am)Well, there’s some reason to hang out here. What is it Jimza?
The Volt has wide appeal to major demographics. From ecologists to geeks. Do you or do you not think Volt is a viable vehicle for your next ride?
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:02 am)In the winter months here in the north… it was reported on the news that Prius owners are getting 26mpg… that’s about the same as my 4,000 lb Buick.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:03 am)I agree with Texas. I don’t care about cost or savings. I don’t care at all about MPG in ER mode – what silliness.
When there’s no gas, as there was in Atlanta in 2008, there’s No Gas. Some silly hybrid is just as hosed.
A slight revision Texas – go electric, or Stay home!
John
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:04 am)IMHO GM got it right with having a AER of 40 miles. However, IMO they realize they went down the wrong path when it came to using a serial hybrid configuration instead of a parallel hybrid drive system. The interest in Bright Idea the other day says they are looking for a better way without having to pay for patent rights. When I went to the Auto Show in Phoenix in 2000 I asked alot of manufacturers if they had any hybrid plans in the near future. The Rep. at the GM expo said they were only looking at larger vehicles for hybrids and were betting on hydrogen fuel cell tech. instead of hybrids for small and mid size vehicles. It’s kind of hard to play catch up for mild hybrids at this point and the sales of those GM offered so far have been dissapointing. IMO GM should go forward with new brand names and focus on plug ins that are the most efficient in their hybrid modes. I know they wanted the EREV configuration to make it easier to go to all electric and or change engines for the generator but this can still be done with parallel systems that aren’t intergrated as much as say Toyota’s synergy drive system is. Just my two cents.
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:12 am)Texas, would you consider the following production forecast to be more consistent with a demand response or a peak oil scenario? I ask because some analysts say demand will falll until oil prices reset lower, then demand will finally grow again and take production to new heights.
Year – Crude+LC, mmbpd
2010 – 73.5
2011 – 69.8
2012 – 65.7
2013 – 62.7
+5
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:20 am)I am an energy independence Hawk… Just because they have all the oil does not mean I want to pay them for it. We should be innovating like we did going to the moon or the Manhattan project. We should be building Nuclear Plants with the newer, safer and lower cost technology. We should be looking at solar/wind & hydro where it makes economical sense.
You will need oil for plastics, heavy transportation, lubrication, etc for the next 100 years or more. If we knock out 70% of our overall current need (not just transportation) we can produce the rest in the U.S.
If you actually read any of my posts over the last year, you would see I clearly believe in the VOLT technology. I know it is expensive to develop this technology. OPEC is successfully keeping prices low to deter the implementation of this and discouraging development of new technology that reduces the need for foreign oil.
+4
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:31 am)The MSRP is actually $40,220. The extra $780 is the desintation charge. So yeah, for $221 less, they could have said $39,999. On the flip side, maybe some people feel like they are getting a better car if it starts with a “4″. You know, like some people who think jeans that cost $100 are better than the $30 ones.
Just a thought
-2
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:35 am)JeremyK
What a surprise , I was just thinking that there arnt any Engineers who read this section . I guess I was wrong .
It is true my friend so very true .
I was beginning to think that it was all people who had nothing to do who with physics .
Maybe their is some hope for people yet . Maybe not .
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:45 am)I think what you’re talking about is thermodynamic efficiency while the OP was talking about fuel efficiency. If you only needed to worry about the vehicle at cruising speed then yes, a mechanical transmission would probably be more efficient than electric transmission (though I don’t think it would be a clear winner, electric transmission can be made to be quite efficient). However in the real world we do have to worry about accelerating from rest as well, and that’s where the inefficiency of a traditional drivetrain comes in, and that’s what I think the Volt is all about anyway. It’s not just about the simplicity of not having a complex transmission – though that does help as well. Traditional ICE drivetrains need a bigger engine for acceleration and then they waste a whole lot of gas while cruising when the extra power isn’t needed. For a locomotive no less you’d need a humongous engine – no wonder it’s not used there. What good is transmitting mechanical power more effectively to the wheels if you’re going to waste more gas in the process? Any efficiency losses in a genset due to conversion between mechanical to electric and back is more than made up by using a smaller engine. That’s why the Volt only needs a 70HP engine when a regular car of similar size likely needs twice that. You can turn off some of the cylinders in a larger engine (if it has enough of them) but I don’t think that beats just using a smaller engine.
The Volt has to have better fuel economy in CS mode just based on its smaller engine. If it only got 30MPG then it wouldn’t make any sense – then there would be no point in using a smaller engine.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:52 am)Hybrids are a waste of time, money and brain power. The focus needs to be on EREV and pure EV.
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:01 pm)“The new mild hybrid design will achieve a 20% efficiency gain over gas engines.”
Yawn. More wasted investment?
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:05 pm)#94 Chaim Said:
Hybrids are a waste of time, money and brain power. The focus needs to be on EREV and pure EV.
A big +1 for that!
You can get a 20% increase in mpg with add-ons from JC Whitney.
-7
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:18 pm)57.5 MPG on my trip back home from vacation last weekend, using my 2010 Prius.
Adding a plug will boost the efficiency average to around 75 MPG.
EREV is just a marketing term. PHEV is any vehicle offering a plug and an engine… which is what some of the hybrids will do.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:22 pm)Who said they are actually recovering anything? We do not know if this is even the break even point for the Volt, and I would bet some in GM pushed for a cost closer to $50k.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:24 pm)Get ready for your “-1′s”….
To support your statement, the Volt WILL be classified and tested as a “PHEV”. See page 8:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/merit_review_2009/vehicles_and_systems_simulation/vss_05_duoba.pdf
Initially, all PHEVs were EV capable. EV, then hybrid operation.
Note: E-REV is a PHEV, despite what GM says
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:24 pm)57.5 MPG…Sweet!
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:33 pm)I agree with those who say if GM is going to run the mild hybrid, they should just run it on some models rather than offer it as an option that probably won’t sell.
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:52 pm)What about that Thorium plant thingy. Is that actually something we should be investigating/developing, or just someone’s hot air?
+3
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:54 pm)ONLY if you eliminate the distinction between series and parallel drive architecture. Is “PHEV” stated officially as a parallel hybrid or is the definition only given as “having both a plug and an engine?”
Even if series or parallel drive is irrelevant to what officially makes a PHEV, there still needs to be a distinction made between “all-electric up to X mph” and “all-electric up to the first X miles.” The latter is EREV; a huge difference both in engineering philosophy and performance.
-6
Aug 5th, 2010 (12:58 pm)Data on the graph is incomplete. Typical GM.
