Aug 26
GM Says Will Release Chevrolet Volt Charge-Sustaining Mode MPG When Final EPA Label is Released
Performing calculations on information on the Volt’s information screen appearing in an AOL test drive video led to to speculation that the Volt could get less than 30 MPG in charge sustaining mode, after the battery is depleted. GM has refuted that speculation as “completely out of context and irrelevant,” noting the car was test-driven in an extremely harsh way, and had sat “running” for a considerable time waiting for video equipment to be set up.
This would mean the Volt should get considerably better fuel economy when tested under the stringent conditions of the EPA test cycle. This number has not been publicly disclosed or officially determined.
GM communications isn’t too happy with this site’s and others reports calling them in one case “lazy journalism.”
To wit Phil Colley of GM communications responding to Nick Chambers of Plugin Cars wrote:
Yours and the other stories yesterday and today show a complete lack of understanding of the process and are quite frankly, lazy reporting. We haven’t announced the extended-range MPG because the EPA is still working with us and other plug-in automakers on a methodology to measure it. It’s that simple. They are trying to pull together the best real-world, comparative numbers on these types of vehicles in a way that is fair and equitable for everyone.
We took a lot of heat for discussing the city MPG in August 2008 (sic) based on a draft methodology and were criticized by many reporters and pundits for it. Now, those same critics are advocating for us to reveal a number using draft methodology once again. You can’t have it both ways.
What I will tell you, and what we would have told you yesterday if you had contacted us, is the MPG we’re seeing in development testing during extended-range mode is much better than what was being reported yesterday. Plus, if any of you had called us to ask, we would have told you the driver’s information center wasn’t even reset before this test drive – so the electric only range on the display wasn’t accurate either. The numbers you, Lyle and others based your “calculations” on were completely and totally irrelevant.
As we always have, we’re more than happy to work with you and others as much as we can to help you understand how the Volt works, but when you report erroneous numbers as fact, that does no one any good.
Another GM communications staffer by the name of Doug Wernert wrote a bit more tempered elsewhere:
Lots of good information in this video, but let me clarify a few things on the range numbers:
First, the AOL Translogic team ran a lot of aggressive tests with the vehicle, including extensive use of mountain mode, time trials (0-60) and aggressive driving maneuvers, all far beyond what a normal driver would do. Also, the extended-range MPG “calculation” didn’t include the significant time the vehicle spent running while the AOL Translogic film crew was setting, nor did it take into account the driver’s info center wasn’t reset before the shoot started.
When we do drive opportunities, we also don’t always start with a fully charged vehicle before a lot of these drive opportunities because many drivers want to experience the switch from battery-only to extended range. We will discuss what the Volt’s extended-range MPG is when the EPA labels our vehicle.
The key information from these staffers then is the Volt’s true CS MPG is “much better” than 27 and that GM will discuss that number when the EPA produces a final label for the Volt.
The EPA is considering applying a newly devised testing methodology standard called the SAE J1711, to determine the fuel economy of range extended electric vehicles and other PHEVs. We have heard previously the Volt may launch prior to getting this official label, which is why GM has said early drivers and buyers may have to figure it out for themselves. The moral of this story is we shouldn’t have based or publicized any conclusions on the values on the screen in the video. But who could resist?
You can view creator Mike Duoba of Argonne National Laboratory’s presentation on the J1711 here. The method involves testing the cars first in charge depleting mode, then in charge sustaining mode, and taking a utility factor of how much people are likely to drive in each mode and to charge over time into account.
+21
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:13 am)This is great news. The Toyota trolls can finally be happy.
I think it is no big deal to wait. These things change around many times and they want to make sure their final number is their best number.
For instance, there are many reviews that used to say the 2010 equinox highway mpg number was 30. This is the first number GM came out with early in the process. After tweaking the car/transmission and final testing, the EPA number was 32mpg. This almost 7% increase made a big impression and put the car well ahead of the competition for highway mpg.
First impressions are important and they are wise to wait and get it right even if it does piss off the Toyota loving trolls.
On another note, an early review of the equinox has the mpg rated at 19 after their “testing”. I routinely get 33 mpg going to and from work (60+ miles with several red lights). Testing mpg numbers from people doing 0-60 runs are irrelevant.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:13 am)Charge sustaining mode: a real hot-button issue! I, too, would like to know what it is, but, alas, must wait for bureaucracy to do it’s work.
+19
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:22 am)Whoa, somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.
Two more months and all will be revealed!
I think the Leaf’s real world battery range is more important and critical than the Volt CS mode as when a Leaf’s battery is depleted your stranded. Maybe GM should add an outlet to let Leaf owners plug into a volt and get an emergency charge, ha ha!
+26
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:25 am)Ah… I’m assuming the “Phil” in the above-referenced letter is the same “Phil” who runs the GM Facebook App (I only say that because both seem intolerant of any criticism). Someone should inform Phil that when the truth is missing, people will fill it in with their own stories. The best thing GM can do is let Lyle take a Volt for a real-world, full tank test run and let the true number come to light. Lyle has always been fair and balanced in his reporting on the Volt (in the true sense of the word, not the Fox News sense), so I would think he would be fair in this type of endeavor as well. Granted, I realize that MPG’s vary according to road conditions, temp, driving style, etc., but if Lyle did this, then at least we then could have a ballpark number (less than 30, above 30, 40, or even 50 MPG’s???) that can either dispel or confirm the rumors that hit this and other websites.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:30 am)” the driver’s information center wasn’t even reset before this test drive – so the electric only range on the display wasn’t accurate either.”
What? Why does the information center need to be reset? When? Every time it is charged? I would have thought this would be automatic, but they imply that it must be reset before a test drive, which may not coincide with charging. I am definitely confused. If the electric only range was wrong, it could have been less than 40 miles.
+20
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:32 am)Whenever there is a vacuum of information, people are left to speculate. I don’t think GM can blame this site or others for trying to report the CS mpg.
At least one thing is for sure. GM is well aware of the “interest” people have taken in CS mpg.
+16
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:33 am)Mr Colley is quoted as saying The numbers you, Lyle and others based your “calculations” on were completely and totally irrelevant.
I respectfully disagree with Mr Colley. The numbers were correct for the situation that was evaluated and relevant to what people want to know. Many people observed that the situation was different from normal driving.
If gm wishes to provide additional data, they are free to do so. In the meantime, people will make estimates based on the data that has become available.
+18
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:34 am)In the absence of official information, speculation will be made from available information. So GM… How much gas was used in the Volt Freedom Drive?
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:36 am)It may be useful to know total/lifetime electric miles driven as well as electric miles on a full charge. Perhaps there are “Trip 1″ and “Trip 2″ settings.
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:50 am)Well, I’m not sure what to say. Somewhat relieved of course. But the fact that things are getting bumpy this close in… the car is still being handled as an engineering science project. I realize that we get more information that way, but the marketeers are lurking in the background getting excited and upset when things don’t go their way. But they are taking no positive action that I can see. The whole EPA thing is a bit on the silly side, but that is to be expected. It is a government thing. That is the way government beurocracies work. We will be lucky if the Argonne National Labs method is put in place unadulterated, but that is not going to happen on a timetable that helps the Volt. I really do think that SOME information about CS mode mpg should be issued by GM in a timely manner, even if it is with disclaimers. That would be fair to GM and to us and to the general public. This is part of the responsibility of “changing the game”.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:52 am)We will know what gas mileage the Volt will get in the CS mode when it is officially announce! Anything else is speculative. Many GM haters will try to second guess by putting a low number on it.
+67
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:58 am)Now is not the time for GM spokespeople to take an attitude!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All they have to do to stop all this harping about the CS mode MPG rating is to release a “preliminary” number based on what they have been seeing in their extensive testing of the vehicle.
Something like this:
At this time, we have been seeing a range of 35 to 55 mpg in our testing. This is in no way an official number, as the EPA testing parameters have not yet been announced for EREV vehicles. But we wanted to stop all this wild speculation until we can announce the official designation as required by the government. We know that our customers are excited by the release of the incredible new vehicle and we are not trying to hide anything, but we can’t release an official rating, until we are given the specifications for that rating. And as always, your mileage may vary.
JMHO
And something else I always go by with my customers in my business:
The customer is always right. Even when they are completely wrong, they are always right, or they will not be our customers for very long………..
And BTW: Don’t harp on Lyle. It is a very easy way to pi$$ off 50,000 people who depend on him for info about the car you want us to buy for $41K+
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:59 am)Ah, the CS saga continues! Never fear, it will all come to light soon.
Interestingly, and seemingly lost in this entire debate, is the fact that the video in question showed the VOLT traveling 43.7 miles in EV mode!!! This in spite of the heavy throttle and aggressive driving! I’ll take those 3.7 extra miles as a GREAT sign that many saavy driver’s will see real world EV range well in excess of 40 miles – and that will be a more powerful statement than any final CS fuel economy number!
-10
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:05 am)(click to show comment)
+27
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:05 am)Looks like this is THE hot button issue about the Volt.
For now, it sure seems to command attention.
As I suggested many months ago, I think it would be a great ad campaign to have someone ask “Whats YOUR Volt mileage?” Then let Volt owners from all around the country stand in front of their Volts and hold up big signs stating things like “142 MPG”,”233 MPG”, “96 MPG”, “354 MPG” etc. (Big smiles, waves, their kids, dogs, etc there too of course, to show that it is a “normal car” for “normal people”. Then at the end, someone gets in a Volt and chirps the tires as they drive away. Fade out.)
Of course, those ads would have to wait until about December or January when lots of Volts are in the hands of new owners, but I think that would be a very effective campaign.
GO VOLT!
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:10 am)Ordering Volts without knowing this information, makes GM more arrogant. Not ordering Volts would make them lower production. What’s a poor Volt fan to do? 8-(
+25
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:12 am)GM can’t have it both ways. We can’t ask for CS mileage for 3 years and be told to shut up and wait, and then have GM come out and call reporters lazy for not asking what the CS mileage is within a day of the AOL report.
Rant over.
The bad news for me is that the good news from the AOL report is incorrect. The AER was NOT more than 43 miles. Phil walked that one back too.
Phil is a jackass, he is the worst type of media hack for GM’s efforts to keep potential purchasers enthusiasm up. This is so typical of GM, I watched the AOL video and thought that it was pretty good news, the CS mileage was obviously less than what a typical driver would get due to the car getting rodded hard, and if it did sit around idling, that drags the mileage down even more. I still believe that the car will get near 50 mpg in city mileage and close to 45 at highway speeds. And I still predict that GM will manage to screw up the marketing of EREVs to the point where Hyundai or Toyota will be the EREV champion in sales in 2013.
I guess the rant wasn’t over…
+26
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:15 am)I agree with Jim I completely. GM needs to calm the storm of rumors, but in my opinion, Phil Colley went about it entirely wrong. He needs to understand with little to no information out there, we naturally tend to speculate based on what facts we can gather. Easy on the communication back to us, the CUSTOMER, Phil of GM!
Go Volt!
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:15 am)An excellent question!
+22
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:17 am)Phil Colley said: “What I will tell you, and what we would have told you yesterday if you had contacted us, is the MPG we’re seeing in development testing during extended-range mode is much better than what was being reported yesterday.”
Many of us have asked. Answers are always evasive.
We’re about 3 months from vehicle release date and PEOPLE ARE PUTTING MONEY DOWN ON THIS CAR. If you’re taking their money, a little candor is called for.
+26
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:25 am)The problem with GM’s response is a comment about “Lazy Journalism”. In reality, most sites like this and Plugin Cars are not run by Journalists. They are run by “Enthusiasts”. And here is where GM cannot have it both ways. Enthusiasts will trumpet and promote (advertise), GM’s product, creating a virile explosion of information to benefit them at no cost. However, as they are not journalists, and have real jobs, there will be times when bad information is not vetted, but still published. GM should have know this could happen with today’s web based environment.
GM needs to understand that knowing CS is important to many people on these various sites, should have taken the initiative to explain who will release the information, and when the number can be expected to come out.
Personally CS mpg is not important. I expect it to be 34 mpg, which is great based on my driving habits. Sorry Lyle, but I suspect your VOLT order has somehow been placed on the bottom of the pile! LOLOL
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:25 am)Well, at least GM agrees with me that CS mode mpg is irrelevant especially in the context of this AOL ‘test drive’. Didn’t seem like a lot of testing was done. Just driving around like a maniac.
There’s a huge difference between a subjective demonstration and objective testing.
+26
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:26 am)Phil Colley said: “What I will tell you, and what we would have told you yesterday if you had contacted us…
Maybe in the future, you should contact us!
+11
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:36 am)I can understand GM being mad when bad information gets out but I see it as their fault as others above noted that when you don’t put out information then others will speculate.
I firmly believe there is no possible way GM does not know exactly how efficient the engine is in charge sustaining mode.
I would speculate that they haven’t put out that number because of the debacle that was created when they put out the 230mpg number and that it doesn’t get 50mpg as they said it would prior to that.
If the EPA does not have an efficiency number for the Volt soon it will begin to hurt sales. These people need to get off their asses. This should take like 1 week worth of meetings tops not years to decide.
+32
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:47 am)Hey Phil,
If GM just told us what MPG the Volt gets in CS mode in city & highway driving then we wouldn’t be reaching for any bit of information we find to try to calculate it ourselves, that’s what happened. That’s a lame excuse that you are waiting for the EPA. We don’t care about the new metric that they are going to use to combine the charge depleting and charge sustaining modes to come up with some useless number for us. The car goes about 40 miles on pure electricity from the grid, awesome! Then, when the generator kicks on, what MPG can we expect? It’s that simple!
You created this issue don’t call Lyle and the others lazy reporters when they are reporting the only information out there because you are withholding the facts!
+8
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:48 am)I posted this 2 days ago and it still is true.
“The longer GM – Chevy is silent on the CS-Mode MPG the more speculative the comments about it become. So why is Chevy not announcing the number???? We can only “speculate” :+}}}}’
——————–
And ….. we are still waiting …. and no amount if indigent comments from GM will change that.
GM folks I refer you to the quote above. :+} (kind of like an “infinite loop” error in a program)
Many of us on this site may be dumb BUT we are not stupid.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:53 am)you get an “ATTABOY” for your comments
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:53 am)They may have observed during testing that the CS mode mileage ranges from 27mpg to 94mpg.. which number do you want them to post and why?
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:57 am)I usually like Phil’s posts/articles. He comments in here sometimes too.
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:07 am)Is it possible that no one at GM/volt has been invited to comment on this site ?
If not I here by invite you Andrew or possibly all of you on the team please tell is WHAT ARE TYPICAL MPG NUMBERS YOU HAVE SEEN IN THE 2 MILLION MILES YOU HAVE DRIVEN?
Tom
+9
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:14 am)The results will be consistent. You run the car till it’s through with it’s CD mode, then you put it up on the treadmill and run the 2008 EPA tests. This equipment is in GM’s facilities and it’s quite reasonable to assume they’ve already tested the Volt many times and know exactly what the numbers are.
(auto manufacturers do not “send their cars off” to be tested by the EPA, they’re tested in their own facilities and occasionally verified by the EPA)
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:24 am)Really? What’s his handle?
+18
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:27 am)Lazy Journalism is not = Using data found in information released to derive a speculative number that has been withheld by the company.
This seems like keen observations being used to fill in the gaps or Journalism.
Phil You get -1
Lyle, the Nerosurgen/Journalist +50,000
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:27 am)IIRC he usually just uses Phil Colley or Phil. You can go the Volt FB site too to see more of his stuff.
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:30 am)Id like to know why the volt ever idled waiting for the aol team? The weather appeared to be nice enough to not demand much enviromental control, well at least not full blast. I suspect there is a good reason but I would of thought the ICE would have shut down in most cases when the car was not moving.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:30 am)Kdawg, I deserved a bit of a scolding for calling him a jackass, as I said I was ranting and I am sure Phil has better days than this. One of the great things about GM-Volt.com is the fact that even our trolls are relatively polite, most of the time, and we have remarkably few flames on the site.
I just wish that GM wouldn’t be so tune deaf at times. Herm has a good point, the CS mileage varies a great deal, but GM knows exactly what the Volt will get on the EPA city and hwy cycle in CS mode. A press release that states that _The Volt has gotten as high as 94 mpg in CS mode and under extreme tests it has gotten 27 mpg. Using the EPA test protocol we get 48 mpg in city driving and 44 mpg in the hwy test. We are incredibly proud of these numbers but the Volt will be operated in CS mode fairly seldom. If you drive less than 15,000 miles a year, most of your miles will be powered by American electricity, not foreign oil._
And GM should under-promise the mileage numbers by a single mpg so they can over-deliver when the actual numbers are released.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:33 am)Concerning the Volt’s mpg in the charge-sustaining mode (“CS”–after the first 40 miles), it seems to me that some people are disappointed that it is not as good as the Prius. Well, what would you expect? Each car must drag around an ICE big enough to assure decent performance. In addition, the Prius also drags a tiny battery that affords a range of one mile while the Volt drags a huge battery that is good for 40 miles. Is it surprising there is an efficiency penalty as a result of all that extra weight?
Whether the vehicle is “serial”, all-electric, like the Volt, or “parallel”, like the Prius, is a side issue. The Prius is ICE-driven, with battery assist, while the Volt is basically battery-driven, with ICE-assist. But that, in itself, doesn’t make the Volt substantially less efficient than the Prius. The Volt engineers have explained that power in the CS mode does not go from the generator through the battery, but rather directly to the traction motor. Rotating electrical machinery is extremely efficient, probably about the same as the Prius’s parallel direct mechanical drive.
There is a reason that the trend of the last century is the replacement of mechanical devices by electrical ones. When I started in industry, power transmission was a huge electric motor turning a “jackshaft” on the ceiling and a forest of flapping individual belts to individual machines. The modern system is a small electric motor driving each machine, controlled by a simple pushbutton; highly efficient and trouble-free. In the same way, the flexibility and smoothness of the all-electric Volt will win out.
But more important, the all-electric Volt will eventually make it possible for sustainable solar electricity to replace the half-trillion dollars we pump out annually to foreigners for liquid fuel. Even more, just look at the statistics for China’s exploding auto market and it is clear that, entirely apart from the this poverty-creating cost, entirely apart from our dependence on unreliable sources, entirely apart from global warming, there soon just won’t be enough liquid fossil fuel available.
How about this adaptation of an old slogan: “The Volt: eventually, why not now?”
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:36 am)That still wouldn’t be the true number. It would be Lyle’s number, using Lyle’s driving habits. Most probably a different number than what you or me would get – I’m very light on the gas pedal.
That’s why there must be a standardized way to do it. GM is cautious to wait for it. Let’s move on.
+14
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:38 am)OUCH! Take *that* you bad, lazy, journalists! (LOL). Personally, I think that it’s great that they have some passion on the GM team – probably because they’ve worked so hard to get that CS mode mpg to be impressive. Granted, some will be more impressed than others.
Be well,
Tagamet
+7
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:38 am)I think the 40 MPG figure is totally realistic for the Volt in ICE generator mode. But for the sake of argument let’s say it’s only 35 MPG.
Using the formula for overall MPG “MPG = 35 X M/(M-40)” where 35 is the ice mode MPG, M is the mileage driven on any particular trip, and 40 is the expected electric range, we get:
Trip length: Overall mpg:
150—————-48
125—————-51
100—————-58
75—————–-75
60—————–-105
50—————–-175
40—————–-NO GAS USED
If we put in the 40 MPG figure for the ICE generator mode the figures look like this:
Trip length: Overall mpg:
150—————-52
125—————-59
100—————-60
75—————–-86
60—————–-120
50—————–-200
40—————–-NO GAS USED
Either figure gives us fantastic efficiency.
And note that 75% of Americans drive LESS that 40 miles per day. If they drive a Volt they will ROUTINELY USE NO GAS AT ALL, and that is the whole point of the Chevy Volt.
So we are on our way to getting off foreign oil no matter what the Volt’s ICE generator mode MPG turns out to be.
+7
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:41 am)Lyle, I guess you just messed up your free Volt.
OK, we understand GM can’t give us the combined values but how about my simple test that will give us an idea of the efficiencies? We will know in three months anyway.
Simple test that can be tested in less than an hour and is a much better indicator of performance, energy needed to move the volt as well as the efficiency of the serial drivetrain.
Simple test:
CSM – 70 mph constant highway speed, flat road, averaged (there and back), regular gas (premium OK – just tell us which).
Now, my guess is 30 mpg (or less) and I would be very happy to get this from a pure serial design. If it’s less then that it is still OK for many people that normally drive less than 40 miles a day (80 miles with a charging port at work). This should cover most drivers interested in the Volt.
For those that drive more, get a diesel (hybrid diesel is better)
Now, Phil, you should not get so pissy with Lyle because this CSM value is just about the biggest mystery to most of the readers here. You are giving him no help, not even the simple test I posted so what do you expect?!
Again, he did not say this was fact, only that this is the only information to go by. Notice how you were forced to clarify things? Thus, you actually added to the information base because Lyle wrote this series of articles. However, It was like pulling teeth.
Lyle, keep up the great work of promoting the Volt. Your tireless effort and high moral standards do this project justice. Phil, shame on you! You are yelling at the choir.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:41 am)When focusing on that one thing, people tend to forget the big picture. The CS frenzy of late is just an opportunity for the Toyota crowd to spin the situation to Toyota’s advantage. It does the truth no good.
And don’t tell me GM has to state the truth cause for now, absent a standard way to compute the CS mode ‘mileage’, there is no truth.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:45 am)Is it just possible that the troll spin here is what has Phil so upset with this site? Ya’ think?
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:48 am)How about this release the video of the Volt going down Pikes peak and getting an average of 500 miles in CS mode to show how irrelevant that 27.6 mpg was.
Tom
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:49 am)Amen!
And I think that GM isn’t releasing the CSM simply because it *can’t* until the EPA # comes out. They won’t want to be seen as influencing the EPA AND they were burnt once for doing so. JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:54 am)Good question
I think I would like to hear the highest and the lowest numbers from their daily drivers taking the car home to get “real world” numbers.
I would also like the mpg for the standard epa cycle starting with a charged battery and an uncharged battery.
I think that would give us the best information to compare to other vehicles and estimate what it would cost to drive and help people make a more informed decision about whether they want a Volt or a Leaf.
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:01 am)Texas, that would not be a fair test.. the average speed during the EPA HWY cycle is 48mph.. “supposedly” a fair substitute would be a constant 59mph on a flat hwy with the AC off. In reality there is no substitute for the real cycle with its 48mph average speed and multiple stop&go on a rolling threadmill.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:03 am)It’s simple – the car has 2 modes. So it needs 2 figures.
Test it once in KWH/mile
Test it in CS mode.
Give both values. Don’t fart around with trying to work out how many miles somebody is going to drive in each mode!
If you figure people only drove 41 miles then the mpg would be sqewed as you would drive 1 mile on CS mode (and if CS mode was 40mpg you would have used 1/40th of a gallon) – therefore you have 41×40 mpg!!! eg.
41 miles = (1/40th gallon used) (41/0.025) = 1640 mpg
50 miles = 0.25 gallons used (50/0.25)= 200 mpg
100 miles = 1.5 gallons used (100/1.5) = 66.66 mpg
It’s complete BS if they do that!!!
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:06 am)This is good news they should not trying to hide this number because it is lower than 50 mpg. If you have an efficient electricity generating powerplant and an efficient EV or EREV which does 5 miles on 1 kwh you might have a PEF (petroleum equivalence factor) of 80 mpg when driving on electricity from the powerplant. If the Volt uses 35 mpg in CS mode the actual range in real condition will vary from 35-80 mpg. The average American driver will probably get around 70 mpg when charging every night in this case.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:08 am)Seems like GM could be telling the truth and the car does exactly what they say it does. Speculating is interesting but I think the estimates have a rather wide margin of error. I can understand the position of not annoucing rating and then having to explain something again when the EPA label come out.
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:08 am)GM’s talk about Lyle “not being able to have it both ways” is bullsh1t. If GM is happy with Lyle publishing estimated AER, they sure can publish estimated CS mpg.
For a company months out of BK, and beholden to the taxpayer for 50+ Billion dollars, they sure are arrogant little *icks. Makes me wonder how they will act when a customer’s car has a problem.
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:10 am)I would say: There is no spoon, but, that’s just the geek in me
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:13 am)What?, you started working back at the start of the industrial revolution in a steam powered cotton loom
Sorry, that was a very cogent note you posted there. True, the Volt does have to haul around the extra weight of the batteries in comparison to a Prius, but that extra weight should not affect hwy mpg much at a constant speed.. city driving may be a different story.
BTW, I dont agree with Lyle that a mechanical parallel setup is more efficient than an all-electric serial setup.. I think in practice both will be about the same.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:14 am)This being the first vehicle of it’s type, I’d say it’s a fair bet that the Volt will be in that 10-15% that is tested and verified in a government lab.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:14 am)Nissan did not hide behind the EPA. They simply published a result based on transparent parameters: 100 EV miles in a LA14 cycle.
See how easy that was, GM ?
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:16 am)Dear GM,
I will be buying a Volt and taking it on a cross country tour from New York to California. I will not be imposing on anybody to get a charge along the way. I would like to know how many highway miles I can travel in the Volt on one gallon of gas at a speed of 60 miles per hour. I know I can travel about 300 miles on a tank full of gas, but I don’t know how many gallons of gas fill the tank. The answers to my questions are greatly appreciated.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:17 am)Texas (#41) says: “Lyle, keep up the great work of promoting the Volt. Your tireless effort and high moral standards do this project justice. Phil, shame on you! You are yelling at the choir.”
—————————————–
My feelings completely. Lyle is only doing what we all want him to do. Report information obtained as best as he can. GM over-reacted, in my opinion. GM is not telling us the MPG in CS mode because it is not as good as they would like, I suspect. Hey, nothing wrong with 30 MPG after the battery power is depleted. Sure, 40 or 50 would be great. GM has to keep in mind that very few people on this site would be interested in buying the Volt for its CS mode MPG. We are interested because of the first 40 miles in battery electric power mode, not for the gas mileage afterward.
Personally, I don’t see why GM does not release preliminary figures and get it out and aired by the public. Most of us will not be swayed by the figures. Only the competition’s loyalists on this site blogging for their “favorite” vehicles will take delight in a low CS mode MPG. GM is never going to satisfy those people anyway. And to hell with them and their comments.
Announce the numbers and let the chips fall where they may. Lets do it and get over it. IMO.
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:23 am)http://www.gizmag.com/buckeye-bullet-25-world-land-speed-record/16140/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=1d10bb5d97-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email
Take Care
Arch
-11
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:25 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:26 am)Phil was talking to another group, not our “Choir”.
Phil Colley of GM communications responding to Nick Chambers of Plugin Cars wrote: blah blah blah…
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:30 am)I don’t care if it’s considered “fair” to anyone! I only care about figuring out the efficiencies of the drivetrain. I plan to run a Prius and the Volt right next to each other at that 70 mph to see the difference. Is that not fair? Probably, to anyone who expects 50 mpg but I don’t see how that is unfair. Sure it might hurt your theories or what you would like happen but the truth is often unfair.
I say let’s be transparent with this technology. If we are not, others will rip these points. If we address them now and work with the advantages and disadvantages we will be able to explain the details more clearly. The Volt technology should be celebrated, not hid!
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:31 am)Well, I guess it isn’t “Charlie H.” Dang, there goes that theory …
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:33 am)The Leaf also only has one mode of operation, which is not in contention as to how to calculate its range. it the combination of modes in the Volt that causes the difference IMO.
-1
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:36 am)I totally agree it was lazy reporting. Even ignoring all the reasons GM came up with, what bonehead thinks that they can determine average fuel economy when you have only burned 0.59 gallons? Plus, the driver specifically stated that he was using sport mode for the 0 to 60 time and I am sure he used sport mode at other times. And the 0 to 60 time was bogus too, you see him shove his foot down more than 1 second after the timer starts, if you wait for that then the time is in the 7 second range, which is more lazy reporting. Even if you don’t create the story or the figures and just repeat them when they are so obviously bogus it is still lazy and irresponsible reporting.
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:36 am)That would be a fair test, but to just post a CS MPG under arbitrary conditions would not be fair.. after all someone will want to know the CS MPG while hauling a load of plywood.
-12
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:37 am)(click to show comment)
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:41 am)Hardly. CS results are no easier and no harder to obtain than AER results.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:42 am)Considering we had to bail out them, these guys are really arrogant. These guys shouldn’t be in GM – let alone anywhere near PR.
What is totally irrelevent is EPA rating.
GM knows what the numbers are for the current standard cycles, but will not let it out because they aren’t good. Remember the 230 mpg they called a press conference to announce and even had a dedicated website about was not EPA approved either.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:42 am)1. I think GM has given some indications of the mileage. We can surmise it is between 30 and 50 based on what they have told us. For a backup system to an electric car, that is probably all many people will need.
2. “It is just not going to happen???” I think it has already happened. The cars are selling well and all will sell.
For those who are ultra worried about CS mileage in an electric car, perhaps they should wait. No one is forcing them to buy a car. If they truly drive so many miles that CS mileage is important, they probably should be considering a hybrid instead. It will be cheaper.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:43 am)Sorry, to clarify, I mean how to come up with an MPG number that makes sense given the combination of modes AND that is easy for consumers to understand. As we all know, if you say something, and it turns out different, you’ll practically be crucified. I think they just want to wait until the EPA says “ok, this is it.” Then they can say to customers “the EPA says *this*”, not “WE say *this”.
-1
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:44 am)But noone is asking for mpg of “combination”. Just of CS mode.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:45 am)Tim you have a very good point here. I’m really excited for the Volt like most people here. But I must point out that Toyota is already doing this with there plug-in Prius. They are letting people / fans have the plug-in Prius for several days to a week at a time. This would be such a good PR move for GM and the Volt. They need MUCH better marketing of the Volt than what they have shown so far. Let the potential buyers sell the car.
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:46 am)Not just LA04 cycle. They gave ranges in various conditions including an unlikely scenario which reduced the range to 47 miles. The longer the delay the more the rumors.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:46 am)We started this, in the comments section of the previous item. By posting an item about it yesterday, Lyle became our advocate; ‘taking our backs.’
GM needs to understand that we are on the front lines in forums like this. There seems no end to critics and trolls who seem to wish fervently for the company to die. If Mr. Colley was frustrated with yesterday’s events, he should multiply them out to the other 364 to get a feel for our position as Volt supporters on the Internet. We are doing daily battle with their enemies, using whatever crumbs fall from the lips of people like him who have whole facts.
It is not journalists who have these questions, but people. Increasingly weary and frustrated people. To denigrate Lyle is to ‘blame radar for the storm.’
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:46 am)If you are driving the car in pure CS mode all the time, I think you shouldn’t have bought the vehicle in the first place. I think the best subset of users for this car are the ones who will be able to charge the car at night 99% of the time.
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:47 am)You do realize that this is all your fault! (Only kidding). Phil Cooley just confirmed what I thought initially — you have no idea what they were doing for the film crew. My guess is they shot the acceleration test several times. That’s just the nature of the beast.
One of the big mistakes people make is looking at MPG, which is a measure of fuel economy, rather than fuel consumption, which is sort of the reciprocal. Once you understand fuel consumption it becomes clear that 40 MPG is a cut off and that increasing MPG after 40 MPG yields minimal benefits. You can see this graphically here: http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12924&page=23
Toyota has benefited from the fact that most people don’t understand the principle of fuel consumption. People see the Prius gets 50 MPG and the Honda Civic gets 43 MPG and conclude that the Prius is much better, but in fact the advantage is quite small, about the same as you’d get between one car that got 19 MPG and one which got 20 MPG. 40 MPG is in some sense the “magic number” you want to strive for. Once you get to 40 MPG there isn’t much more benefit to be derived from increasing gas mileage simply because you’re not using that much gas in the first place. Technically the gas savings are below the curve, and after 40 MPG there is simply not much area below the curve.
Which brings us to why most people want a Volt. Why do they want a Volt? Not to be obvious, but because it’s an electric car, and electric cars are new and interesting and, if everyone who drives one can be believed, fun to drive.
So while your charts are perfectly accurate — though for long trips I think there would be opportunity charging, upping the Volt’s MPG — let’s not get caught up in the weeds. My guess is that for most people who buy one, the Volt will get in the range of 500 MPG, mostly because the utility factor in SAE J1711 assumes people will use it for long drives whereas in practice the Volt will be a commuter car that is rarely used that way. It will be used 95% of the time around town and charged more than once a day if necessary. But that’s not why people will buy one. They’ll buy one for the technology and the cool factor and the green creed or simply the fact that it’s fun to drive silently down the highway using electrons.
IOW, not to be too critical, but let’s forget the charts. They’re boring.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:48 am)In the grand scheme of things, why do the need better marketing. Every car they make will sell. They don’t need to do any marketing. By the time the average Joe can find one of these cars on a lot to actually buy (I am thinking 2013), there will be plenty of information to educate the buyers.
Right now, from a marketing perspective, GM does not have to do squat.