That graph is missing some points on the time line. There should be additional small peaks before and after the major peak indicating where the “Areola” is.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (1:05 pm)A liquid fluoride thorium reactor was actually built and tested with positive results:
http://energyfromthorium.com/
… and this is only one example of possible Thorium technology. Thorium is highly abundant in the United States (the only country with more is Australia). Many of the proposals for developing a commercial Thorium cycle would also include a means of safely “burning up,” or disposing of, the waste from our present Uranium / Plutonium LWRs.
The main obstacle appears to be the near impossibility of getting the necessary funding through Congress for such a program (which mystifies me, considering some of the cr@p that does get funding).
-4
Aug 5th, 2010 (1:08 pm)I think you’re confused. A mechanical transmission does not need a larger ICE than an electrical transmission.
Hybrids use a smaller ICE because they draw acceleration power from the batteries, but that has nothing to do with diesel-electric locomotives, which have no batteries. Furthermore, hybrids can use a downsized engine regardless of whether their transmission is electric (Volt) or mechanical (Honda’s IMA).
-2
Aug 5th, 2010 (1:28 pm)Since Prius is a Series-Parallel hybrid, there is no all-or-none distinction anyway. It shares design aspects of both.
It’s the difference between marketing and actual real-world performance that matters.
Look at it this way. Purchase decisions will based upon price, emission-rating, and the expected consumption of gas & electricity.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (1:30 pm)We’re pretty much on the same page then. Except imho OPEC has no control over prices.
Oil is not priced ‘low’ right now at around $82 a barrel. $35 would be low. Or even historically ‘normal’.
http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_rate/historical_oil_prices_table.asp
What is amazing is that there is an oil glut right now and prices still don’t go down. This indicates that investors think that oil won’t go down and will probably go up. These guys aren’t wrong too many times or they would be out of the market for good.
Thinking that oil will go up means that the fundamentals (supply vs demand) will correct. This will probably happen quickly. (Not 50 years from now, more like a year or months.)
When (not if) OPEC reaches 100% output again, they cannot control prices downward. There is no longer a huge reserve capacity bat for them to swing the price both directions.
If you look at the last 5 or 6 years on that (inflation adjusted) chart above, prices have increased dramatically from historical numbers. OPEC can’t do (and hasn’t done) crap about it.
-11
Aug 5th, 2010 (1:31 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (1:32 pm)Adding : some attributes always have value
ex: lightweight
highly-aerodynamic
Above both works for all cars because they help to get better results apart from the drive train.
On the drive train in my view 2 options are worth experimenting :
Just EREV – electric motor drives , same BAS+ slide shown above, only difference is fuel on will be replaced with “Generator power” and electric power assist will be renamed to ” Power from battery / Ultra caps ” and the generator should be highly optimized. This should work for a base necessity truck and person can use the generator as a power source at his remote work site.
Second : a diesel small engine with BAS+ ( i remember reading GM producing 1 ltr diesel engines in India – similar ones coupled with BAS+ – similar to GM Precept, consists of a 1.2-liter, four-cylinder, CIDI, turbocharged 55-kW aluminum engine with a starter/alternator that replaces the engine flywheel ). This case engine will be 3 cylinder 1 ltr diesel with BAS+ – should get 120 mpg.
Still valid options for markets where fuel prices are high and needs affordable solutions.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (1:41 pm)My 2005 Magnum Hemi got 25mpg during vacation last week. But I had the cruise set at 83mph and got a ticket
.
Aug 5th, 2010 (1:44 pm)You’re still a very sick puppy. Get some help.
+6
Aug 5th, 2010 (2:11 pm)As a Prius owner, I own a “lightweight highly-aerodynamic dedicated non-plugin hybrid capable of over 50 MPG”. It’s a great little car!
I don’t have any brand loyalty, though, so I’d love to see a competitor beat it by building an even better. The Prius sets a pretty high bar, though. Most automotive journalists miss what makes the car so good. Most automotive journalists seem to obsessed with fit-and-finish and driving fun — the Prius is competent in both of these respects, but in no way exceptional. What keeps Prius owners happy is that it’s efficient, reliable, and the way the interior space is arranged makes it much more useful than most other small cars. It’s a competent little transportation-appliance for day-to-day life.
I do see why GM would prefer not to take on Toyota head-on with this car. First, Toyota has it mostly-right, and they have a decade of experience building the car and have spent a decade building the “Prius” brand. Second, Honda has tried this head-on approach and mostly-failed at it — the New Insight was supposed to be a cheaper alternative to the Prius but, when the Insight was released, Toyota just dropped the price to almost-match. Now the Insight is just an off-brand Prius knockoff. Third, once the Volt becomes price-competitive with the Prius and Insight, it could be an all-around winner — depending on how competitive the CS MPG turns out. So, it seems like GM decided to go for the end-run in the eco-car category, rather than trying to beat Toyota head on. It’s a very rational decision.
Still, I’d love to see GM build a car that actually covers my needs. Most of their cars are intended for people who aren’t me — Trucks, SUVs, corvettes, low-cost college-kid cars just don’t do what I need. The Volt comes very very close, but I’m priced out of the market for now. Good thing I already have my Prius.
Aug 5th, 2010 (2:16 pm)We will have to agree to disagree on who sets the oil price and if we are at Peak reserves yet or not. I will stand corrected on saying that OPEC is keeping the oil low price. What I am saying is that OPEC has found a “sweet spot” for price. They know that much over $100/barrel and the world starts to conserve and innovate. The $65-95 range is pretty much quiet time. People are lulled into complacency. Maybe oil should be at $35-$60 range, but they can charge higher knowing that we have settled into a comfort zone. They have us right where they want us.
Some have proposed a sliding scale tax to keep oil at a constant price of say $125/barrel. This would create tax revenue which could be used to develop alternative energy. While that looks good on paper, the reality is OPEC would just jack the price up to $125/barrel. We would be shipping our money over to OPEC, there would be no tax money for development and we start the recession over again.
Bottom line is that GM and others need to keep working on this high priced / high performance technology. We need the wealthy early adopters to purchase it and embrace it, while the rest of us wait for next generations to bring us into the world with lower cost and better performance.
Aug 5th, 2010 (2:30 pm)Sounds like a plugless Voltec with a tiny battery and vehicle light-weighting.