-1
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:48 am)I disagree! That is why I want the 70 mph test. ICE – Generator – Controller – Electric motor – Mechanical linkage – wheels VS. ICE – Transmission – Mechanical linkage – wheels
every energy transition results in an efficiency hit. The direct route is more efficient. Some disagree but we don’t have bikes with generators and no chains, cars with serial drivetrains, etc. People will come back with reasons like cost, etc. The main reason is that it’s not as efficient.
That is why the 70 mph CSM test is so useful. We can see the difference in efficiencies of the drivetrain.
Again, I’m a Volt fan and think the Voltec drivetrain is fantastic and will have many advantages over other designs. Hopefully, GM and others will get enought market acceptance to continue to optimization the design. Volt 2.0, 3.0, etc. will be very interesting.
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:52 am)I agree with your statement about passion. Although, I think Phil’s anger may be a little missplaced here. I’m much happier to read this comment then the normal GM corporate speak that makes my stomach turn. Real feelings and real resonspes are welcome even if I dont’ agree with them.
-12
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:54 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:55 am)I agree. The KISS technique is the best option. Keeping the calculations simple makes the most sense and that IS WHAT FOLKS WANT TO KNOW. Anything else is just plain spin.
The reason many people want to know the CS-MODE Mileage is simply when the battery is depleted what will be the mileage. I want to buy a VOLT and I expect MANY times I will exceed the battery limit. I want the electric drive BUT if the VOLT in CS-MODE has really low MPG the cost advantage of driving this car is diminished.
Consequently other electrics and or hybrids are now competitive.
If we know the CS-MODE MPG then we as customers can make more intelligent decisions about the car as to their individual needs.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:59 am)GM mouthpiece says to Lyle: “As we always have, we’re more than happy to work with you and others as much as we can to help you understand how the Volt works, but when you report erroneous numbers as fact, that does no one any good.”
They were not “erroneous,” they were “play around the track” numbers, mouthpiece.
If you do not like them, publish your own.
Anyway, did you get the message, Lyle ? GM would like you to vet your blog by the PR department to keep the message consistent. What are you going to do ?
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:07 am)If you drive less than 15,000 miles a year, most of your miles will be powered by American electricity, not foreign oil._
That is an incorrect statement. If I take the Volt on a cross country trip and do not impose on anybody for a charge, then I will have used gas 100% of the time. The Volt is not only a commuter car. CSM MPG is relevant.
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:09 am)They do need marketing and GM already does…hence their own Volt website. The issue is that their marketing strategy is really poor at best. Sure there cars will sell at some point, but will customers have a bad taste in their mouths because of issues like this one we are dicussing on the forum right now even before they get a test drive? More than likely yes. I would like a Volt, but want more information before I place an order. I’m not going to make a blind purchase…that’s just rediculous. GM should look how their competition handles their PR and why they are successful. IMHO they seem to be hiding results and not making the car more acessable to long drives to the public. Same idea others have mentioned on the site here.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:12 am)Good Points DonC, I have looked at this for car purchases and at some point, paying for higher mpg numbers is not a good deal. Going from 15 to 20mpg is huge. Going from 45 to 50, not so much.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:13 am)GREAT IDEA!
How could that be a bad thing for GM right now? It would not be an official number, but would be a number based on actual use, which almost certainly would be impressive. The EPA mileage calculation will come out later to provide GM its official number, so GM would not be held responsible for Lyle’s statements. And six months from now, few would remember anyway because the world will be flooded with true high-mileage stories from the first VOLT owners.
If you agree with this idea, please go back up to #4 and give Tim in SC a “+1″.
Perhaps GM will listen to us on this.
GM, you know you have a winner. Let Lyle show the world now, and in a way that provides you the cover you need for pre-EPA announcements.
LLLD! (Let’s Let Lyle Drive!)
GO VOLT!
+11
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:15 am)If the charge sustaining mode is over 40, will you come here and admit that you were wrong?
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:19 am)LYLE,
You are doing fine and you will probably get pressures from many different sources. GM is a company that wants to sell a product and will do everything it can to manage information flow i.e. keep it positive for the VOLT.
You have chosen to discuss the the VOLT and promote it on its merits and AND TO YOUR CREDIT you allow all viewpoints to be expressed… even trolls.
FREE INFORMATION EXCHANGE IS ALWAYS A WINNER. Everyone will know all of the merits and problems…. and it the VOLT measures up this car will be the biggest winner for all and sell, Sell, SELL!
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:27 am)Define not using a lot of gas. Quantities are relative. And, as gasoline becomes more scares, smaller amounts become more significant.
Yes. With a 40mpg car, you would probably be using a lot less gas than the average American. But you would still use more than, say, the average person in a developing country.
An EV is better than a car that gets 40mpg. Maybe the additional savings doesn’t mean much compared to the average American driver. But that doesn’t mean that saving the additional few gallons of oil doesn’t also help.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:30 am)You are right… If GM / VOLT gets bad press and the public perceives the car is less than promised then it will not sell well.
GM needs to do all it can to promote the car in ways people can understand its benefits… electric drive, extended range with a comparable high MPG to its high MPG gas competitors.
Buyers will be excited about a high MPG car that gets extra range because it can run on a battery that is charged from home.
Maybe that is the better way to market the VOLT. I would be excited about that approach. :+}
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:35 am)It’s going to be intrinsically difficult to measure the Volt’s CS MPG in a short sample such as the EPA test, because the battery state of charge will be fluctuating the whole time — within a limited range, but still enough to skew the result. Suppose you start the test with exactly 30.00 percent battery charge, and when you finish the test the battery charge happens to be let’s say 31.5 percent. You’ve “wasted” (but not really, of course) enough gas to charge the battery 1.5 percent — which will enter into your MPG calculation making it look lower than it “really” should be.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:37 am)Here is some more fuel for the fire.
I was reading about the Facebook App, which lead me to the Droid App, which led me to this video interview with Nick Pudar, GM Onstar. This is from May 2010, so it may be “old” information for many of you.
http://www.thebigmoney.com/blogs/shifting-gears/2010/05/20/google-gm-chevy-volt-cool
While demonstrating the application, there are several screen shots (Time: 2:25 minutes) that show the following information:
Lifetime MPG (155), Lifetime EV Miles (713), Lifetime Miles (1053)…in addition to EV Range (40) and Engine Range (300). It might be save to assume that this is his phone and the data is for his “captured fleet vehicle” (i.e. his personal company car).
If you ratio the total miles (1053) with the composite mpg (155) to that of the “gasoline miles” (1053-713 = 340)….you get CS mpg of 50 mpg. In other words, 1053/155 = 6.79 gallons of gas used over 340 gasoline miles.
If my logic is correct, this would be the AVERAGE CS mode mpg over 1053 total miles and 340 miles of gasoline driving.
These calcs could all be horse-sh!t, however, if the app is only a demo and is not tied to an actual car…
Discuss amongst yourselves.
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:40 am)The method involves testing the cars first in charge depleting mode, then in charge sustaining mode, and taking a utility factor of how much people are
likely to drive in each mode and to charge over time into account.
I have not read the posts today yet, but GM is not going to help their PR with this kind of additude IMHO. I do not agree with the fuzzy math of taking a utility factor of how much people are
likely to drive in each mode and to charge over time into account. The number people want is a very simple process and does not have to affect what the EPA method publishes. I don’t want an average number combining ae and cs. I want to know how efficient each mode is seperately to be able to compare these apples to apples and oranges to oranges. What’s so hard about that?
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:41 am)I am approaching it from the angle that the Volt represents a new an upcoming technology and the relatively few early adopters are not going into this blind. They want the latest and greatest electric car design that will not leave them stranded.
What I don’t understand is all of the wailing and nashing of teeth that goes on at this site.
I like to look at the big picture. GM has made a great electric car with an engine/generator backup so you won’t get stranded. Many people don’t care if CS mileage is good for a car of this size and power (at 35mpg) or is world-class state-of-the-art for a production car of this size and power (at 50 mpg). There really is not that much difference between the two in total gas usage for a Volt owner. That is not the main point. The main point is that the Volt is an electric car that will not leave you stranded and that needs very little gas for most users.
You are apparently one who needs CS mileage to be high to make the Volt a good deal for you. You are wise to wait, as you are. I personally agree that the Volt is not for everyone. A hybrid is a much better choice for drivers who put many many miles on their cars. But for the many who want an electric car that won’t leave them stranded, GM has done enough marketing to sell every car they will make this year and I would propose that the early adopters who will buy this car know more about it than the average person knows about the cars they buy (i.e. Oh crap, I have to change my timing belt after 4 years, Oh crap, My headlights are $350 to replace, Oh crap, those tires cost $300 a piece for the special size, etc. etc.)
Every detail of the Volt will be known before 2000 or fewer cars have been sold. In the end, I predict the earliest of the early Volt buyers will be very happy. Those who follow can thank them as early adopters for helping to provide all of the information needed. By that time, GM should have this information on their website also.
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:42 am)Lyle posted a picture of SAE J1711, which is to be the basis for the upcoming EPA protocol for PHEV testing. The Argonne group tasked with the work has published a summary of their Q1 2009 state of progress, wherein they say
The entire pdf can be found at http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CB0QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.eere.energy.gov%2Fvehiclesandfuels%2Fpdfs%2Fmerit_review_2009%2Fvehicles_and_systems_simulation%2Fvss_05_duoba.pdf&rct=j&q=SAE%20PHEV%20test%20procedure&ei=yoh2TNO0MYL7lwftk6C0Cg&usg=AFQjCNE1sBjODjoPAG2WUGQVOCv8qc1Wbg&sig2=Usol-0ASiF8CF8V34ica6Q
Everybody should realize that the lame excuse of not having a combined gas and electric figure is preventing them from saying anything is pure bullsh1t and an insult to the intelligence of prospective buyers.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:46 am)That’s something of a non sequitur. I said “they’ll release the info when forced to do so,” which has nothing to do with the actual value when we hear it.
However, the other day, I said “38″ in one of my posts, which is the number I’ve had in mind for a while. In George S. Bower’s forum poll, I’m in the 38-39.999 slot. If it’s greater than that, I’ll admit I was wrong. Facts are facts. And $41K is a lot of money for a car that doesn’t do the job (reduce oil consumption) in all modes.
Actually… My 38 was originally predicated on the belief that GM was using regular gas. I mean, really, who expects a fuel-miserly car to run on premium? This is one of the reaons the Smart sells so poorly. A pity GM missed another opportunity to learn from someone else’s mistakes. I’ll admit I was wrong if the CS mode fuel economy is greater than (Price of Premium / Price of Regular) * 39.999. The price factor is somewhere between 1.07 and 1.14, I think. Regular is $2.69 at the moment but I don’t know if Premium is $2.89, $2.99 or $3.09. I usually don’t check the price of premium; I’ll have to look at this on the way home.
-3
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:47 am)Is the fuel capacity 9 gallons? Do we know that for sure? If so, it should be relatively easy to estimate CS mpg. To replace the family car, the Volt should get about the same total miles per tank (and charge) as other cars, which is roughly 350 miles. Subtract 40 miles for battery; that leaves 310. Subtract one gallon of gas, since no one would want to run until empty. Eight gallons for 310 miles is about 38 mpg. That should be pretty close (+ or- 4) with the CS highway mpg. So, that would put CS between 34 and 42 mpg.
The time the AC or heat operates will have a significant effect on these numbers, especially in the deep south in summer with that all black interior. I’ve lived in cold climates as well, but it’s easier to tolerate a cold car than one that’s 140 degrees inside!
-9
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:48 am)The presentation referenced said the testing would probably require 4 days. It’s not going to be a short test.
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:48 am)Which Prius? The PHV that’s due out in 2012 sometime?
This will be past noise when a responsible test is done by a major car magazine. I can wait.
The shootout will be against other $40k 2011 cars, not a 10-year-old design Prius.
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:51 am)If you’re happy with the principle of “caveat emptor” and dissatisfied with the notion that government regulartory power should be used to level the playing field between corporations and their customers by requiring that full information be provided to customers, I suggest you move to China. It’s the Wild West, there. I think you’ll find it entertaining, to say the least.
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:54 am)At 10:50AM, we’ve got about as many posts today as yesterday at this time.
Somehow, I don’t think Phil Colley has defused the situation. Maybe GM should call in McGruber and get him to cut the green wire.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:57 am)Ziv,
I agree with a fair amount of the criticism that’s been posted here. But in Phil’s defense, both he and Doug have stayed pretty well connected with Volt-head community in the past. I also think they’ve been as patient, open, and earnest as possible, given the constraints on what they can/can’t state publicly.
Yes, Phil’s reaction this time did come off pretty angry and, well, “over-the-top.” But it’s the also first time I can ever recall Phil sounding like this. Bad day, maybe?
Cheers,
Mike-o
-10
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:58 am)(click to show comment)
-1
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:01 am)This GM PR mess has to be CEO Atkinson’s top priority to resolve. Never ever should any GM spokes ever ever fabricate a condescending argument such as Phil Colley did here. Notice he stayed away from this site. Nonetheless, Colley should resign. (‘lazy reporting’ roughly defined is media spin propagating media spin.)
Facts are facts. Had AOL Translogic hit a foul – then sure we want GM to correct. That’s not what’s going on here. I said this many moons ago. Run ten VOLTS San Francisco to San Diego and back. And we can get a fair idea of what real world MPG the ER consumes.
Notably, should it turn out GM reasonably can lay claim to a 35 mpg hit, the AOL AUTO report would be quite useful.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:01 am)Thanks. I had noticed that, too. Not being of the reflexive “private good, gummint bad” stripe, I’m not surprised to see ANL taking a sensible approach.
Did you notice, a few slides later, a slide that said “The Volt is a PHEV, no matter what GM thinks”?
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:03 am)The best thing about these heated discussions on CS MPG…more awareness that something called CS MPG (or CS mode) exists.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:04 am)Maybe there’s even another variable? What if on the Freedom Drive, they found that as long as you know you are driving at least 300 or so miles, it is better to let the grid charged battery assist the electric motor for the entire trip? And then Volt could go a step farther and calculate the amount of assist needed for whatever length trip you told it you were doing. That would make a straight MPG figure even more meaningless. And also make the 40 miles variable, depending on what is more efficient. This might give more efficiency by allowing the output of the ICE to be exactly at it’s sweetest sweet spot.
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:05 am)It suggests nothing at all. And uproar is too strong a word. The day of the video, two days ago, 462 posts for 6402 page views. Around 7% of the viewers decided to comment. The opinion of the remaining 93% is unknown.
Yesterday, the day of the denial, 420 posts for 4318, less than 10%. Again, a very small sample of the viewers commented.
The day of the video, EricLG (you) and USBSeawolf2000 expressed their strong feeling for the CS mode so much that you accounted for around 25% of the posts. Quite a distorsion here.
Sure, we would like to know the CS number. But let’s keep perspective here and not spin this thing out of control for a mere frustration.
-4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:06 am)GM communications isn’t too happy with this site’s and others reports calling them in one case “lazy journalism.”
I agree….. could even call it “Yellow Jounalism” of which there is way too much of.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:08 am)China, LOL. Nice Hyperbole but not grounded in reality.
The Govt will provide a level playing field with an EPA label. I am simply trying to point out that many here are crying about not having the information early enough for them. The information is coming soon enough. People just need be patient. We are far from Chinese markets and GM has provided an above average amount of information for a car that no one can buy yet. I pity the fool that plunks down money on something without having the right of first refusal upon examination of the object. There is no level of governmental intervention that can save people from doing foolish things with their money.
As a similar example of corporate bastards hiding the facts from the poor public, I am getting the kids a 4th generation ipod soon but only if it has a camera built in. Those damn apple execs won’t release the details of the units even though they will be on sale next month. Damn them to hell. I cannot sleep. My kids cannot sleep. Apple sucks. What are they hiding. The Japanese are more forthcoming with details. Blah Blah Blah.. That is what I am hearing from some here.
GM is not out of line with the way they are handling the Volt roll out. Sounds very similar to the Apple roll outs. If you really need to be the first to buy the car, then you might have to get in line before all of the facts are on the table. That is what it takes to be the earliest of the early adopters… For these people… caveat emptor
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:10 am)Pretty sure the buyers that are acting now may have their deposit refunded if they are disappointed when they test drive and try the actual car. Not much of a risk for them not knowing now. By the time they will receive the car, we should know the EPA rating.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:12 am)No, quantities are definitely not relative. Look at the graph. To get 1/4 of the savings that you’d get upgrading a 10 MPG car to 20 MPG, you’d have to go from 40 MPG to 80 MPG. Put another way, moving one vehicle from 10 MPG to 20 MPG will reduce oil consumption more than getting four plug-in Prius owners (assuming the claims for 80 MPG are accurate) to buy Leafs and then making sure that every mile driven by the Leaf owner was in a Leaf (not happening unless you think no one is going to drive more than 80 miles or so). There isn’t anything relative or subjective here. In fact it’s the opposite — it’s paint by numbers.