Aug 5th, 2010 (2:35 pm)We’ve actually been saying a floor at about 75 to 85, not 125. Which would put the ball in OPEC’s court and still protect the investments now being made in alternatives to oil. I’ts been said that the devil is in the details.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (2:44 pm)I’m with you on this one. Here’s hoping that GM’s emphatic NO is based upon presently known battery technolody and that technology will change sufficiently by Volt GEN II or GEN III where higher-than-40-mile AER is possible.
-2
Aug 5th, 2010 (2:49 pm)I wish the term mild hybrid would disappear. It’s pointless & confusing to consumers. Gimme a series hybrid hummer & be done with it.
Aug 5th, 2010 (2:55 pm)#7
My sentiments exactly. +!
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (3:00 pm)What I meant to say was with a mechanical transmission you need a larger engine OR a massive gearbox with lots of gears. I agree that you could have the same size engine for both electrical or mechanical, but then the gearbox would be so massive it would be impractical. The added transmission losses and the extra weight to carry around would counteract the fuel savings of using the smaller engine. Normally you have to strike a balance between the gearbox size/complexity and the size of the engine, but with electrical transmission you don’t need to strike such balance since there is no gearbox (at least not a complex one with multiple ratios) so you can use the minimum size engine for the power requirements. Even a locomotive which isn’t a hybrid so it doesn’t have an alternate source of power for acceleration probably benefits fuel consumption wise, albeit not as much as a hybrid would. Now I don’t have numbers to back this up but I bet that using electric transmission can always be more fuel efficient than mechanical, regardless of the configuration used. Whether it’s by a significant amount, I can only speculate.
A hybrid like the Volt of course, does use batteries for extra acceleration power so it can use an even smaller engine for cruising, and that’s on top of getting the extra benefit of not having a mechanical transmission. So can anyone explain to me why it’s speculated that the Volt will have a mileage of around 35MPG or less in CS mode when other parallel hybrids routinely get north of 50MPG? Reading this blog I’m getting the impression that people think GM is hiding this “dark” and “terrible” secret about the mileage in CS mode because they haven’t made it public yet so therefore it must be bad. Is there any concrete basis to this belief? Are there even any hybrids out there which get less than 35MPG?
+6
Aug 5th, 2010 (3:13 pm)Randy
The only joke is on the people that dont understand the BAS hybrids and how well they work.
Shutting off the ICE at stops is quite effective at reducing fuel consumption and reducing emissions. The motor can also be used while driving to reduce the load on the ICE and it has regenerative braking as well during deceleration.
FYI- The BAS motor and belt drive is used to “quick-start” the ICE after it shuts off, so you’re talking out of your ass regarding the “starter” wearing out.Plus GM gradually improved the software of their original BAS cars and SUVs so that the 12kW motor could contribute more while driving at steady speeds. So latter versions of BAS vehicles (or those that received software updates) got a LOT better mpg than pervious BAS models.So in my opinion your just another misinformed, inflexible, Prius lovin goof that refuses to accept ANY other alternatives to the almighty Synergy drive.
I fortunately am the proud owner of a 2009 Saturn VUE (actually the wife’s car) with BAS and it gets an excellent economy improvement over the 2009 base 4cyl FWD version of the Vue.
i.e. 32% city (19>25mpg) and 24% highway (26>32mpg) making the combined economy improvement 27% (22>28mpg) You can go to http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm to compare yourself!. “Hiollow Hybrid”?- the Union of Concerned Scientists can kiss my ass!
When I’ve driven it I’ve consistently get around 31-32mpg which is excellent for a small SUV of it’s size (same as the Equinox) and I drive it pretty hard. I’m surprised GM hasn’t put the BAS system in more vehicles as its not real expensive but DOES provide real-world returns. (Despite what the ritards on the Prius oriented sites like to spew)
I actually own a couple of 2-mode hybrid pick-up trucks (part of the family landscape business) that get AMAZING fuel economy as compared to comparable trucks or utilities, yet they don’t get any respect from the bourgeois Prius driving crowd either, but to them I say F-U-2 !
.LB
PS>
To GM I say BRAVO for bringing out new and innovative mild,strong, and EREV technologies to give people a CHOICE as to getting a vehicle that meets their needs yet still assists in reducing emissions and our dependence on foreign oil.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (3:18 pm)I agree, and I think this is the reason: The CAFE standard is not the arithmetic mean of the fleet MPG, but rather the harmonic mean. The upshot is that the high MPG cars have little effect on the CAFE numbers, but the low ones do. Getting 20% more mileage out of your gas guzzlers can do a lot more for you than getting more mileage from your gas sippers.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (3:35 pm)Well OPEC listened to you… Price of oil per barrel has fluctuated in that range for about 16 months… By the way I am not an advocate for the sliding tax, but oil would need to get in that $120-140 range to stimulate innovation on an ongoing basis.
Aug 5th, 2010 (4:17 pm)Take a close look at Insight. That hybrid has the same relative aerodynamic shape as Prius and is a smaller vehicle, but gets no where near as good MPG.
Next take a look at Cruze. GM’s own Two-Mode promotional materials clearly state the advantage of direct-drive over electrical-conversion. Yet, it doesn’t deliver MPG as good as Prius either.
The larger engine in Prius running an Atkinson-Miller pumping cycle at lower than normal optimized RPM which tops off the battery with excess power from that optimization all while providing both direct-drive and motor-assist/drive is a complex formula that gives it an edge over the others.
In other words, Insight=40, Cruze=40, Prius=50. What would make Volt deliver greater than 40 too?
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (4:24 pm)GM seems to never catch up, i can almost guarantee it wont be as good when it comes out as the 3rd gen prius currently, and that car handles good and is incredible hybrid system. i have wanted to like GM, but the LEAF will be better than the volt, who cares about erev. i would buy a used escalade for the ER part to vegas, and use the leaf for everyday.
-3
Aug 5th, 2010 (4:53 pm)Yeah, lots of gears. Semi trucks can have 18 forward speeds, a locomotive would need more. A torque converter with lockup can keep the number of gears manageable, but still can’t give the elegance of electric. Transmitting power via bendable wires gives you a lot more flexibility than using drive shafts and differentials. That’s why gigantic mining trucks often use electrical transmissions. Electric drive also allows much more sophisticated traction control, which is a really big deal for locomotives, and easy ganging of multiple engines.
Nah. Electric transmission efficiency might be mid-80s, mechanical can exceed 95%. Weight isn’t a problem, locomotives need weight to prevent wheel slip. The real issues are simplicity, reliability, maintainability, design flexibility, cost, traction control, etc. Electric wins that stuff hands down, more than justifying a 5-10% higher fuel cost.
Volt CS mpg is at a disadvantage to Prius due to electric transmission, higher weight and a less efficient engine. 35 mpg might be a bit low, but don’t dream 40+ is a slam dunk. Sacrificing CS mpg to save cost is absolutely the right engineering decision – a 12k mile/year Volt might only run 2k mile/year in CS mode. Spending $1000 extra to get from 40 mpg to a Prius-like 50 mpg only saves 10 gallons per year (about $30/year). That doesn’t make economic sense. It might be a marketing issue, though. Look how many people here obsess about CS mpg despite its almost total irrelevance.
Aug 5th, 2010 (4:55 pm)This argument is wrong. Most of the development cost for the Volt was erased from the books with the bankruptcy, IMHO.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (4:58 pm)On the other hand, you sir would spend your money wisely by taking a course and learn english.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (5:00 pm)Well said. You make some good points.
I will point out, though, that the MPG in charge-sustaining mode is only irrelevant for those who don’t often drive more than 40 miles in one sitting.
If you commute <20 miles each way during the week, but travel 150 miles and back each weekend (to the lake house or something) then it's a different story.
Aug 5th, 2010 (5:03 pm)Personally, I consider mild hybrids to be gimmicky and would never shell out extra money for one just to save 10-20%. I believe they add complexity and thus less reliability.
I’d really like to see GM work on a Equinox or small pick-up BEV with a 150 mile range. Even if it takes 5-7 years before the batteries will have gotten powerful enough and cheap enough, there’s no reason why they can’t start projects like this as low-priority background projects. And when the batteries are ready, GM will be ready.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (5:03 pm)#120 KForceZero A hybrid like the Volt of course, does use batteries for extra acceleration power so it can use an even smaller engine for cruising, and that’s on top of
getting the extra benefit of not having a mechanical transmission. So can anyone explain to me why it’s speculated that the Volt will have a mileage of
around 35MPG or less in CS mode when other parallel hybrids routinely get north of 50MPG? Reading this blog I’m getting the impression that people think
GM is hiding this “dark” and “terrible” secret about the mileage in CS mode because they haven’t made it public yet so therefore it must be bad. Is there
any concrete basis to this belief? Are there even any hybrids out there which get less than 35MPG?
First af all, the Volt is a series hybrid simply because of the fact that the wheels are not mechanically driven by the ICE. Yes the battery sometimes will help out in cs mode for short bursts. Parallel hybrids are best known like the Honda civic with the IMA system. Series-parallel hybrides are best known like the Prius. GM’s 2 mode system can also be described as a series-parallel system. There are several larger hybrid vehicles made by GM that don’t get 35 mpg. Like Texas pointed out earlier, going from gas to electric to mechanical or to the wheels is not as efficient as gas directly to mechanical. The advantage that the series-parallel hybrid configuration has is that it can get the best from both or either power source, which is why I think Volt would be more efficient with a series-parallel system instead of their series hybrid system that they currently use. Hope that doesn’t confuse you but rather helps.
Aug 5th, 2010 (5:17 pm)Honda CR-z 33mpg?:
http://jalopnik.com/5445212/honda-cr+z-122-hp-33-mpg-worst-of-all-worlds
Saturn Vue Hybrid 28 mpg combined?:
http://www.edmunds.com/saturn/vuehybrid/2009/review.html
Aug 5th, 2010 (5:24 pm)Sorry Capt. Jack, that was #120 KForceZero asking the question, not me. Cheers
Aug 5th, 2010 (5:27 pm)Oh….OK
Aug 5th, 2010 (5:51 pm)You are talking about worldwide? He was referring to US production.
Aug 5th, 2010 (5:51 pm)It’s hard to get support without support from the industry that you are supposedly supporting.
When Admiral Nimitz picked Uranium for it’s strategic by products over thorium, the course of the industry was permanently tied to uranium.
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:21 pm)Is the CS MPG number meaningful to those looking to buy the GM stock IPO? A solid CS number will mean a 20% difference (high or low) in shares of GM purchased in the market. What is this worth to GM is real cash? It’s billions.
News of a mild hybrid program may be a small drag on the IPO. Been there, done that, not a good result. GM must exploit the potential of their new battery lab.
Best case is that GM will announce a strong CS MPG number with the new Volt. And follows with a pledge to incorporate Voltec into a Buick and a Cadillac for the 2013 model year. News of the new relationship with Bright Automotive is a small positive for the IPO.
When the Volt is available for demo drives in the Spring of 2011. Many perspective buyers will rethink the small, light, underpowered Japanese compact offerings.
My order is in for a 2011 Volt. Whatever the CS mode turns out to be. The car will be full time electric drive. Very quiet and comfortable to be in. Offering cutting egde voice, bluetooth, nav, and 6 speaker Bose w/ sub woofer. Five year OnStar, free roadside assistance, XM trial, configurable LCD display, touch screen LCD, an innovative capacitive touch control panel. Heated front seats, hatch back with fold down rear seats offering good storage capacity. Three 112V outlets in the cabin, Low E UV block glass, a back up camera option, and leather option.
=D-Volt
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:36 pm)Maaan, you know what I have always wondered? Why don’t they make the glass like those glasses called “Transitions Lenses” (i think that’s what their called). That way during the day it’s dark/tinted and blocks the UV and whatever and at night night it’s clear for better vision.
/just a crazy azz thought….
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:49 pm)Even if you drive 150 miles, if you start with a full battery your going to get around 70mpg?
Aug 5th, 2010 (6:58 pm)Would transistion lenses allow the drive to focus on the semi truck in the distance, then look down and focus on the deer right in front of him? Or maybe i’m thinking of progressives. I think the color changing stuff is photochromic lenses. Either way, that could be cool, in certain states. Michigan wont let you tint your windows very much (well not the front ones or windshield)
You could try these.. for $19.99
http://www.buzzillions.com/reviews/one-step-ahead-stay-put-photochromic-car-shades-2-pack-reviews
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:07 pm)Awesome idea. Some sort of photo gray glass. There must be a law against color shift or auto darkening glass. It’s too good an idea to pass on otherwise. Why don’t tint shops offer this?
=D-Volt
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:40 pm)Agreed. The world is now on an oil production plateau, and the only reason the price has dropped is that the global recession caused a drop in demand. Regarding new fields to replenish the depleting fields currently being pumped, the “easy oil” is gone, and the recession has caused a lot of new projects to be put on hold because that oil will be too expensive to produce, relative to what people can afford.
Worse yet, because the new projects have been put on hold, oil production will not be able to increase significantly in the future, because many of the on-hold projects were needed just to maintain the production plateau.