This is why all those Prius owners who will jump to Leafs or Volts aren’t going to move the needle on our oil consumption. To do that you need to concentrate on vehicles using between 10 MPG and 20 MPG. Driving an EV is a statement and it may be fun but, unless your last vehicle was a Hummer, it’s not doing very much to reduce the use of oil for transportation.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:14 am)If by ‘beat’ you mean mpg, I really don’t give a crap. I’m spending $40k and want a $40k car not some slapped together plug-in.
Besides, Prii are ugly and slow. I regularly pass them on the way to work. As a matter of fact, I haven’t ever been passed by a Prius. While they’re poking along getting their max MPG, I got other things to do.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:14 am)It’s simple! The information center needs to be set to zero readings so that the results reflect only the test drive.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
P.S. I posted yesterday that the CS mode mpg wouldn’t be revealed by GM because there wouldn’t be an official rating until EPA gives one. It is nice to know that I was right!
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:15 am)They can deal with this, they can repeat the test cycle enough times until it averages out. Did you know the Volt can do the 11 mile city cycle 6 times in all electric mode?
-4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:16 am)This is really how the “new GM” talks to the public? Seriously? I am shocked at the tone of his letter. Don’t forget, if it wasn’t for our tax money to save your company, you would be unemployed right now. How about a little respect in dealing with a public just wanting information about your products.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:16 am)Not so hard for the Volt, which has two very distinct modes. But how does that work for a blended mode PHEV like the upcoming Prius, which will sometimes deplete the battery while also burning gas?
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:18 am)I agree with you but had GM issued a CS mpg rating on their own and then EPA later gave one that was lower, GM would take a bashing from our Pius friends.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:19 am)Yes, actually that would be surprising because weight doesn’t have as much of an impact on efficiency in a vehicle capable of regen braking. Of course it all depends on the regen efficiency, but to put things in perspective, with a hypothetical 100% regen efficiecy the extra weight would have no impact at all on fuel efficiency.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:23 am)Point well taken. Funny too. But the problem is that GM has set a standard by releasing a lot of information so they’re hoisted on their petard, so to speak, by not releasing this one piece of information. That said, I’m sure we can agree that claims of deception are greatly exaggerated aka “off the wall”.
I would suggest to GM that, rather being upset by the whole thing, that they be encouraged by the fact so many people are interested. That includes those who are wed to a aging technology the appeal of which is being greatly reduced — hot buttons are definitely being pushed. In the scheme of things setting the bar low initially isn’t always such a bad thing.
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:23 am)Did Apple take a deposit on that iPod you want? GM has been taking deposits on the Volt.
Speaking of hyperbole… The Prius moves along as fast as anything else on the road. I drive a little over the limit and I rarely pass Priuses. Certainly I pass them less often than I pass disabled GM vehicles waiting at the side of the road.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:25 am)I agree with Jerry 1000 percent. I personally would like to introduce Phil to a knuckle sandwich, courtesy of my right fist. We don’t need GM a$$holes insulting us because GM has information it will not release, leaving an information void.
GM does’t need EPA’s permission to announce a ballpark CS number. Just deplete the battery, drain the fuel system, add EXACTLY 5 gallons of gas, drive the Volt in CS mode until it runs out of gas, and divide the miles driven by 5. Simple. Even a cavemen could do it, but apparently Phil can’t.
If this is a “New, Improved GM” after reorganization, impress me. Start by 1) firing Phil (or let me beat him up for five minutes), 2) use the instruction above to announce a ballpark CS number, then 3) drastically increase the number of Volts and States in your initial rollout. Any of these would impress me (and beating up Phil would make me feel better).
The truth is out there (at GM). Who is hiding it, and why? What do they know and when did they know it? Is it a government conspiracy? An alien conspiracy? Should I reach for my tin-foil hat to block those nosy goverment mind control satellites? Tune in tomorrow for another episode of “As GM Squirms”.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:25 am)Posting while driving is a dangerous habit.
I’m a slowpoke driver, no doubt about it. Not because the car cannot go faster, but to use less fuel. Funny how you ‘oil independence’ types find that objectionable.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:25 am)I smell a lawyer somewhere, behind all this.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:26 am)But you’re talking in percentages. I’m talking absolutes. Yes. You’d save more oil by moving from 10mpg to a 20mpg vehicle. And, yes, getting people out of SUVs will matter a lot more for our overall oil consumption reduction than EVs. At least right now.
But what I’m saying is that, at some point, every gallon will matter. No, it won’t move the needle compared to our overall current oil consumption. But, at some point, as oil reserves become more and more depleted, and developing countries demand more and more, gasoline will become more and more expensive. And that will change.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:27 am)That will happen regardless of what GM says or does. If the MPG in CS Mode turns out to be 50, you’ll still hear about scenarios where, on a given road, between the hours of 10 PM and 2 AM, with the temperature at 97%, and a road made of tar, the Prius will deliver better MPG if you turn off its engine and freewheel.
-2
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:28 am)No, just a normal Prius. Remember, the batteries of both are at minimum range at this point. At a constant high speed the main issue is aerodynamic drag and the batteries will not be used for acceleration because there is none. thus, it’s just the ICE for energy production.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:28 am)Mine’s close. It’s a HEMI!
I plan to trade it in for a Volt. And I really don’t give a crap what Volt’s gasoline usage is because my commute is in the perfect sweet spot for Volt’s design.
Going from 16mpg to 600mpg will save a crap-load of gasoline I’m thinking. (Laura, ‘crap-load’ is a technical measurement meaning a LOT of gasoline.)
Of course, I’ll be sacrificing my 6-second 0-60 time, but, I get lots of tickets for using that option.
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:29 am)It already did. No other car company EVER built an EV with an unlimited range provided by a gas generator.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:29 am)What’s “BS” about telling people what MPG they’ll get at different ranges? That’s exactly the problem with trying to pin down the Volt’s fuel economy to a single number. The MPG that any owner will experience with the Volt — or *any* plug-in hybrid — is drasticly dependent on the miles traveled between charges.
GM’s public information job is going to be a lot harder than I’d thought. I’m disheartened that someone who obviously “gets it” well enough to be able to calculate the effective MPG based on distance thinks that to be “BS”. Did I miss a sarcasm alert? Did I miss the point of this post?
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:31 am)What’s more than a little ironic (and laughable) is that all the hub-ub about bad data came from a GM commercial for the Volt — brought to you buy and sponsored by Chevrolet. Not to mention the fact that their own engineer is the one who read out the efficiency data.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:31 am)If you were sitting in his shoes, had worked hard to bring such a vehicle to fruition, you would be saying the same thing. And don’t blow the situation up by bringing in “dealing with the public”. After the Pius trolls took over this blog for the last couple of days and made false statements regarding the CS mode mpg I don’t fault him for mentioning Lyle’s website. I do find fault with him blaming Lyle and not limiting his statement to just the specifically involved posts. Give me a break; public as whole didn’t make the false claims of low CS mode mpg. To a large degree, it was the Pius crowd.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:31 am)Looking at the getting a Chevy VOLT can be this simple.
Assuming the VOLT has comparable CS-MPG of 45 and above, then a comparison to ANY OTHER HIGH MPG car, gas or electric, will yield a result where the VOLT will be the BETTER option. The electric motor with home charged battery capability will be the determining factor. High CS-MPG makes or breaks. It is really that simple. ( yup, price needs to drop but that can be later)
THE GAME WILL BE OVER AND WON BY THE VOLT.
The CHEVY VOLT will be the BEST ALL AROUND CAR for DRIVING WHEN EVER – WHERE EVER!
The VOLT will sell and sell VERY WELL when the price gets more in line with it competitors.
If one were to drive the VOLT only for the 40 mile electric capability and very little for the CS-Mode then they are driving the wrong car. ( GM will happily sell you one) They would be better off buying a basic electric like a Leaf.
If the CS-MPG is not that high (where other cars become competitive due to their better MPG) then the decision becomes…….. cloudy
-13
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:32 am)(click to show comment)
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:33 am)I’m hoping that the published figures will represent mile per kw city/hwy and mpg city/hwy in cs mode.
All other calculations are up to how each individual uses the vehicle.
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:34 am)No doubt. And GM has already been spanked for claiming an EPA figure without getting an EPA rating.
But were GM to say, “on The Freedom Drive, we achieved such-and-such” and publish the results, then we can’t say GM is being dishonest, disingenuous or evasive. GM would simply be presenting a fact. And if the CS mode fuel economy on “The Freedom Drive” was in the upper 40′s or even better, then we’d have to admit that GM achieved a decent or even impressive result in spite of the theoretical limitations of serial hybrid EV drivetrain characteristics.
Of course, if GM released figures from “The Freedom Drive” that involve a CS mode fuel economy in the low ’30′s, we could say, “that svcks.” And we’d be right.
While I’m thinking about it, it was probably stupid for GM to go on “The Freedom Drive,” anyway. Highway driving and highway speeds are not its forte’. At one point, GM draped an extension cord out the hotel window. Yeah, right, like anyone is going to do that in a hotel (I never accept a ground-floor room). Hitting the open road, GM had little chance for more than 10% electrical miles per day at best.
The Volt is best utilized at lower speeds and when charging is convenient. GM should have been running Volts around NYC, charging at every possible opportunity, and racking up “N Consecutive Gas-Free Days with the Chevy Volt!”
Seriously, who does their marketing, publicity and advertising that they came up with a publicity stunt for which they had to keep the results secret?
They should hire whoever did Ford’s “Thousand Mile Tank!” run. That was pretty smart; it demonstrated the Fusion Hybrid’s strengths instead of showcasing its weaknesses.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:35 am)As an example.
The person who drives the Lexus LX10 and drives 15,000 miles per year uses 1071 gallons per year based on combined mpg of 14 from the Lexus website.
Moving to a Tahoo Hybrid with similar size, the driver would get 21.5 mpg combined (chevy website) and would burn 698 gallons of gas for the same drives. Total gas saved is over 373 gallons per year.
The person with a 45 mpg car driving 15,000 miles per year burns only 333 gallons for the year. Moving to a 55 mpg car saves only 61 gallons for the year. Not really a big deal.
-12
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:36 am)(click to show comment)
-4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:37 am)I contend that the Volt can’t beat that 10-year-old parallel design. There are just more inefficiencies for a pure serial hybrid. However, the advantages are no transmission with associated complexity and maintenance costs. Additionally, one could easily put in a tiny genset if they wanted to (I do – I only want to have a limp-home genset, just to relieve range anxiety) or use several different genset configurations (turbine – any fuel, diesel – better fuel efficiency, specialized unit, etc.).
Have you ever checked out the Prius drivetrain? Let’s just say that you don’t have as much freedom to change things. It’s a very integrated and complex piece of machinery.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:38 am)There is GM engineering, and then there is GM marketing.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:41 am)Actually, more weight would increase the moment (energy) and would make a difference with a hypothetical 100% regen (?). More energy would be recovered. Of course on the opposite end of the equation, more energy would be needed to get the vehicle moving. But since this is a hypothetical case, it doesn’t matter except for understanding the physics behind it.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:41 am)Your are correct… but 61 gals times $2.89 ( in mi) = $ 176.29 is still money to me and I will happily take that saving and apply it to something else. ;+]
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:43 am)I’m all for oil independence just like any other reasonable folk. I’m not for reducing my ability to get quickly from one place to another to save a few gallons that somebody else will just burn in their 3-ton SUV.
In other words, an EV needs similar capabilities as my current car. And passing Prii is one of those criteria.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:43 am)Great idea. Add an owner holding a sign with an infinity symbol, and saying something like, “I haven’t used any gas at all since I bought my Volt. But in case I do, it’s nice knowing I can go 300 miles with it. There’s no way to get stranded.”
-3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:45 am)May be you can ask the Oracle for the CS mpg.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:45 am)I know you understand cost benefit so I’m perplexed as to why you seem opposed to getting 20X the return on a dollar invested rather than getting x return on a dollar of investment. Every gallon may count but 100 gallons count 100X more than one gallon.
In the context of the discussion about the MPG the Volt will get in CS Mode, I’m just pointing out that if you drive a Volt over the course of a year, the gas saved by having this number go from 35 MPG to 50 MPG wouldn’t be sufficient to power a Ford F250 50 miles. IOW discussing it may have entertainment value but if you’re concerned about reducing oil consumption t’s a sideshow.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:47 am)You are mostly correct but mass does have some impact on rolling resistance. More mass is rarely helpful.
And a great deal does depend on your regen efficiency, which is likely to be no better than your efficiency of conversion to kinetic energy in the first place – figure 85%. And then there’s the maximum charging rate to be considered, you can’t regen at a higher rate than that.
-12
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:49 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:49 am)Unless you disable Volt’s computer logic, you still got 30% of her battery to do a burn out. Not really fair to poor Prius.
+8
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:50 am)My 2 cents worth on the CS MPG story
The Volt will be my Wife’s car. She travels 44 miles a day. Her driving style makes me think 38 miles on Electric. Leaving 6 on gas. If the Volt gets 24 mpg (to make the math easy
) she would drive 4 days before she burns 1 gallon of gas. Now with a six gallon tank that would mean 24 days and $24 at $4 a gallon.
LOOKS GOOD TO ME even using these crappy CS mileage numbers.
-3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:50 am)… and never the twain shall meet.
-12
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:50 am)(click to show comment)
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:51 am)I think we guys are better at these kinds of technical measurements! LOL
If you keep getting tickets in CA your mileage goes WAY up!
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:56 am)mass has little effect on energy consumption at steady speed driving, but is #1 in acceleration. Think braking, or city driving.
If GM manages 33% regen efficiency they will have done brilliantly.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:57 am)Dream on, Don.
-3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:59 am)Why The Chevy Equinox EPA Mileage Numbers Don’t Add Up
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/why-the-chevy-equinox-epa-mileage-numbers-dont-add-up/
-10
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:01 pm)(click to show comment)
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:01 pm)Script for Future Volt Commercial
Phil: You want answers?
Lyle: I think I’m entitled.
Phil: YOU WANT ANSWERS?
Lyle: I want the truth!
Phil: YOU CAN”T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!
Fade to CS MPG Text that fills the screen
Not sure if Jack Nicholson and Tom Cruise are available for casting on this.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:03 pm)Your point is well taken but you’re overstating it. First of all you’d also have to assume that the drive train itself was 100% efficient. Second rolling resistance is a dead weight loss and its directly proportional to mass – regen can’t recover it. Third is that you could go twice as far with the same acceleration if you halve the mass.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:03 pm)If you really want to be the first to buy a Volt and not wait until they are released, you will have to go out on a limb a little bit and put money down without knowing all of the facts. Otherwise, someone else will buy it. Big deal. You act like this is China??? This might impact 500 people nationwide. Not even worth talking about. In addition, anyone with sense will only put money down with the right of first refusal. The dealer in Germantown, MD where the volt visited on the freedom drive made this clear. He stated, of course you can refuse the car once it gets here. Its your choice.
Again, it is caveat emptor as you say.
As far as apple goes, many people line up to buy these things without really knowing what they do. Currently there are no reviews out for the 4th generation ipod touches.
I agree with your note about the Prius. These things move along just fine. Even climbing hills.
Your note about the broken down GM cars speaks volumes to your state-of-mind. Unfortunately there are many like you out there with irrational fears of GM cars. Funny, the other weekend at a party 4 Honda owners (who would not buy a GM) were talking about their expensive repairs (2 transmissions, a really expensive radiator, and some other item I cannot remember). Apparently even Japanese cars brake down.
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:04 pm)BTW,
Very interesting to read the back and forth in the comments section between Nick Chambers and Phil Colley from a historical media perspective (something Lyle can appreciate, I’m sure)
Watch how ‘internet viral’ can force a giant corporation rep into dealing with tiny bloggers. He (Colley) comes off initially very harsh and then tries to back pedal out a bit, offering up the offline chat and a ride in the volt in order to smooth things out.
Classic
http://www.plugincars.com/gm-fervently-denies-sub-30-mpg-fuel-economy-claim-chevy-volt-61907.html
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:04 pm)Isn’t that implied by what I said? More energy would be required for acceleration but then all of that energy would be recovered by regen braking. How would that make a difference to the fuel economy?
Of course there’s no point in contemplating this in real scenarios as we’ll never get 100% regen efficiency, but the point I was trying to make is that it seems there’s a general misconception that moving a heavier object uses up more energy, which mostly only true if you waste all that energy by stopping with conventional brakes. So I don’t think the extra weight of the Volt’s battery has much impact on its fuel efficiency.
-1
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:05 pm)The problem with using these methods are that they are incorrect. The electricity that you use for the first 40 miles is not free. Pick an acceptable average cost conversion to MPG of the those 40 miles and change the table. I think that someone once said that it was around 240MPG equiv. Fine but saying that some one is getting 1640 MPG just sounds foolish. Not that this post author is foolish just that type of statement. Use this type of chart:
First 40 Miles = 240 MPG equiv.*
50 Miles = 199 MPG equiv.
100 Miles = 117 MPG equiv.
200 Miles = 76 MPG equiv.
300 Miles = 62 MPG equiv.
*These figures assume average cost of 10 cents/KWH and gas cost of $3.00/gallon and 35MPG in CS Mode after the first 40 miles. Milage also depends on driving habits.
It still seems like it is going to beat the pants off a Prius.
Some thing like that?
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:08 pm)CharlieH, unfortunately for the fuel savers, this is so true. In the end, just about all of the oil will be used up no matter what we do.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:09 pm)Trip Length
Model ZEV Miles CS MPG 10 Miles 45 Miles 100 Miles 180 Miles
Prius 0 Miles 51 MPG 51 MPG 51 MPG 51 MPG 51 MPG
Prius PHEV 15 Miles 51 MPG Gas Free 77 MPG 60 MPG 58 MPG
Volt EREV 40 Miles 40 MPG Gas Free 360 MPG 67 MPG 58 MPG
Leaf BEV 100 Miles - Gas Free Gas Free Gas Free -
Caveat: I guessed at the Prius PHEV and Volt battery ranges (“ZEV Miles”), and guessed at the CS mode mileage for both. When people have accurate numbers, the table will be easy enough to recalculate. I also removed a bunch of columns to hopefully fit within the text limits of the reply box. And the proportional font messed up the columns anyway. Whatever. Try to read it as is (or tell me how to past an Excel spreadsheet into a post).
So there’s your consumer comparison information. If *none* of your drives are over 100 miles, then a Leaf is your most economical. If your drives are almost all up to 100 miles but occasionally over 100 miles, then a Volt is your best choice. If your drives are almost all over 130 miles, the Prius PHEV is your most economical.
The Prius PHEV *never* beats the Volt for MPG until the trip length exceeds 130 miles. It doesn’t matter if you occasionally do a trip over 130 miles. They *all* have to be above 130 miles for the Prius to beat the Volt over the long term.
Off the chart, but the traditional Prius *never* beats the Volt for MPG until the trip length exceeds 180 miles. It doesn’t matter if you occasionally do a trip over 180 miles. They *all* have to be above 180 miles for the Prius to beat the Volt over the long term.
I can see why the GM spokespeople are annoyed with the fan base’s fixation on the single CS MPG number and the repeated comparisons of that single number against the Prius (or Jetta TDI) MPG ratings. They understand that the mileage owners will experience will, in nearly all scenarios, be radically higher than the CS number — and higher than any other conventional car.
-9
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:10 pm)You didn’t use enough CAPITAL LETTERS to persuade me. Please try again.
And, remember, just 10K Volts in 2011. We’ll still be counting votes in 2012 and beyond. The game isn’t over until the Volt is a mainstream vheicle choice.
Like the Prius has been for about the last 7 years.
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:13 pm)Hi, Michael. Note my name too.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:15 pm)I’m not sure there’s any need to pay top dollar for acting talent on this project…
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:18 pm)Interesting article. As an Equinox Owner coming up on 1 year of ownership and an anal retentive (my wife calls me an ass) PhD who did his dissertation lab work at the National Institute of Standards Labs in MD, I trust my testing more than these articles. I have numbers for each tank, all the computer numbers, and my own miles driven to actual gallons added.
The truth is, it is easy to get 32mpg out of the equinox and yes, my trip computer says 34 mpg when I am getting 32. I have averaged full tanks with the trip computer at 35 (mileage around 33.1) and I can get the trip computer to show 37 for a run back and forth to work (60 miles) and this includes red lights and some traffic in the MD/DC/ Rockville area.
These reports show some bias and obviously the writers have a little bit of an axe to grind. I will give them, however, that it is easy to drop the mileage down into the 20s with many short trips and with a heavy foot. The numbers they are reporting, however, just don’t add up.
The biggest drains on gas for the car are a heavy foot, the AC system (mileage dropped about 3 mpg during the hot summer) and short trips (warming up mileage is not good).
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:19 pm)Good job including the electric cost. Clear, readable chart (much better than the one I was composing while your post was going up).
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:19 pm)Not true. Energy required to overcome rolling resistance increases linearly with weight. This is a significant driver of vehicle road load below 45 mph.
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:19 pm)I’m a little perturbed about their comments on how the Volt sat “running”… Hopefully that’s just because the A/C is on or something, but in ideal situations, I would think that when it is sitting idle, it most certainly is not running the ICE.
join thE REVolution
-4
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:21 pm)Hmmm… we could tax it in proportion to its real costs. Then the market would rush forward with a mix of transportation, lubrication and heating solutions that radically minimize oil consumption with very high efficiency or exploit alternative energy sources.
I know… that’s just crazy talk.
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:23 pm)BLIND GUY
: I want to know how efficient each mode is seperately to be able to compare these apples to apples and oranges to oranges. What’s so hard about that?
block quote end
Not so hard for the Volt, which has two very distinct modes. But how does that work for a blended mode PHEV like the upcoming Prius, which will sometimes
deplete the battery while also burning gas?
(Quote)
Here’s where it gets trickie. Actually you could say that the Volt has more than 2 modes. The Volt will have normal or eco mode, sport mode, mountain mode, and I might be misstaken, but can’t the Volt dip into the battery for brief times when extra power is demanded quickly and then replaced to the battery if necessary? So, to get separate cs numbers with the Volt might have some gray area to deal with as well. Since the plug in Prius will still be a serial-parallel hybridIMO the best path would be to continue the same method of mpg. To measure the Prius efficiency all electric bs blended would require conditions and calculations that would probably not be practical unless comparing the Prius in general with another plug in serial-parallel hybrid. It would be great if you could enter your driving needs and desires into a program and have the computer give you what kind of vehicles would be best for you on all that info.. For some people, the Volt will be a great match, for others it will be BEVs and others, etc…
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:24 pm)# 146 DonC Said:
LauraM: But what I’m saying is that, at some point, every gallon will matter.
In the context of the discussion about the MPG the Volt will get in CS Mode, I’m just pointing out that if you drive a Volt over the course of a year, the gas saved by having this number go from 35 MPG to 50 MPG wouldn’t be sufficient to power a Ford F250 50 miles. IOW discussing it may have entertainment value but if you’re concerned about reducing oil consumption t’s a sideshow.
Are you beating around the bush to say it’s better to hybridize a few pickups, than to have a good percentage of the country driving gas free?
-13
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:27 pm)(click to show comment)
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:30 pm)Look, Y’all, the mpg is, by the definition used by the car buying public and the car retailing industry, whatever the EPA (or whatever the agency is called) says it is! If GM comes out with a number at this time, no matter what disclaimers they use, it will end up being wrong, and they WILL get raked over the coals for having done so. Nearly all who post on this site, and very nearly all who ever read it will not get a 1st year Volt. They are going to sell every one they make these first 2 years. They will not lose ONE single customer by keeping mum on mileage for a little while longer. Soon enough we will know all there is to know about the Volt’s mileage capability. This has been totally a tempest in a teapot.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:31 pm)My Maxima was a lemon–the worst car, repair-wise, I’ve ever owned, by far. And that’s saying something, since I’ve owned a lot of cars, including a ’59 Triumph TR3.
And what’s up with the board being highjacked by angry Toyota people? Making the same obvious, lame posts over and over. Very bad form.
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:32 pm)I’m curious as to whether there are any clues in this new SAE J1711, dated 6/8/2010, as to what the outcome of all this will be. But I’m not curious enough to spend $63.00 for a copy of it to find out. For anyone who wants to download or order a copy, go to: http://standards.sae.org/j1711_201006
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:34 pm)Which uses more fuel in the aggregate? Maybe it makes sense to hybridize the pickups first.
El Lutzbo was not wrong when he said that increasing fuel economy from 16mpg to 20-22mpg would save more fuel than increasing fuel economy from 45-50 mpg; he was right about that. Where El Lutzbo got it wrong was in thinking that people buying 16mpg vehicle cared enough about fuel economy to pay $13K (maybe more) to improve their fuel econmy from 16 to 20-22mpg.
Reducing fuel consumption is not a technical problem… there are many ways to do it (the cheapest and easiest being completely non-technical solutions, like car-pooling, biking, walking and taking the bus). The problem with reducing fuel consumption is that, for the most part, nobody cares. There’s fifty million gas-suckin’ SUVs out on the road with yellow ribbons on their fat behinds and the dolt at the wheel doesn’t think there’s any kind of connection between his fuel filler port and the world beyond the local soccer field.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:35 pm)I’m curious as to whether there are any clues in this new SAE J1711, dated 6/8/2010, as to what the outcome of all this will be. But I’m not curious enough to spend $63.00 for a copy of it to find out. For anyone who wants to download a copy, go to:
http://standards.sae.org/j1711_201006
[PS: Lyle, the site software is still blocking ALL posts in my normal user name/email address]
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:35 pm)The argument’s really been over bragging rights, IMO.
-1
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:35 pm)+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:36 pm)Those SUV owners are kicking in $7500 of your alleged $19k price differential to say ‘thank you’ for that downward gasoline price pressure. As well they should.
Only if driven gingerly. Merge onto a freeway or accelerate up a hill during those 12-14 miles and the PHEV Prius will burn gas. The Volt will not.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:38 pm)That is all of the caps I could find. ( sometimes folks read so fast they might miss “my important points” so I thought caps might help) But I will stand by what I said.. even in little letters. Unless someone has a better scenario
For me ( as might have guessed) this seems to be the best way for a comparison.
If MPGs close to equal in any ICE then the electric capability of the VOLT makes it the better car. :+}
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:39 pm)Don C
I actually feel bad about it. I’ve wondering if I should have left it alone. All the while. I agree the # in the video can not be used a basis for anyone’s real world expectations unless you take your Volt to a track day.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:54 pm)The near absence of informal comments from the Volt’s engineering teams about CSM MPGs (or gas tank size) is disappointing but may be understandable.
Could the bailout of GM with the stigma of “Government Motors”, the 230 MPG gaffe, the recent critical New York Times story, “GM’s Electric Lemon”, the turnover of CEOs and upper management shuffle, day-to-day GM career uncertainties, simply made the folks working there feel reluctant to speak freely?
Looking forward to the early adopter reviews but am waiting to decide to order a Volt until more of the experiential consumer info becomes available.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:54 pm)EricLG or Others
Take a look at my post #92. I’d like to hear your Devil’s Advocate prospective on my analysis.
Motorola Droid app. demo video seems to indicate 50mpg.
http://www.thebigmoney.com/blogs/shifting-gears/2010/05/20/google-gm-chevy-volt-cool
+7
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:55 pm)You’re right. It was lazy reporting. But then, Lyle doesn’t, as far as I know, pretend to be a journalist. He’s a blogger, running the gm-volt fan site. Are his responsibilities similar to a journalist’s. Hmm. (I literally don’t know. Interesting topic to argue about, though.)
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:56 pm)It is amazing how many engineers there are on all of the blogs I have seen? Everyone is an expert forget about the guys that got a degree from M.I.T. they don’t know anything, we should all rely on the reporter with a video camera. Myself I never get excited about what I see or read from the press or the manufacturers the proof is in the pudding and the pudding pudin is not out of the oven yet. So cool your jets just relax and don’t get to worried about the small stuff, who give’s a hoot about range on the generator anyway as most or let me say only 80 percent of us will be driving this car when we can get our paws on one in PURE ELECTRIC MODE ONLY. I myself will be lucky if I can purchase a Volt around 2013, generation 2 should be out by then, I may not be an engineer but I heard that it will recharge on banana peels, now I worry about the price of banana’s in the future, what are we to do?
-11
Aug 26th, 2010 (12:57 pm)(click to show comment)
-12
Aug 26th, 2010 (1:06 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (1:13 pm)100% efficiency drive train wouldn’t be required, only that it would be equally as efficient with the higher mass.
That is true, but I decided not to mention rolling resistance for the sake of simplicity. Also, I’m assuming the rolling resistance coefficient can be optimized for a higher mass., but that I’m not so sure of.
Twice as far until what? Perhaps a better way of putting it is you can travel the same distance at the same acceleration with half the energy if you halve the mass. But if you can recover 100% of that energy in both cases when you stop, then the extra mass wouldn’t have made any difference.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (1:16 pm)That’s why I don’t go crazy with schemes to save fuel myself. I live close to work, I have reasonably small cars with reasonably good gas mileage, I added insulation and weather stripping to the house (a more efficient furnace is in the budget), we don’t use A/C unless it’s unbearable, I don’t waste gas idling, I bike many errands and walk others but I don’t go overboard.
Until the rest of the country gets on board with the idea that we should do something dramatic about oil consumption and CO2 emissions because these things are important, there’s really no reason to wear the hair shirt oneself. Any fuel you save will get used up by someone who just doesn’t care or someone who just bought a car in one of the emerging markets.
I just do what seems reasonable and, of the money I’ve saved, a significant chunk is invested in solar power technologies.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (1:19 pm)Did you look under the keyboard? Sometimes they fall off and get stuck under there or maybe under the monitor.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (1:22 pm)That wasn’t where I was going. I was making the point that the human mind misinterprets the significance of differences in the MPG number over 40 and the CS Mode MPG number doesn’t matter for oil consumption. (It may matter to you, that’s a different question).
But since you bring it up, we’d be much further ahead concentrating on fueling trucks with CNG than on getting Prius drivers to move to EVs.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (1:29 pm)Why is it so important to wait for the EPA?
“This is the MPG we get in CS mode right now and this is how we tested it”. Who cares what the EPA says?
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (1:43 pm)OK. Let’s do an example. You need to use 10 kWh from a battery to hill climb in car M. The drive train is 50% efficient so you can recover 5 kWh coming down the hill. Now you climb again and you lose that 5 kW. Two climbs and you’ve lost 10 kWh. Now you have car 1/2M with half the mass. Since the energy needed to climb is given by U=mgh, you’ll only need half the energy at the wheels to climb in the 1/2M car. So you use 5 kWh on the first climb. You lose half due to drive train inefficiencies and get 2.5 kWh back through regen. Now you do the second climb, again losing 2.5 kWh. Net result: Car M, the full mass car, has lost 10 kWh due to drive train inefficiencies while the 1/2M car, with half the mass, has only lost 5 kWh.
Same 50% efficiency, different losses because the percentage is being applied to larger and smaller numbers.
Made a mistake by saying half but the principle is right. Take the M and 1/2M cars again. They’re at rest. Now accelerate them over the same time frame so their kinetic energy is the same. Since the kinetic energy available for regen capture is 1/2MV^2, to make up for the fact that its mass is less, the 1/2M car has to be going faster. This necessarily means that it’s average velocity will have been greater, which means it will have covered more distance. So at the end of any time period it will be further down the track than the M car.
Now let’s assume that regen captures all the kinetic energy and instantly stops the two cars. We’re assuming that the kinetic energy of both cars is the same, so the amount of energy recaptured will be the same. However, since the 1/2M car started further down the track when regen stopped it, it will have gone further than the M car, which by definition means it was more efficient.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (1:57 pm)Phil of GM: You could validly make the accusation of “lazy journalism” if the journalists and bloggers had never asked GM for the CS mode MPG. However, quite the opposite is true: I believe every time Lyle has gotten the ear of a GM Volt representative, he has asked for, among other things, the CS mode MPG. (And all he has ever gotten is evasion. Why can’t you just tell us what you’re experiencing — you know, anecdotal?)
So if Lyle can be accused of anything, it’s zeal, NOT laziness.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:01 pm)There are FOUR lights.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:03 pm)When they were a novelty, DVD players were much more expensive than their VHS counterparts. At that time, even the full equipped VHS player was cheaper than the new technology. At the video club, movies were mainly in VHS format. Almost no DVDs were available to read for your player.
Didn’t change a thing. DVD players were an improvement over the existing technology. VHS are now things of the past.
New tech is always more expensive. I’m sure you know that. It doesn’t stop people from buying it because it has a ‘cool factor’ attached.
Someone who wants the cool thing will buy a Volt.
-12
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:05 pm)(click to show comment)
-9
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:07 pm)I thought you covered the bases, I have nothing to add.