The world is now at a critical point, unique in recent history, where national economies will now oscillate as follows: Recession >> Oil Price Drops >> Recovery >> Oil Price Rises >> Rinse and Repeat.
So today I reserved one of the 16 Volts allocated to Putnam Chevrolet, Burlingame CA. They are charging exactly MSRP but require that you get a “loaded” Volt. Sounded a lot better to me than an empty dealer markup.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (7:59 pm)So when does Lyle get His</b? Volt???
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:11 pm)I’m sorry, I guess you don’t understand the basics of supply and demand. They are not pumping at full out right not, only back in July 2008. Have you looked at the numbers? I follow them religiously. I bet many people would be shocked to realize we have not yet reached the level we did two years ago. It should take about three years to get us back.
Also, if you follow things you would know Saudi Arabia brought on a massive project that gives them an additional 2 mbd capacity but that was one of their last huge projects that is expected to give them so much. However, it’s likely that even that will not help them as their other wells continue to deplete.
So, here is the key – when the world economy is going strong, we will hit that petroleum production level of July 2008. That’s when we see instability because reserves on hand start to fall (production can’t keep up because it’s too hot). As soon as the market sees those numbers the price shoots up.
After the recession that the high price causes (food, travel, etc. all go up) then the economy is cool and uses less oil. The reserves fill and the market sees there is plenty because demand was destroyed. That’s how she works. We stupidly forget because the cycle is around 3 years or so. It’s like we just get up run into the brick wall, get knocked out, wake up, get up and run into the brick wall. This will happen over and over as we get weaker and weaker.
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:21 pm)Nobody knows how it will go down, only that it will eventually. Factors like state of economy (expect numerous recessions), price of oil – if high for long periods then more projects will get funded, peak oil recognition (panic if finally recognized), wars (all hell breaks loose), etc.
One thing is fairly clear. The price of driving an EV will continuously go down while driving a conventional gas powered vehicle will get continuously more stressful (instability of your future costs).
Get ready for the roller coaster ride. We are about to climb to that second peak. Double dip? Oh yeah! You better hang on.
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:30 pm)Uh, we are not talking about that. The benefits of using hybrid drives to get away with a smaller engine are well established (see Prius).
We are talking about what the fuel efficiency would be at 70 mph for two vehicles:
1) Volt with ICE and mechanical transmission (manual in 5th gear)
2) Volt with serial hybrid drive.
The first Volt will get better fuel efficiency. Now, if you doubt that, you will learn the truth in about 3 months. ICE – mechanical transmission – wheels is more efficient than ICE – gen – controller – electric motor – wheels. Always will be, if properly designed.
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:31 pm)I will NEVER buy a hybrid… Especially a Mild Hibrid.
An EREV, yes. A BEV, absolutely.
I would buy a Volt today… But alas, GM won’t be building enough. If GM thinks I’m going to settle for a hybrid they’ve got another thing coming.
If I have to settle… It’ll be a Leaf.
Sorry to be so negative, but I still can’t wrap my head around the low productions numbers of the Volt.
GM… What are you thinking?
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:34 pm)Not to get into your guys’ debate, but are there numbers for total energy use? I’m talking about coal, nuclear, wind, etc. I’d just be curious to see if we are using more energy today than in 2008.
-2
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:36 pm)My stomach just turned a bit when I read that GM is unveiling another mild hybrid. This car will lose GM money, integrity, and name recognition. Hey, look at the awesome VOLT changing the way cars are made, oh, and there’s that crappy hybrid they can’t seem to sell. As a buyer, you could buy a Prius, Insight, Fusion, or Cheverolet’s hybrid, which would you choose? GM really, really, please explain to me why you would do this to yourself! It’s has to be the mpg mandate.
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:37 pm)I’m all in on the GM-VOLT.
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:38 pm)Hummm, understands what’s coming AND is going to have a loaded Volt… Smart person!
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:40 pm)OT:
Rick Wagoner got a new job.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9HDHUH03.htm
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:42 pm)Maybe they are going to make a hybrid sports car? Just a guess.
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:43 pm)Now look here, Tex, I just gave you a thumbs-up, so I hope that wasn’t sarcasm from you!!
No, I don’t normally go for loaded cars, but that was the deal I could get at MSRP. It should be interesting, when it finally arrives (we’re talking next Spring!)
Aug 5th, 2010 (8:50 pm)China just surpassed us as the largest energy user on the planet. You can find some interesting plots, showing oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and hydro usage for the US versus China at zerohedge.com (posted a few hours ago). Those plots are going nearly straight up for China, meaning that chinese demand is rapidly skyrocketing and will dominate the energy markets in a mere couple of years.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:27 pm)Nice look at the Volt at a charging station.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryrAS-dL_34
=D-Volt
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:37 pm)Oh and BTW , this article is in error as the BAS hybrids were NOT discontinued. It just so happens that my county recently purchased a fleet of ten 2010 Malibu hybrids for use in parking and bylaw enforcement.
So they DO still produce it. (of course the Saturn’s are toast- but fortunately my local Chevy dealer now has all the Saturn tools to look after any issues with my Vue hybrid)
.LB
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:50 pm)That’s leftover inventory, probably quite old at this point. Only 359 total for the entire country were purchased through June of this year.
Aug 5th, 2010 (9:58 pm)Sounds good. Although we actually looked at what oil was doing anyway and wondered what would make a stable floor in this environment.
As for the number we actually need, through scientific study and analysis 120-140 sounds great. Isn’t that about where the financial system broke and the economy collapsed last time though? Maybe we should let some of the alternatives like the folks working on cellulosic ethanol and the half dozen or so electric car announcements to come on line before someone experiments with prices like that again.
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:01 pm)Sorry but I believe you’re wrong. The cars are all 2010 models THAT is for certain. So they STILL produce the Malibu hybrid, but possibly for non[retail fleet sales only. (at least that’s what wikipedia says- not that it’s 100% or anything)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAS_Hybrid
.LB
-2
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:07 pm)2010 production began last fall. If there is no inventory leftover, GM would have to be producing at a rate of just 2 vehicles per day. That doesn’t make any sense.
+1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:09 pm)We will just have to disagree… There is all kinds of oil out there for the next 50-100 years. How much is pumped is determined by OPEC. That is what sets price. When they let it go crazy in 2007/08, people got serious about conservation and innovation. OPEC realized they made a mistake and are now keeping the oil at the sweet spot that makes oil cheap enough to kill innovation, yet they make a good profit. As the economies get better, they will pump more oil and keep prices stable. I watch the oil prices and they are staying in the $75-85 / barrel range for 16 months.