As for the 50.0 CS mpg, a line from some movie or another keeps zinging around my head, but I cannot pin down the title. It went something alone the lines of “I believe in coincidences, they happen all the time. I just do not *trust* coincidences.”
Aha, I remember! Garak in DS9, while investigating with Dr. Bashir the discovery of a Cardassian orphan who turned out to be the lost son of a pivotal Cardassian politician.
+14
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:08 pm)Lyle, you know you have an amazing group of fans when they’re all defending you against something that wasn’t even said to you… ;o)
I understand the curiosity about mpg, though it’s not nearly as high on my priority list as it seems to be for some folks- it’ll be known soon enough, as will the rest of the details. If the difference between 35 and 50 mpg on an engine that most people won’t use very often is a major factor in a purchase decision and is enough to keep anyone from buying the car, then everyone behind the Volt and indeed the movement probably has bigger issues.
Yes, GM could provide an estimate, but I can see why they prefer to wait until they have a number they’re confident in, based on what happened with the 230 mpg debacle. The reality is that there’s a heightened scrutiny and layer of cynicism around anything GM says, which is why they got more flak for that announcement than Nissan did when they announced 370 mpg the same week. It was a poor choice for both, but only one got punished. Besides, no matter what number gets put out, it’ll be different from “real world” mpg.
It’s also true that any one drive is merely one data point, and it’s not fair to draw conclusions without knowing all the factors. And whatever he calls himself, Lyle has become a recognized authority on this vehicle, and he has an unprecedented amount of access to GM for a mere “enthusiast”. We all know that various other sites pick up his reports and assume them to be valid- so I think it’s fair to expect him to pick up the phone to GM to confirm these things. It may not be required, but it’s the right thing to do for his readership.
As for Phil, I happen to like the guy. Dude works his butt off for the Volt, and I’ve gotten responses from him at all hours. Besides, PR folks who will call it like they see it instead of relying on a polished corporate line are a rare breed, and I’ll take ‘em over the alternative any day.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:09 pm)This isn’t rocket science… All this talk about how CS mpg varies is just double talk. Of course it varies, but within a narrow range over a long period of time.
My truck has an instantaneous reading that ranges from about 5 mpg when I floor it to 99 mpg when I’m coasting, but sure as rain, the average will be in the 17-20 mpg range.
Today, the consumer can look at an ICE vehicle, and based on it’s size and engine choice guess a fairly accurate MPG range. With the Volt we have no basis to even make an estimate. GM could end all this idle speculation with a simple “it’s in the range of x- to y”
It still seems to me that GM is banking on some combined Voodoo meaningless number from the EPA. I could care less about some blended Charge Depleting and Charge Sustaining number that is based on some theoretical number of miles per day. Give me the steady state CS MPG and let me do my own math.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:17 pm)I’m beginning to think we *are* the same person, but maybe I just get my writing proofread and edited by a pro sometimes.
-14
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:17 pm)(click to show comment)
+7
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:29 pm)Lol- not a chance! But I do want to see these early programs go well; it’s our best chance of getting more EVs in the long run. And all of the OEMs will and should be held to the numbers that they put out, so I think they could all stand to put a little more thought behind them. Besides, when GM acts without thinking, we end up with the Volt dance, and my eyes couldn’t take that again.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:40 pm)I see a victory here. We now know when the EPA label is released that GM will disclose the MPG in CS Mode. Before, yesterday that was not certain at all. Thanks Lyle!
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:41 pm)Nissan’s tweet about 367 mpg was a tounge in cheeck dig on GM’s 230 mpg offical announcement by then CEO Henderson.
/Surely you are aware of the absurdity in weighting these two statements equally?
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:54 pm)First, you’re assuming the price of the Volt can and will come down, like the DVD player. That’s quite an assumption. The Volt is, by dollar value, equal parts compact car and way-too-expensive battery. Well, there’s a little bit of control system and whatnot in there. The compact car part can’t be reduced by much… GM has been doing that for years and improvements are tiny and incremental. The battery price is likely to come down with scaleup but the shape of that decrease curve is unkown. If demand outstrips supply, as other auto manufacturers ramp up and as other uses for large-cap batteries are developed, the price could increase.
DVD prices fell by integration, scaleup, competition and other factors. Integration was key… the partcount in a DVD player fell dramatically over time. Not gonna happen with the Volt.
Whether or not people buy “the cool thing” depends, in large part, on its price. iPods are the creme de la creme of cool in MP3 players (and it has numerous operational advantages, too) but there are other major players out there, making a good living because for quite a few people “cool” is not worth the extra $20-40 needed to get an iPod.
The number of people who “gotta have it” when cool is an extra $19K… very very small.
To be a success, the car must be affordable. There is no way around this.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (2:54 pm)Talk about naive. lol. My Magnum R/T can outrun any Prius made (and Volt as well). Not that I try. It just happens.
Prius top speed is what ~86mph? My top speed is around 130. The speedo goes to 160, but, I’m not quite that crazy. I can get to Prius’ top speed in about 10 seconds in 1/8 mile.
Magnum R/T. Google it.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:04 pm)I think I have seen the car you own — it looks like someone flattened it from above, right ?
How is the ‘oil independence’ storyline and your car working out for ya ?
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:05 pm)This must be why i get honked at and flipped off daily for trying to accelerate without the engine kicking on. Then there is the EV mode which is limited to 10MPH during warmup and 25MPH the rest of the time, and the wonderful excuses i get as to why I can not have it. “EV Mode deactivated – Excessive Acceleration”, “EV Mode deactivated – Excessive Speed”, EV Mode deactivated – Low Battery” and my favorite of all – “EV Mode not available” (no explaination). You really have to feather the accelerator to keep the engine off, and I am an experienced hypermiler who would get low 40′s out of a XB.
My prius MPG is usually about 55, but on a long road trip a week ago i used premium to test the better fuel economy claimed by GM and was able to get 59MPG on the highway at 64MPH.
Prius is a great car, Volt is just better!
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:10 pm)BTW I have had my 2010 prius to 103MPH Once,
But i would never attempt to compete against a car built for performance!
You have an awesome car – One of my favorite body styles on the road today.
-9
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:13 pm)Hope you enjoyed the wind. Premium does not have more energy/gallon than regular, and does squat for mpg in a Prius. The high octane is needed in performance engines (read: high power) to avoid heterogenous fuel combustion, known colloquially as ‘knock’.
You are not saving fuel by driving that way. I have never been honked at, and I get 70 mpg in my city driving in temperate weather.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:18 pm)My Truth is obviously different than yours. I consistently get +1 or so and you consistently get -7 or so. Sounds like you’re on the wrong forum.
If I didn’t care one hoot about gas usage (not gas mileage), I wouldn’t be buying a $40k Chevy. It’s just that without 3 billion other people making the same choices, oil will eventually run out.
I can’t change that world, but, I can be driving around when gasoline is obsolete. By that time, I will have a full EV and still be passing Prii.
/oh wait. Prii use gasoline. sorry ’bout that.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:22 pm)I would buy something like a Magnum R/T.
Oh, wait. That was you.
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:25 pm)Oooh… Ooohh… Gotta big engine… Ooohh Ooohhh…
The Prius tops out at 105. By “as fast as anything,” the Prius can do any legal speed in the US. And, by my observation, they usually do.
You can jam as big an engine as you like into whatever you drive but you risk a ticket over the speed limit, same as a Prius.
Take a look in the mirror. Whatever problem you think the Volt is gonna solve, you are a part of creating it.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:26 pm)I’m OK with -7 from a self-selected and delusional group.
-10
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:28 pm)(click to show comment)
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:31 pm)Are we still taking nominations for Post Of The Day?
+7
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:32 pm)Instrumentated values for performance metrics such as mpg can sometimes be very difficult to interpret.
This episode was a very good example of that.Let’s learn from it.
A screenshot of a gage or info center can easily be misinterpreted because it is unknown the exact the driving cycle details used in it’s creation. In short anyone can pretty much operate the car in a under specific conditions and drive in such a fashion to create whatever numbers you want.
You are also at the mercy of how the software is making the various calculations. For instance the “fuel used” values can be extrapolated from different sources. Some systems might be using a measurement of fuel consumed based on the fuel tank sending unit, others might use compiled injector duty-cycle and pulse width data, others extrapolate from the delivered fuel mass. All come with accuracy and stacked tolerance issues. Some might be corrected for, some perhaps not.
In the case of the Volt what we do know is the instrumentation displays is currently a work in progress. Why scrutinize an incomplete work of art?
In the end all that really matters is consumers get “apples to apples” numbers which is what the what the EPA methodology is attempting to establish. Why can’t people just be patient for that to occur? From what I can see, most of the people pounding their fists on the table demanding CS-mileage from GM are not the least bit interested in purchasing a Volt, but instead are looking for validation against the their own cars from the competition.
That’s their agenda, and GM isn’t playing their games.
Recently many of the trolls here have been pointing out various documents and statements from those authoring J1711. But it looks like most of them either didn’t bother to read those documents, or were unable to correctly interpret them.
But it is important to point out that it is the intention of the EPA to establish a new MPG formulation for PHEVs and EREVs that takes into consideration 3 primary elements.
1- All electric range at full charge (under a precise “full-range” cycle of exercise, ANY fuel burned will be additive into the CS mpg)
2- MPG while in CS mode over the identical “full-range” cycle
3- a Utility Factor that is weighted correctly and “recognizes” efforts to increase AER
Below is a sample draft (from one of these previously mentioned documents) that illustrates what we will likely see.
Again, this is just a draft. The final curve shapes and relationships are still being determined by the EPA.
But what it tells us is that if the Volt ends up with a 37mpg CS rating (it will be more than that but just as a number out-of-the-hat) over the course of the drive cycle, it would achieve a 100mpg rating based on a 40mile AER range under the identical cycle.
Another plug-in vehicle that say had only 14 miles of AER but managed 50mpg in CS (including any fuel consumed during AER tests that resulted in ICE operation) would achieve a 72mpg rating.
Apples to Apples this is a fair methodology to compare these vehicles for the consumer, but certainly BOTH cars might be able to do much better OR worse under certain conditions- but you have to start somewhere.
HTH
WopOnTour
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:37 pm)EricLG
Charlie H
carcus3
Dan Frederiksen
The Grump
john 1701a (or some such)
They should open their own site. Pretty please. Something indicative of their attitude, like, “IHateYou.com”, “TheWorldSucks.net” or “BlogDestroy.org”.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:41 pm)Dunno, it seems to me that a couple of them oughtta just pull ‘em out and measure already. ;o)
-10
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:42 pm)(click to show comment)
-13
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:53 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:56 pm)Premium fuel had 0 ethanol, i typically fill with 10% so that was probably the reason for the increased efficiancy.
As for the other issue how is accelerating with the engine not running not saving fuel? Is it one of the inherant flaws of the prius that it can not be charged with a plug? My 55MPG on 10% Ethanol includes about 1 mile of city driving and 8 miles of highway traffic. Since most of the driving is on highway I try and make the last mile on electricity to offset. I do live literally directly off the highway, so i only have city driving when arriving to work. My complete daily commute is 36 miles 9 + 9 + 9 +9 (I come home at lunch time). With the volt I will save 187 gallons of gas during the year on My work commute ALONE, plus more saving on other drives. I currently use 220 – 250 gallons per year in the Prius.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:58 pm)Very nice form there bud. Go wank off.
I got 25mpg on a recent road trip. That’s 30% better than my previous vehicle.
It runs on 4 cylinders when going a steady speed in overdrive. And yet, I can haul a class III trailer if needed.
Magnum R/T. Google it.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (3:59 pm)New thread has been posted.
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:00 pm)Now THAT’s the Post of the Day!!
I think I love you. ;^)
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:06 pm)Additional information, such as;
miles per KW hour
KW hour per gallon
This would be very valuable for vehicle comparison. That is, if competitive vehicles were available.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:10 pm)Noth’n there. No range extender.
-10
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:14 pm)(click to show comment)
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:14 pm)If customers can’t get wh/mile and mpg ratings from the offical testings, then everyone will just flock to third party independents like Consumer Reports or reliable online sources. And then we’ll just be paying another government agency to implement useless standards and distribute useless information.
It’s too bad, really. The epa had made a lot of progress when they changed the testing for 2008.
Everybody will have different drive/charge cycles. Without the raw efficiency data how can individuals calculate their own projected individual fuel/electricity use?
It’d be an absolute shame if the city/hwy 2008 drive cycle testing was not utilized in testing/distributing the plug in hybrids for mpg and wh/mile efficiency.
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:15 pm)Good lord, why aren’t you thrilled at the prospect of getting Loboc into a Volt. Every Magnum driver switching to a Volt saves the country more gas than a half dozen Prius Drivers switching to Leafs. As much as you may think the Volt is somehow wrong headed, you have to admit the American made Volt appeals to a certain demographic that you’re never going to get into a Prius or Leaf.
I appreciate that GM has tried to produce an electric car that’s not an anemic econobox. I can’t afford a Tesla, but a Volt is within my means. I’ll certainly want to test drive a Volt against a Leaf once they’re both available in my area, just to see how much of a difference there is to me and how I want to drive. I might actually want to buy my first American made car.
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:15 pm)I like it! +1.
/oh wait. A little out of context. -2
-11
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:17 pm)(click to show comment)
-9
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:20 pm)And if you’d like to compete, what metric shall we use?
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:22 pm)You mean like on a date? Come on over!
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:24 pm)Metric uses way smaller increments, so, you get more per inch.
+5
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:25 pm)Ha!
You’ve hit on the marketing genius of the “range extended” terminology!
“So, this car will extend my… range?”
-10
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:27 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:28 pm)I think the smart ED already has that marketing theme covered, though probably not in the way they’re hoping!
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:30 pm)True. Still, my argument hold : as the competition is trying to improve incrementally an old design and try to keep up, GM is working on a new basis (the Voltec) much more promising and closer to the goal of electrification.
As for the decrease curve, it’s like the CS mode number : time will tell and it can only improve over the years.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:38 pm)Yep–sustain your charge. ha
-11
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:47 pm)(click to show comment)
+10
Aug 26th, 2010 (4:57 pm)Wow – lots of reaction to my comments yesterday.
Let me clear up a few things. Being that I handle social media for the Volt, I have been a tireless supporter inside the company of Lyle’s site and any other blogs, microblogs, forums, etc. that do their best to provide the most accurate information about any Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick or GMC vehicle, especially the Volt. I’ve also referenced this site on numerous occasions on the Volt Facebook page in discussions about what a good third party site it is. That being said, just like I told Nick yesterday of my criticism, “My comment wasn’t an indictment of your blogging career, just on the report yesterday.” Same goes for Lyle.
You may be surprised to know Lyle and I communicate quite frequently, mostly via email, and Chelsea is absolutely correct when she says, “Lyle has become a recognized authority on this vehicle, and he has an unprecedented amount of access to GM.” This site and others like it are very important, because members like all of you are on the “front lines” as Jackson wrote and are looked to by your respective circles as experts on the Volt. And that is exactly why we work with Lyle and others bloggers to provide the most accurate information available.
All that being said and our shared passion for the Volt aside, I hope you understand that we are limited in what we can say publicly sometimes. What I can tell you now, though, is the extended range MPG will be much better than what was reported the past few days. And as we’ve always done with the Volt, we’ll continue to be as open and transparent as possible. As soon as we can share additional information, this site will certainly be one of the first to know, so stay tuned.
Phil
http://twitter.com/philcolley
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (5:04 pm)The leaf is just a battery and electric motor. What is there to complicate rating it compared to a plug-in vehicle with a fuel tank and engine driven generator on board?
-1
Aug 26th, 2010 (5:07 pm)So you call it your semi-HEMI.
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (5:13 pm)Wow, Chelsea Sexton AND Phil Colley commenting in here?
I love this place
Thanks for making it worth plowing through all the soul-sucking comments.
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (5:26 pm)I have been posting the screenshot showing 31.5 MPG in CS mode. So this 27.5 MPG was not a surprise for me. They tried to boost the EV mile range by recharging the battery with the gas engine. The firestorm started due to the lack of clear communication and manipulation in the promo video.
http://priuschat.com/forums/attachments/chevrolet-volt/25058d1281759995-calculation-details-volts-230mpg-city-estimate-volt-lifetime-mpg.jpg
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (5:30 pm)Hey nasaman, we have a “long distance purchasers” thread in the forum that I hope you’ll take a look at and add your comment to.