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:09 pm)By the way, there is a software mod which could really boost Volt CS mpg around town. Even the Prius’s Atkinson cycle engine operates inefficiently when cruising at 30-40 mph. Hypermilers get 100+ mpg via “pulse and glide”, running the engine harder than needed for a short time then turning it off and coasting. This annoys the drivers behind you, but when the engine does operate it runs at peak efficiency.
You can simulate pulse-and-glide with software. Instead of accelerating during the pulse phase you dump the extra energy into the battery. And instead of slowing down when the engine is off you use the battery to maintain speed. This is not as efficient as true pulse-and-glide due to battery losses, but would still be vastly better than running the engine nonstop.
Why doesn’t Toyota do this? Perhaps they’re worried about battery cycling. Perhaps the EPA’s test profile doesn’t give pseudo-pulse-and-glide enough chances to kick in and make a difference on the window sticker. Perhaps it is a driveability issue, feeling the engine kick on and off while cruising at a steady speed might turn people off.
The Volt’s bigger battery can handle more mini-cycles and the engine turning on and off would not be felt through the drivetrain since there is no mechanical connection between engine and wheels. The reason not to bother with this on the Volt is most CS mode miles will come on the highway, where engine inefficiency is less of an issue. I figure the Volt engineers won’t mess with this, but it might be fun for a hacker to play around with.
-1
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:18 pm)At lightest load, with the engine running at just 992 RPM, the gauge reads 145 MPG. I see it routinely at 30-40 mph. That’s considered inefficient?
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:31 pm)Nice vid. Wow those doors really are thinner. THey said the T-battery pushed the drivers out so they had to thin the doors a bit, they weren’t kidding.
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:40 pm)Looks like the US is still down from where we were a few years ago on all fronts. China’s got problems, unless they have lots of coal. Coal looked like it was skyrocketing for them.
+2
Aug 5th, 2010 (10:41 pm)Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) classify by sources of power, NOT what drives the wheels. Volt is equipped with a gas tank and a battery pack. That’s a hybrid. It came out from factory with an exhaust pipe. Name an electric car with an exhaust pipe. Exactly, Volt is NOT an EV.
If initial 40 EV miles satisfies 100% of all trips, you may be right. However, it doesn’t. It only satisfy about 75% in City traffic, less for Highway. Does that mean Volt is only 75% EREV and 25% HEV? Think about it, 25% HEV does not make it an EV.
Range Extender. A plug is a range extender although not on-board. PHV Prius has the capability of initial 14 EV miles with a fraction of the battery cost. How far will it need to go in EV miles to be considered EREV?
Electric Motor horsepower. PHV Prius (like a regular Prius) has two electric motors. Traction motor is 80hp and the generator that can also act as a motor is 56hp. You may not be able to add them up due to different peak power RPM. How fast do you need to accelerate in EV to consider it EREV? and what speed?
Answers to these questions do NOT have clear cut answers. There is a reason why SAE define the classifications the way they did.
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:16 pm)But that would seem to contradict your earlier statements where you implied using a smaller engine in a series hybrid like the Volt would basically get you no benefit at all:
And sorry, I missed the times you’ve stated your reasons.
I don’t doubt that in general, I just doubt the degree by which you’ve implied this is the case. How can the volt with a 1.4 L, V4, 71HP engine get 30MPG which is the same mileage as my 2002 Buick Century with a 3.1 L, V6, 175HP engine? That would either mean that GM is using a really crappy engine in the Volt and they don’t know what the heck the’re doing or that the conversion to electric and back is only 40% as efficient as mechanical transmission which is simply not the case – it should be at least 80%. Now perhaps engine power and fuel efficiency don’t scale linearly but I doubt that accounts for differences by the margin you’ve implied. Like I said, then there would be no point in using the smaller engine, they might as well just use my Buick engine in the Volt and then you wouldn’t need batteries at all if you don’t care about plugging it in – it would shave 10K off the MSRP too! Come to think of it, why don’t they just re-release my Buick disguised as a Volt – even easier!
I don’t expect the Volt to have 75MPG, not even 60, but it should be in the same ballpark as the Prius, in the 40s at least!
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:32 pm)The jury decision actually awarded Paice over $4 million and $25 per vehicle from Toyota. Requests for a new trial or to set aside the verdict were denied.
The $98 I’m talking about, you’re right about one thing here, came from a judge recalculating the Jury award and not a separate hearing, as I mistakenly posted.
In a separate hearing to be heard by the ITC,
Severinsky did indeed seek to have the Toyota hybrid banned from being sold in the US. Before the International Trade Commission was to begin the investigation, Toyota settled for undisclosed terms. This settlement with Toyota was announced on July 19, last month, and a separate settlement was announced with Ford on July 16.
Toyota is paying at least 98 bucks per car to Paice.
I needed to do the homework on this, thanks!
Aug 5th, 2010 (11:37 pm)The cruze isn’t a two mode hybrid, just a turbocharged 4 cylinder.
-3
Aug 6th, 2010 (12:04 am)Why are you assuming the transmission is more efficient?.. transmissions and gears are quite lossy and that is why they use an oil cooler.. The Volt will operate at a total electric path efficiency of 85% (per Remy), plus the benefit of a small engine operating at a sweet spot. GM has talked about 50mpg in CS mode for a long time now and they know their stuff. I bet the Cruzes new 6sp MT eats about 10% of the power all by itself..
Aug 6th, 2010 (12:07 am)and BTW, that 10% loss on the Cruze MT transmission is GOOD and a big improvement over the past.
-1
Aug 6th, 2010 (12:20 am)Nobody’s gonna read this since I’m on the Left Coast and it’s late. Still, I just have to air my two cents since this is seriously funny.
Larry Nitz stuck his foot dead square in his mouth the other day, clearly stating GM is not committed to hybrid or electric cars – now today we have some Larry Nitz recovery article trying to smooth over his slip o’ the lip.
Come on, GM —- When is the “plug variant” coming? Come on GM. You had your chance to make a 50 mpg + Prius fighter and you opted not to.
Ford’s Fusion hybrid is a good car. It saves gas for sedan buyers who don’t want to stand out, but just have a nice family car that gets good mileage. Fusion hybrid works because it is able to run solely on it’s electric motor up to 40 mpg, battery SOC permitting. For GM to stick to the “nearly as good as Honda’s IMA system is just a joke. Add lithium packs and still it’s like guilding a fake Swiss watch. It’s not gonna make up for an inferior hybrid plan. Make a car that has a plug, and can run only on it’s electric motor. CR-Z and Insight are failures – right out of the gate.