+9
Aug 26th, 2010 (5:41 pm)Phil Colley is right! And I’m going to try posting a general technical dissertation (without doing hypothetical computations) that I wrote 2-3 days ago (this site’s software has blocked my posts recently). The 4 posts referenced are from the 8/24 thread here with 462 comments at last check. Go to http://gm-volt.com/2010/08/24/video-chevy-volt-does-0-to-60-in-8-53-seconds-gets-over-40-miles-ev-range-and-under-30-mpg-in-cs-mode/ to re-read them.
=============================================================
Dave K, post #1: “…The listed distance/fuel numbers were under an abusive driving style with full throttle acceleration and very hard braking. Mountain mode was also used. Which means for a short time the battery and the gasoline tank were being drained at the same time. With very little regen being reclaimed and no consideration of the efficiency gauge. Actual real world numbers will be more positive in the production car…”
KentEE, post #17: “…The energy stored in the battery from burning this .59 gallons may be enough to propel the car an additional 9 miles. Guess what? You’re at 50 MPG in CS mode! Point is, you *have* to take the average over a long time period. You can never know the true MPG unless you can turn the ICE OFF and then deplete the charge it produced while burning gas.”
JeremyK, post #57: “…1) Consider that 1 gallon of gasoline contains 36.6 kWh of energy
2) The ICE is 25% (>37%?) efficient in converting the chemical energy to mechanical
3) The generator (and supporting electronics) are 85% efficient in converting mechanical to electrical
4) It takes 8 kWh to go 40 miles
So: we get 38.9 mpg equivalent.”
Koz, post #88: “…25% for ICE seems very low. The Prius ICE maxes out at 37% efficiency. With steady (state) operation, GM would doing pretty poorly to be below 32%.”
======================================================
The above quotations are very insightful and I encourage everyone to reread them. I’ll base my following remarks on those astute comments as supporting or background information…
There are at least 3 other key factors that would adversely affect the CS estimate of 27.3 Mpg this thread has postulated —NONE of which have been accounted for in the discussions so far:
1 – The Volt traveled 43.7 miles on the battery with the ICE/Gen NOT IN OPERATION, followed by only 16.1 miles with the ICE/Gen running —its very likely that for the first several miles the ICE may not have reached its most efficient operating temperature.
2 – GM engineering has tuned (valve/injector timing, etc) the ICE to operate at a limited number of steady-state rpms to maximize efficiency; if Koz is correct that Toyota has achieved a maximum efficiency of 37% for the Prius ICE operating from 500-7,000rpms(?), the Volt’s ICE should do at least that well, rather than 25% as JeremyK says.
3 – MOST IMPORTANT, for most normal driving the Volt ICE/Gen can provide roughly TWICE the electric traction power needed to maintain highway speeds. IOW, using the battery as a buffer, GM will have designed the control algorithms to operate at full load/max efficiency; hence only HALF the power generated will propel the car & the other half will divert to the battery. Thus in this example the ICE/Gen duty cycle is 50%, so it’s OFF half the time & using NO gas.
Finally, Volt Chief Engineer Andrew Farah publicly says he’s still targeting 50mpg as the CS mileage goal. In view of the foregoing arguments, how can we just “blow him off”?!?!
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (5:48 pm)Thanks for your response, Phil. The vast majority of posters here understand the communication constraints that you have, and appreciate the openess that you and GM have displayed with the Volt. It has been awesome to feel like, and to actually be at times, a part of its development. Talk about a great way to create a community of loyal customers! Frankly, that is very refreshing for the many of us, like me, who didn’t always have the best experience with GM, if you know what I mean.
It’s a new world now, both for the electrification of the car and for GM, so it’s nice to see GM taking a new approach. With over 50,000 people on this site’s ‘Want List’, please continue to reach out to us–you almost can’t be TOO open with us. We still have tons of unanswered questions, as you can tell by our posts.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:08 pm)So you are buying Volt for the image and to make a statement. Many people here accused Prius owners of it. The accusers need to look themselves in the mirror.
I think many Prius owners are the core of the environmentally concerned group.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:10 pm)Wow, that’s a really breakthrough. What’s the cost and the benefit?
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:16 pm)Reasonable? You can buy more gas with $19k and “set it free”. You’ll free more gas than plugging in and driving the Volt.
-4
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:17 pm)Phil Colley should be fired. He handled all this publicity wrong. If GM woul’ve given a preliminary figure or better a range, none of this would have happened. Nothing wrong with “Preliminary” disclosures.
The only reason they won’t do it now is because the moron who said to go ahead and have a big “coming out” with the 230mpg blew it. That person should have been fired too.
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:22 pm)Most trips are less than 5 miles anyway, per insurance company accident data. PHV Prius’ 50 CS MPG with regular gas will also be in favor of the Prius. PHV Prius should be faster on the highway as well.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:22 pm)Ah, come on. Let GM have there little secret. I am sure it will be one heck of a party when they produce the “Official” EPA sticker. They will have to have something to announce. Let them have their reward. I am sure it is not that easy dealing with the EPA.
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:26 pm)Climbing mountains or accelerating with battery is very expensive. This is why Volt is adding a hack (mountain mode).
PHV Prius would be smart enough to turn on the gas engine to keep the EV miles consistent. Without the mountain mode, Volt’s EV range will swing very widely.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:28 pm)Oh. Wow. Oh. Baby. You are just a fuel economy stud.
I was thinking of using the phrase “self contradictory.” But “rampant stupidity” is looking pretty good, too.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:31 pm)From what I can tell, it’s easier to deal with the EPA than GM Dealer Service Departments.
+7
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:36 pm)Seawolf. You’re bordering on the rediclous. It’s always been known that most “accidents” happen close to home. It’s got absolutely NOTHING to do with the length of the trip, more like the frequency you will be in that vicinity and your mindset in terms of concentration and distraction when in a comfortable surrounding (i.e. around your neighborhood)
So you can go ahead and interpret that insurance data any way you want I guess, but every time you say “most trips are less than 5-miles” , there’s a collective laugh! LOL
Isn’t also just as humerous that 5 miles to and from just happens to be about the EV range of a Prius PHEV. (providing you don’t try to accelerate too fast or exceed 61mph)
Hilareous!
WopOnTour
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:38 pm)No, the EV hill climbing is surprisingly powerful. That ability to accelerate up a steep suburb escape out of the valley where I live (1/3 mile at 40 MPH from a dead stop) turned out to be no big deal. The electric motor offers quite a bit more punch from that configuration than the one without a plug.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:43 pm)Those are the reasons $23k Prius and $26k Leaf are the way to go.
If you want to consume only 3,000 gallons get the Prius. If you want a real pure EV, get the Leaf. If you want something in between, there is PHV Prius (under $30k) and the $41k Volt.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:44 pm)Interesting way to put it, since beating isn’t the point. The design is intended to offer a vehicle that’s ultra-efficient at an affordable price. That’s not the same as Volt.
I ran an errand my final morning with a PHV. Not a drop of gas was used on that particular trip. The engine never started. I knew exactly what the efficiency was too.
The BS mode will be known soon enough. Since Volt still has an engine, offering a solution to the so-called “range anxiety” problem, people will want to know what they are paying for.
Also, why would a Volt owner ever use mountain-mode if they don’t know what the tradeoff is of intentionally forcing the engine to run sooner?
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:49 pm)You are more familiar with your neighborhood. The accidents occur more within 5 miles range is because there are simply more trips.
I doubt you drive 20 miles away from home to get milk.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:57 pm)Ummm did you not read or comprehend the word “frequency”? FYI- same thing.
and the familiarity with your surroundings is actually part of the problem, you relax combined with a loss of roadway attentivness. All of this is well documented.
So again please keep saying “most trips are 5-miles or less” it’s doing wonders for your cred.
WOT
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (6:57 pm)That just made me laugh out loud.
And you’re right. I did the math and, were I to “go Volt,” it would cost me $175 for every gallon of gas I saved from a fiery death. Your suggestion seems much, much more practical.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:11 pm)Well, perhaps…but straight talk sometimes is refreshing. Good to see the wood put to the trolls.
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:14 pm)So, what the hey… I did Google it and I’m sure glad I did. Here’s Jalopnik’s take on it…
http://jalopnik.com/137847/jalopnik-reviews-2006-dodge-magnum-rt-part-1
“The Dodge Magnum: Beefy enough for a wannabe gay porn star, practical enough to stir the loins of a thirtysomething woman. Think of it as some perverse automotive version of Miller Lite.”
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:17 pm)Am assuming here the new EPA MPG rating system will be applied to other vehicles with a combination of electric and gasoline/hydrogen/LNG etc fueled propulsion systems…so a Volt number will not be subjected to apples-oranges comparisons.
-7
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:34 pm)That really is quite clever, seawolf
I was mulling over WOT’s criticism of using accident data as a proxy for trip length, and the utility factor (UF) the EPA is apparently adding to the PHEV placard. I think both the proxy and the UF share the same fatal problem: purchasers of PHV cars are not going to mirror the general populace *at all*. If they act a bit rationally, they will match the car to their personal situation.
If I live 15 miles from work and plug-in while there, the UF says I benefit the most from a Volt, which is nonsense. Worse, if I live 7 miles from work and do not have a plug, the UF says more benefit from the Volt, because the median American drives more.
The UF is predicated on a random either/or PPV/Volt purchase, applied to the entire population, when it is clear that 99.99% will buy neither. How f’g ludicrous, and typical of GM politics.
+8
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:44 pm)Hi Chelsea Thanks for stopping by, always a pleasure, and thanks for all you’ve done and are doing for the electrification of the automobile.
I cant take credit for any fans though, they like me are just people that want to drive a Volt. We’re just in it together.
And for the record, do your really think I didn’t ask GM what the CS MPG is? I have a good idea and yeah I agree with you it really isn’t all that important if its 36 or 46, most will barely use it anyway.
Thanks Phil, its been an interesting debate as usual. And no publicity is bad publicity anyway…
So, how much better?
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (7:54 pm)Likewise, Lyle! ;o)
Purposely didn’t speculate whether you did or didn’t- just said it’s not an unfair expectation given the role you’ve come to have and since you’ve access most don’t, whether you classify yourself as a journalist or not.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:21 pm)Consumer Reports has no credibility with this motorist at this time. If you can at least agree the most basic mission of any private passenger vehicle is to safely transport its occupants to their destination, Toyota’s recent spate of recalls for a defect that was killing people did not disuade CR from continuing to recommend some of those same vehicles. A later unfavorable review of a Toyota SUV model by a differerent media outlet forced CR to back away from a previous recommendation on that unit. I’ve been driving since 1967 and have been behind the wheel of every major Japanese, Korean and US manufacturers’ vehicles, and some of the European makes as well. We are looking at a purchase now. After test drives and extensive research – none of it from CR – US and Korean vehicles are at the top of the list.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:46 pm)Comments by the trolls on this list: approx 85 (out of 280).
This is not a wave of outside opinion, it’s a minority invasion. Whenever you see these names, hit the negative button without hesitation. If they continue to insist on coming here, they can at least be removed from the top view.
-11
Aug 26th, 2010 (8:54 pm)(click to show comment)
-4
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:16 pm)Think of us as representatives of the general public. You know, the people that think $41K is an awful lot for a compact car.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:26 pm)I don’t recall seeing the price of the PHEV Prius. Will it be affordable? If Toyota loads the battery into the lower-end trim packages, yes it could be affordable. I guess we’ll have to wait to see if it’s only offered on higher end trim packages which would bring price into Volt/Leaf (after tax credit) cost range.
Nice that you ran an errand within the battery range of whatever car that was. Did you happen to notice what the maximum battery range spec was? As the chart I posted showed (sorry it was misaligned by the posting font), up to the battery max range, all cars have excellent — infinite — gas mileage. A point for purchasers to compare across various cars with electric drivetrains.
And, of course, people will want to know what they’re paying for. But it they think that a car with a 40 MPG CS rating and a 40 mile battery range will immediately fall to a trip average of 40 MPG upon hitting 41 miles, then they’re sadly misinformed. Do you suppose you could explain coherently to those you talk to why the Volt, if those are the raw numbers, will pull into the garage at night after a 41 mile day with a trip MPG of 1640 MPG, or 360 MPG at the end of a 45 mile day, or 67 MPG if 100 miles since the morning? See, then you could keep your friends from being sadly misinformed.
+6
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:37 pm)Not a dime- guess I’m even more of a sucker than you thought, huh? ;o)
I didn’t say they *couldn’t* publish a number, or that it wouldn’t be a good idea; I simply said I can see how they would want to be more careful this time. None of the automakers should put out a number they’ll backpedal on later, so they’d better be prepared to stand behind whatever it is, whether that’s today or in a week or month. Personally, I think they should all lowball on range and mileage (and charging time), rather than use optimistic EPA numbers. It’s a lesson we learned painfully on EV1 in the first generation, and fixed in the second. Using EPA numbers to set consumer expectations falls firmly in the “just cause you can doesn’t mean you should” category for me.
I don’t support GM blindly or without complaint- jeez, Phil would be merely one in a line of GM’ers to tell you that. I think there are mistakes have been and are being made, and I’ve concerns about how they’ll affect the program- all of which I’ve voiced both to them and publicly. Same goes for other automakers, though I also believe in giving them credit where it’s due.
In the grand scheme, this particular issue doesn’t rank that highly *for me*- never suggested it couldn’t for others. And I don’t represent myself as either journalist or blogger, just call it like I see it. Even if that makes me lame.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (9:54 pm)Sorry, perhaps you didn’t hear about the $7,500 federal tax credit. Funny you missed that. It’s been all over this web site. And every other web site dealing with the Volt. Or the Leaf. And in every news report about the purchase price of those cars. How embarrassing for you to have posted a number that everybody else knows is wrong.
-6
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:07 pm)We won’t need to, since the number of gallons consumed is what they’ll see anyway.
In fact, that’s the way efficiency is already being reported by some.
The confusion the “230 MPG” promotion caused seems to have had a positive outcome in that regard.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:16 pm)You’re the one who’s being lame TROLL.
Why is the Freedom Drive mpg so important to you. Do you drive that same route regularily or something? Thought so.
FYI- Someone in the media pool following the Freedom Drive asked what types of speeds were maintained throughout the 1776 or so miles.(a good question, given the time constraints of the 3-day trip complicated due to numerous public appearances along the route)
The response from the driver was “Let’s just say I was very very lucky to to have gotten a huge ticket!”
Q: “What RPM was ICE running at those speeds?”
A: “It was running near its maximum RPM”
Q:”So what is the maximum RPM of the Volt’s ICE”
A:”No comment, but this is the reason why we feel it would be unfair to disclose our MPG achieved at those high average speeds”
Q: “So the Volt burns more fuel at higher speeds?”
A: “Ummm of course! No more questions”
I’ve driven a Gen 2 Prius at 95mph for an extended period, guess what the display read- 26mph
So what would you be doing right now if they had said the Volt average 28mpg for the Freedom Drive? I think we ALL know.
That is why you are a TROLL and the majority here are not!
(and that’s why I’m with Mr. Jackson, let’s just agree to -1 you mothers out of existance- pretty sucessfully in the last thread I must say!)
.LB
+2
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:18 pm)You’re right, my mistake, the drivetrain would have to be 100% efficient. I was imagining a genset like in the Volt with a rather low efficiency but I forgot about the electric drive train efficiency. Be that as it may, electric drivetrains don’t get as low as 50% – more like in the 90s so again, extra weight in a vehicle like the Volt only has a small fraction of the impact it would have in a conventional drive train.
I don’t see the relevance of the total distance traveled in fuel efficiency. Ignoring any losses through drivetrain, regen, drag, etc. travelling always uses zero energy regardless of the distance traveled, it’s Newton’s first law of motion. In your example, both cars start and stop at the same time, but what prevents the heavier car from stopping later and catch up with the lighter one at a constant speed while consuming no energy? I agree that you have to put in more energy to accelerate the heavier object or it will take longer to reach the destination but it won’t need any more energy to do so than the lighter one.
Somebody here was making a similar argument a couple of weeks ago, saying that accelerating the same car faster uses more energy – equally untrue. Mass or the rate of acceleration has no bearing on the total amount of energy usage and therefore fuel efficiency. Only the aforementioned losses have any impact on it at all. If we lived in a ideal world without any losses then it wouldn’t cost anything to get from A to B.
I think this misconception says a lot about how ingrained our conception about transportation has been made by traditional ICE vehicles. We’re used to thinking that carrying more weight around or “stepping on it”, driving aggressively uses more gas, costs more and is something to deny ourselves if we want to conserve energy and be environmentally friendly. Once people start realizing that these aren’t absolute truths, only relative then cars like the Volt will prove to be a much larger paradigm shift than we ever imagined.