Kudos to Ford for using Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive scheme – it’s harder to do but the results speak for themselves. Ford did mess up in not building a distinct, aerodynamic model that looked different from it’s other products. Fusion hybrids sell, but they aren’t setting any records and fall far short of standard Fusion sales. If people are gonna pay more, they want something that looks different. Ford looks way ahead of GM here because all they have to do is lighten Fusion and give it an aero body. With that, a future Fusion with it’s layout will tromp this second attempt at failure GM is calling it’s 2nd gen 2 mode.
On the Bright Idea front, I didn’t comment on that day due to schedule priorities. I have to say the 5 million “investment” GM made in Bright is just the same game plan they used in NIMH battery patents in the 90′s. If ya can’t beat ‘em – buy ‘em. Bright has a genuinely promising product in it’s van and the commercial market is wide open for a large van that can run 35 miles on all electric, and have the extended range of it’s split front/rear engine/motor format. When they need cash and open the door to GM, look out – if Bright looks as if they’ll really gain momentum – GM will infuse cash and literally snuff them out. Why do so many people miss this stuff?
Larry Nitz let the cat out the bag. He said GM is in no way going to make 2 million hybrid/electric/EREV cars. They have too much stake in the petroleum biz.
GM – Lead, Follow or Get Out Of The Way.
RECHARGE!
James
Aug 6th, 2010 (12:31 am)I agree that most of the high oil price were the result of speculation. When members in congress started commenting on this relationship the price started dropping (go figure). Also it also appears OPEC no longer has as much influence on moving prices up or down.
The world economies are indeed the major reason for oil prices staying low.
The real question is when will the economic outlook start to cause a rise in oil prices?
Aug 6th, 2010 (12:36 am)The argument is which system is more fuel efficient. If you’re measuring fuel.
A 99 hp motor is efficient at a very limited rev range. At what speed is that torque the most fuel efficient for a car the weight of the Volt? Forget the transmission, use a single gear and stick with it. Use the battery, gen and regen to do the rest.
Want to go faster? Get a different car, use more gas.
If you want a gas efficient car, drive a Prius. If you don’t want to use gas don’t drive a Prius, …
get a Volt or a Leaf or an EV Focus or a Fuel Cell Equinox or whatever and just drive past gas stations.
If you can’t afford one of these, wait a while, things are changing fast around here.
+1
Aug 6th, 2010 (12:46 am)Well I read it! :+} I am in Michigan…. the middle coast.
You have made some interesting arguments and believe these are issues GM needs to consider and make adjustments. With the price of OIL LOW the commitment for the VOLT in the future will be difficult. Plus new IC engine technologies –new light diesels — OPOC engine – HCCI — put additional pressure on electrics.
I am a fan of Electric cars and hope the VOLT is a big success!
Aug 6th, 2010 (1:06 am)Hmmm. Let’s see.
There were some Malivolts running around as well as some Vue hybrids. We killed the Vuick, not GM.
It doesn’t take much work to engineer a few hybrid Malibus and test them around too. When the choice had to be made, I am so glad the Volt is the one on the production line.
So why be so dramatic? If we somehow heard about the Malivolts being crushed for a hybrid Malibu program GM would never hear the end of it.
Aug 6th, 2010 (1:12 am)Thanks Nuetron, I really appreciate that. Nightowl to nightowl.
I agree, there are a lot of exciting new ideas, and lots of new thinking out there. This is what it is going to take, thinking outside the box to say bye bye to our extreme current dependence on oil.
Whenever I hear the word diesel I roll my eyes. Why? Because while Europe is totally sold out on diesel and has been for years, the cracking process for making diesel fuel is totally different from making gasoline. I’ve read that if an oil company decided to convert a refinery ( just one ) from gasoline to the diesel hydrocracking process, it would take 6 – 9 years to do so. I’m being lazy since it’s late and I’m tired so I’ll rely on memory here, but I think I remember hearing our American crude oil refining network is 85% gasoline, 15% diesel. Most of that diesel goes to industrial/commercial use including over-the-road semi trucks. The U.K. refines a small bit of oil to gasoline, then, because they have no use for it, they actually import gas to America! Since the United States is so invested in gasoline production and use, there’s literally no chance in any foreseeable future we’ll convert to diesel. VWs and Mercedes and various other consumer vehicles using clean diesels today are great indeed. They’ve nearly cured the age-old problem of minute oil particulates in the air that lodge inside our bodies causing cancer to Alzheimer’s. Problem is, when we experienced the ’08 gas crunch harbinger of things to come….Diesel skyrocketed in price faster and higher than gas did. Here in the NW I remember seeing diesel pump prices nearing $5 per gallon! My friend was one of those pioneers brewing biodiesel in his yard —- that goes down the river when every Tom, Dick and Harry is going to the Mexican restaurant down the street for it’s used cooking oil ( one TV news outlet reported people actually breaking into the dumpster areas of fast food places and stealing the ten gallon buckets of used veggie oil! ). New veggie oil costs nearly as much as a gallon of diesel….so there ya go!
Don’t get me wrong. I aspire to own an RV someday – one that is not a gas pig, and large enough for my family to go some distance without breaking the bank and polluting the world. Sprinter diesels appeal to me, yet, as I said, diesel isn’t found everywhere and it aint cheap. I’ve followed Daimler’s attempts at a hybrid Sprinter, but getting one here could take five or more years. This is where the Bright company’s van looks really neat. The RV industry is sinking fast. Hybrid motorhomes are really needed out there, and they will sell big.
GM can’t buy everything. In the end if they don’t “Lead, Follow or Get Out of Everybody’s Way”….They’ll go under, plain and simple. Our bailout will just have been an extension holding back an inevitable total failure of a flawed company. My sincere hope is that won’t happen and they can take Volt and EREV and really really make it. Man, I hope lithium or zinc air, or ??? batteries soar to new heights and we can just jettison that big heavy spark and bang, 19th century tech lump that resides in our vehicles altogether.
What I wish for, and the reality that is —-well, there seems to be a large chasm between the two. GM has such a long history of partnering with oil companies – CEO Whitacre on Exxon/Mobile’s board and GM board membes investing heavily in oil industries says more than all the hype, all the sales talk and all the Volt development oppenness in the world.
I deeply feel it won’t be GM who leads us into a world of electrified transportation.
RECHARGE!
James
Aug 6th, 2010 (7:09 am)It was an example given of direct-drive.
And the reference still holds, that is more efficient than the converting all mechanical energy to electrical than back to mechanical again.
Aug 6th, 2010 (9:48 am)The SAE simply got it wrong. In time, they’ll be forced to recant, or lose much of it’s credibility.
Aug 6th, 2010 (10:11 am)An engine directly driving an automobile must be capable of producing usable power at every speed (when mated with an appropriate transmission). In order to get an engine which runs at every speed, engineering trade-offs must be made; so that the engine isn’t as efficient as it could be at any one speed. The Prius uses an unusual trade-off called the Atkinson cycle; with the result that little-to-no useful power is available at low speeds, though efficiency is much improved. To fill in the holes in the power graph, an electric motor picks up the slack. That, and regeneration, is the whole rationale behind Toyota’s HSD; which works very well: but at the expense of much mechanical and electronic complication, and mediocre performance. Even Toyota has been reluctant to greatly widen the use of HSD across it’s line; they seem to believe (correctly, I think) that the Prii’s panache has as much effect on sales as the drive.
In a true serial hybrid, the engine is relieved from the need to produce usable power at every speed. The job of matching power to speed is given over totally to an electric motor; which operates very efficiently over all expected speeds without a multi-speed transmission. Now, the engine can be limited in rpm range (never ‘lugging down’ in a narrow gear range to deliver more acceleration); just to generate electricity. An Atkinson cycle is simply not necessary in this scenario. In short, the job of making energy has been separated from the job of moving the car. The resulting improvement in efficiency is not quantifiable at this moment, but it is far greater than the “zero” assumed in your comparison.
In the current Volt, the batteries must be kept pampered; and so the rpm range of the on-board generator must be relatively wide: but this is a far cry from meeting all power demands at all speeds. Future Volt batteries will be tougher; allowing a much smaller engine to run over a narrower range of rpms. If cs-mode mpg is less than 50 in Gen I, it has every potential to exceed it in Gen II or III. It all comes down to the batteries.
Aug 6th, 2010 (12:19 pm)Like I said, I am not an advocate for that approach… But there are a bunch of them out there.
-1
Aug 6th, 2010 (2:25 pm)Providing lots of information that has nothing to do with question says a lot.
Theoretical arguments hold no weight anymore. There’s an actual vehicle. Why do you believe it SPECIFICALLY will be able to deliver greater than 40 MPG in CS-mode?
Aug 6th, 2010 (2:53 pm)Yes, they are telling us we are going to jump for joy when we find out the Volt’s CS mpg.
-1
Aug 6th, 2010 (9:33 pm)Attacking credibility of SAE won’t gain your credibility.
Going by your logic we need to make a distinction for Range Extender X as well. Volt’s RE is 300 miles while the PHV Prius’ RE is 600 miles.
John1701a made a great point that purchase decisions will be based upon price, emission rating, and the expected consumption of gas & electricity.
Volt does not not do EV as far as Nissan Leaf. It does not extend the range as far as PHV Prius. Volt appears to cost the most. It is a very expensive combo of “not a good EV”, “not a good HEV” that is “not the cleanest emission”.
Aug 7th, 2010 (5:30 pm)I’ll only be impressed if these hybrids surpass 50 mpg.
Aug 8th, 2010 (11:06 am)So much for making constructive responses to a troll. Remember this the next time you’re cross with a short answer. This was all relevant. It’s just what you refuse to understand about the Volt, and why your constant criticisms of Voltec are most often groundless. Until you ‘get it’ you will continue to look like a fool on this website.
Aug 8th, 2010 (11:09 am)At the very least, their determination doesn’t go far enough. They’ll be forced to modify their ruling. Wait and see.
Most of us here know that John is not a friend of the Volt concept. Citing him doesn’t help your argument much, it just identifies you as another naysayer.
SAE doesn’t need to go to ridiculous lengths with specifics; it just needs to make a distinction between cars with serial or parallel drive: this makes a huge difference.
Whatever you think of this model of the car, you must accept it as a seed. The first airplane and automobile were not that impressive by today’s reckoning either. The fact is, the Volt is relevant on today’s roads; and can only improve with development.
Aug 8th, 2010 (4:58 pm)Your desire to make a distinction between Series and Parallel hybrid is driven by the lack of understanding (or existence) of Split hybrid (HSD).
HSD in Prius (and PHV version) is torqued to 28% Series and 82% Parallel. The power that split to Series path depends on the generator. At the generator maximum RPM, Prius is 57% Series and 43% Parallel. When the generator is barely pulling power, it is mostly Parallel. This ratio varies at any instance in time since this is the eCVT in action. Series path is used more at low speed (and high load) and Parallel path is used more at high speed (and low load).
The gas engine in Prius is relieved from the need to produce usable power at every speed due to the Series hybrid inherited benefit. Additionally, Atkinson cycle enabled Prius ICE to operate at 220 g/kWh to 240 g/kWh most of the time. At near redline, it still deliver 250 g/kWh which is still much better than the optimal condition for Otto cycle engine (as in the Volt).
HSD is always in the right gear because it only has one gear ratio. HSD powers Prius from -25 MPH to 112 MPH in the same gear. The traction motor simply spin backward in Reverse and HSD never need to shift gear. HSD also inherit yet another Series hybrid benefit.
Parallel path provides direct power delivery without conversion loss. This is a feature the Volt is lacking. The combination of Atkinson cycle and Parallel direct power delivery path enabled Prius to beat Diesel even on the highway with 48 MPG.
PHV Prius will stay more in the Series path due to abundant (relatively) of electricity in battery pack. It can be pure EV under 62 MPH and modest acceleration. The blend approach of the plugin split hybrid (PHV Prius) promotes team spirit between gas and electric. It discourages piggyback riding one another, if you know what I am referring to.
If you need to define the Volt as 100% Series hybrid then you also need to clearly define HSD as 57% Series (max) / 43% Parallel (min). Doing this will just highlight the weakness of the Volt in CS mode.
Aug 8th, 2010 (5:16 pm)HSD in reverse is 100% Series hybrid since the gas engine does not provide reverse propulsion. It only spin the generator and provide electricity to the traction motor providing the reverse propulsion. HSD tries to avoid the gas engine in reverse due to inefficiencies related to it. It just use the HV battery as much as possible.
As you can see, it is not black and white to define a car to either Series or Parallel. However it is a clear cut how many power sources a car has. Since the Volt has an exhuast pipe and to regulate emission, it is a clear decision to define the Volt as a plugin hybrid.