+4
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:46 pm)Charlie H:
Think of us as representatives of the general public.You know, the people that think $41K is an awful lot for a compact car.
block quote end
Sorry, perhaps you didn’t hear about the $7,500 federal tax credit. Funny you missed that. It’s been all over this web site. And every other web site dealing
with the Volt. Or the Leaf. And in every news report about the purchase price of those cars. How embarrassing for you to have posted a number that everybody
else knows is wrong.
(Quote)
In all fairness, the 7500 tax credit does not change the purchase price of the Volt or Leaf. Of course the bottom line is much more after sales tax and whatever else can be tacked on. Oh yes, you can get the tax credit for now at the end of the following year if you pay 7500 in Fed. tax or more, which is alot of us. So to be clear, you will be paying more than what Charlie stated when you walk out with keys in hand. Let’s keep it real, shall we.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:51 pm)But how do I get that 20x return on investment? I can’t control what other people do.
I can only control what I do. And keep my own gasoline consumption to a minimum. That’s where a car like the Volt will come in. And, while it’s true that that won’t save as much oil as if some guy with a hummer traded it in, I still think it’s worth doing.
+1
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:52 pm)Duplicate post. Please ignore.
-8
Aug 26th, 2010 (10:54 pm)The fact of the matter is, the car is $41K. As it happens, the general public gets to participate in the purchase price, so the owner is receiving a gift from the general public.
As a member of the general public, I’m a dissatisfied customer. I don’t think I’m getting enough for my tax contribution.
+3
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:06 pm)Is that just for the Volt, or do you not want the tax credit to apply to the LEAF either? What about the numerous Prius subsidies? (Including the HOV stickers in California that the Volt isn’t getting.) Were those also a mistake?
Or do you believe that the government shouldn’t subsidize R&D period? Are you against DARPA? NASA? The NIH?
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:21 pm)Too funny. Of course range and fuel economy suffers at high speeds… that’s why 55mph was recommended as a national speed limit. A Prius gets only 26mpg at 95mph? I’m not surprised. In fact, that’s probably not bad, in the grand scheme of things. There’s plenty of vehicles that get 26mpg, or worse, at 55mph.
The fact is, it would be irresponsible for GM to plan a trip that couldn’t be carried out at legal speeds and, were one of their employees to engage in “reckless” behavior and cause or contribuet to an accident, GM would get its butt sued with a vengeance.
Further, I often enough go 1300 miles in two days at legal speeds. It’s not fun but it’s doable. GM had 4 days scheduled for “The Freedom Drive” and that makes for about 450 miles/day. Far easier.
GM is, clearly, not willing to talk about the Volt’s fuel economy at legal and reasonable speeds.
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why.
As I outlined in another post, the most idiotic aspect of this stunt is that the stunt occurred at all. If GM wasn’t going to be able to talk about the results from this stunt, they should have done a different one.
From a Chevrolet Voltage propaganda film: “In one of the most electrifying trips since George Washington crossed the Potomac River…” That’s the most delightful hyperbole… It covers so much territory. More electrifying than Lewis and Clark crossing the continent in 1804-1806? More electrifying than The Voyage of the Beagle? More electrifying than the circumnavigation of the world by the US’ Great White Fleet? More electrifying than the first explorations of the Polar regions? More electrifying than Apollo missions?
And then GM lost the gas receipts? Lame. So lame.
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:46 pm)Like_Budda, here’s something else for you to contemplate…
GM won’t disclose the results of The Freedom Drive and doles out access to the Volt in what seem to be twenty mile doses. Nobody gets enough information to really evaluate the EV range and fuel consumption characteristics of the car. And it’s due out in November, just about 3 months away.
Toyota, on the other hand, was perfectly happy to leave a 2012 PHEV Prius with John1701a for a week. And they didn’t tell him he couldn’t talk about his experiences. To tne contrary, they seem perfectly happy to have him tell all interested parties how the car performed. THis guy:
http://priuschat.com/news/dr-rangelove-or-how-i-learned-stop-pumping-and-love-plug
had the PHEV Prius for 4 days. Toyota didn’t muzzle him, either.
Which company has confidence in their vehicle?
On behalf of the GM-Volt Trolls: We Report. You Deny.
-5
Aug 26th, 2010 (11:49 pm)I have no qualms with government research.
However, I’m entirely dissatisfied with the amount of bang for the buck we’ll be getting from this tax credit.
+5
Aug 27th, 2010 (12:26 am)Well it was 3-days actually
They departed Austin mid-day July 1st (just after Mr. Whiteacre announced the inclusion of Austin as an initial market) and arrived in NYC July 4th (~1776 miles in ~72hrs)
But I don’t recall hearing that posted speeds were being exceeded- and I agree, not good if they were. I’m quite skeptical of the conversation in .LB’s post actually.
But still I fully understand their potential reasoning behind not sharing the fuel consumed at that time:
a) At 5-month from launch, the fuel rates ICE speeds/loads adjustments stored within the ECM calibration might not have been fully optimized or refined to what one would expect for initial launch at that point. Why would they choose to expose anyone to numbers that might not be reflected to initial purchasers of the car? It’s called engineering. Not unusual.
And then,
b) The REAL point of the Freedom Drive was that for the vast majority of people the Volt could have been potentially driven all week or all month while not burning a drop of fuel
AND THEN was still able to drive 1776 miles over 3-days non-stop
(something that a typical EV simply could not accomplish)
So if YOU thought the goal or point was anything other than that, then I guess you were sadly mistaken. Something you seem to make a habit of …
JMO
WopOnTour
+3
Aug 27th, 2010 (12:29 am)He’s clearly against life itself.
-5
Aug 27th, 2010 (12:40 am)A) The PHV Prius is further from shipment – 8 months, minimum, I’d say, and Toyota isn’t afraid to let people drive the car for 4 days and see what it can do. They’re not fussed about calibration or any of that other crap.
B) I keep hearing, both from the Volt Fanboys here and from GM, that the real point of the car is that you can virtually drive “gas free” and it is OFTEN said that most people won’t need the gas engine at all. You also make mention of driving gas-free. Clearly, that is one of the Volt’s strengths. The car has a “range-extender.” El Lutzbo likened it to a life raft, if I recall correctly. Even the name, “range-extender,” smacks of something added on and not mission-critical. The Volt’s CS mode fuel economy is doomed, by the serial hybrid nature of the car, to be mediocre. Why on Earth would any sensible organization stage a publicity stunt designed to showcase the car’s secondary capabilities when they are weaknesses?
-4
Aug 27th, 2010 (1:01 am)Earlier today, one of the other trolls – I mean, realists – pointed out that for the $19K cost difference over the Prius, you could buy and sequester quite a lot of gas.
You could also do any of a number of other things to reduce oil use (or, more generally, CO2 emissions… there are many, many ways to approach that) for that $19K.
Some Volts will be used nearly gas-free over the course of a year. Some Volts will get driven in such a way that a cheaper Prius would have used less fuel over the course of a year. The most optimistic case is that a Volt saves 292 gallons of fuel a year. The average won’t be anywhere near that… let’s assign 200. That’s $600 in fuel per year, so the “payback” for the $7500 is 12 years down the road.
That’s worth $7500 up front? Nobody would make a business decision like that (this is why it’s hard to build nukes, for instance).
Finally, the $7500, as I mentioned earlier, amounts to a transfer payment to the ROK. The key technologies are the cell chemistries and cell manufacturing techniques. This $7500 is doing nothing to further domestic development of better battery chemistry or manufacturing technique. The $7500 is making it possible for GM to build an uneconomical car using critical components supplied by the ROK.
Tell me how I’m getting good value for my $7500.
-5
Aug 27th, 2010 (1:15 am)Would you have them showcase a 40 mile EV range, when the next commercial to follow is the 100 EV mile, much less expensive Leaf ?
I can well imagine the challenges a compromise car presents to advertising trying to deliver a coherent strong message. You see it the fanboys here. One day they scream that AER is the only thing that matters; the next day extended range, and the third blended mpg dependent on whether they are fighting off the imagined invading hordes of Prius, Nissan, or PPV infidels.
It is apparently enough to make a Volt fanboy schizoid. The paranoia was already present.
-1
Aug 27th, 2010 (2:13 am)Huh? Do you understand the situation? It will not burn the remaining 30%. That’s why they call it the lower limit. Digging deeper kills the life of the battery. Additionally, we will be driving at 70 mph constant speed. No acceleration. Any tiny accelerations will be be able to be serviced equally by both battery systems, if required (but they should be able to be covered with increases in ICE output).
+4
Aug 27th, 2010 (2:31 am)Ummm OK, I’ll bite…
A) the PHEV Prius is essentially an identical ICE, transaxle, loads, and powerflow as the existing non-plugin version. All that software would have been completed long ago. GM on the otherhand is dealing with a relatively new ICE spinning loads that are not typical for any other powertrain. What’s so surprising that dozens of complex software tables, each potentially with up to 1000 sites, might need to be “tweaked” under realistic operating conditions. Engine calibrations are essentially never “done”. In light of emissions, mpg, and drivability issues they are for the most part always a work in progress. So again, why would they want to release or advertise numbers that may or may not be achieved by the time production commences.
As a potential rationale for the lack of reported MPG from the Freedom Ride, this seems simple enough to me.
B) AGAIN, it’s not that it can ONLY act as an EV, not burning ANY fuel potentially for long periods, but it CAN also be used in a more conventional fashion on on the relatively rare occasion that a long distance trip is demanded from it. Volt owners can have it BOTH ways. If as you indicate that you’ll never be able to take advantage of the Volt’s pure EV capabilities and would be relying on CS operation almost exclusively on a daily basis for 250+ miles- then perhaps the Volt is not for you. You sir represent the exception, a small demographic for the most part.
WopOnTour
+1
Aug 27th, 2010 (4:54 am)# 234
EricLG Said:
There are lots of tutorials around the net how to maximize Prius fuel economy (without bothering anyone or engaging in risky tactics.) If you have a technical bent read Hobbit’s website. Otherwise read Evan Fusco’s monograph at priuschat.
Great post, really says a lot. It’s wonderful that if you have a technical bend, or take the time to study how, HSD has the tools to save a little gas.
The Voltec drive will give people who aren’t technical, or don’t want to study, the tools to save a lot of gas, and never have to get the Hawaiian Peace Sign.
+1
Aug 27th, 2010 (5:12 am)# 295
Charlie H Said:
Which company has confidence in their vehicle?
Or could it be Toyota has no technology anybody would want to figure out ?
-2
Aug 27th, 2010 (1:31 pm)EPA should have just required two numbers, efficiency in EV mode and efficiency in CS mode. No new standards required… Any blended values/tables could then be calculated based off of those two values. GM should have pushed for this too, in the interest of transparency and avoiding confusion, rather than pumping the 230 mpg extremely case-specific value. My guess is they have already determined the CS mode efficiency (the value we all want) but are still working on the table (which those without calculators want).
I think GM leaked this to get our expectations low following the original 50mpg goal. Now they have us thinking under 30mpg, and when they come out above 40mpg they’re hoping people will feel they are beating expectations. PR buzz move…
-4
Aug 27th, 2010 (1:39 pm)A) Do you see the power of an extensible platform? HSD powers the LS600H. That car is not light. If Toyota thought it useful to do so, they could certainly boost the EV aspect of the HSD in the Prius so as to power the car 100% electrically until the battery runs down. As I said before, though, why bother? They get EV operation almost all of the time and why beef up the electrics when you can just borrow power from the gas engine on the rare occasions? This keeps the car light and improves overall performance and fuel economy. The “S” in “HSD” is for “Synergy” and it pretty well describes what’s going on in there.
Toyota can adapt the car at very little cost, while GM is spending months futzing with calibration.
By the way, I do not wholly accept the “calibration” excuse. GM should have gotten 90% of the calibration done in the first few test runs. They should be well beyond 95% now, especially since they can run simulations of any scenario they like. I could accept GM driving people around with some number XX.XX showing on the dash and being told, “We expect to wring another few per cent out of that by the time we build Customer Volt 1.” That would be perfectly reasonable. But the discrepancy between what they’ve got now and where they should be at First Customer Ship should be small.
B) I like the way “rarely” gets bandied about. I live in an inner-ring suburb of a good-sized metro area. As it is, 40 miles AER range would pretty well cover much of the driving I do. Without leaving the metro area, I’d probably only hit the 40 mile limit once a month or so. Yes, I’d grant that to be “rarely.”
However, note that I said, “inner ring suburb.” I’m very close in. Lots of people live much further out and they’d be hitting 40 miles a few times per month and maybe a few times per week. If I had to go to the opposite side suburbs for anything (used to have a civic meeting over there aobut once/month), the engine would engage.
Then, there’s the out of town trips. Who doesn’t do that? And the number will vary from person to person but “none” is, to say the leat, extremely unlikely.
Further, we don’t know what sort of accomodations must be made for environmental factors but in the Northern tier states, it seems exceedingly likely that GM is going to want to run the engine sometimes, no matter what the SOC, principally for the heat.
Yeah… the PHEV Prius engine will run from time to time. But so will the Volt. It’s not going to act like a pure BEV and it doesn’t weigh what a pure BEV weighs and it doesn’t cost what a pure BEV costs. Toyota is leveraging HSD to keep vehicle weight low, vehicle performance up and the tradeoff is that the engine runs sometimes. Overall fuel economy will still be very, very high. Not as high as the Volt, you say. Sure… but the price is going to come in a lot lower and the “CS” mode fuel economy will be just about the same as a bog-standard Prius – pretty close to 50mpg.
+3
Aug 28th, 2010 (5:42 am)There are lots of tutorials around that will tell you how to maximize your use of Windows Vista. I’m sure some really great ones are out there. But, even if your only goal is to save money, there are better ways to do it, and basically the whole past date technology universe surrounding it is so done, there’s no point to even sticking a fork in it. But if that’s the direction people want to go, go for it…
+2
Aug 28th, 2010 (11:34 am)Oh please. If there’s anything that Toyota HAS proven it’s that it’s HSD is definitely not scalable or extensible. At least in terms of mpg results.Sure they can make it bigger or more powerful, but anything other than the Prius should be considered as a failure in terms of the HSD technology.
The Camry hybrid fuel economy is only 34mpg combined, the Highlander hybrid 26mpg. That’s a far cry from what you are getting with your Prius.What’s worse is that these numbers represent a very small percentage of improvement from the base non-hybrid models, yet at very high cost premium.
Yet conveniently Toyo fanbois such as yourself turn a blind eye to that and instead scoff low-cost parallel systems (such as BAS) that gain equal levels of improvement. Ridiculous.
I mean seriously the Lexus LH600 hybrid you are bragging about gets WORSE fuel economy than a full-size Tahoe/Yukon hybrid and THAT with a vehicle a fraction of the size and weighing 795lbs more with a 6.0 liter V8.
Yea, that’s “extensible”. I guess what they are saying around here is correct you ARE a Troll.
I won’t respond to any of your posts again in this thread.
WopOnTour
-2
Aug 28th, 2010 (1:57 pm)You’re pretty funny when you’re displaying your ignorance. I have NEVER scoffed a t low cost system. I have certainly made fun of GM’s BAS implementation because it a simple and obvious solution that SHOULD be low cost but, as with so many things GM, delivers little improvement in fuel economy for a whopping increase in price.
As for the LS600H… Toyota does that because they can. Toyota makes perhaps something like 2000 of them per year, so it’s a sideshow to the HSD implementation. In the real world (visit us sometime, it’s nice here), it does what it should… reduces city fuel economy dramatically, it’s a car for people who live in Manhattan. But it’s still a luxury car. A review I read didn’t get too much into the economics of it, just observing that the power came on like a subway train… it just kept pushing and pushing and pushing. Toyota dialled that on in right… the car doesn’t needlessly waste fuel sitting in Manhattan traffic but it performs like a V12. It’s the right car for the luxury market.
Take a look at the Camry hybrid, instead. It’s a much more economical car and is aimed at people that want better fuel economy. Real world experience is about 40mpg. Although it sells poorly, compared to the Prius, it outsells all of GM’s hybrids put together.
And the Camry hybrid provides a lesson in engineering and marketing for you…
I took a tour of the parking lot the other day. Here’s what I found:
Priuses: 8
Camry hybrids: 4
GM hybrids of ANY kind: 0
Current Gen Chevrolet Malibus of ANY trim level: 1
I work at a world HQ for a Fortune 100 company. The demographics of the employees who work there are good (lots of BMWs and Mercedes, too). These are the people GM wants to be selling cars to and they can’t sell as many Malibus into our parking lot as Toyota can sell Camry hybrids.
The same marketing team that produced the GMT900 hybrids and the BAS hybrids is now rolling out the Volt. Although 10K is considered a disappointing number by some, it’s the only way GM will be able to declare a sellout “victory.”