Yesterday we finally heard some information directly from the EPA about their plans to create and finalize new fuel efficiency labels that could be applied to advanced technology vehicles like the Volt.
Mainly there is a distinction between two major design change options, a system rating cars from A+ through D- based on how much emissions they produced or a more conventional label without the letter grade. Both labels display a vehicle’s efficiency in terms of mile per gallon equivalents (MPGe) whenever electricity is used or miles per gallon (MPG) when gas is used. This same method is used in the letter grade labels in which case the pure EV gets an A+, and the PHEV gets an A. Conventional gas cars get a C or D.
MPGe is given by the formula: MPGe = (miles driven) / [(total energy of all fuels consumed)/(energy of one gallon of gasoline)]). For example, an electric car with an efficiency of 200 watt-hours per mile (like the Volt) would be rated at 168.5 MPGe.
There is some controversy though about whether MPGe should be used at all.
Mike Duoba is a scientist at the Argonne National Lab who is the leader of a team that created the J1711 methodology for determining fuell efficiency of PHEVs. Duoba isn’t particularly happy about using MPGe for electric mode operation. “I am worried that EPA is responding to the focus group conclusion that MPG is familiar so it must be used for EV mode,” he said. “Crazy talk.”
Duoba confirmed that the J1711 is still in effect. “EPA is using J1711, its just that J1711 does not combine them magically into a single MPG value,” he said.
“For blended mode operation, things will get very complicated,” he added. “The EPA proposal is just plain wrong.”
At this point the EPA proposal is just that, a proposal; it isn’t finalized. The agency is looking for the public’s opinion and comments over the next 60 days before a final ruling is made.
The EPA has proposed two separate and different labels for blended PHEVs that use gas whenever power demands it and extended range electric cars (EREVs) like the Volt that only use electricity for the first certain number of miles driven (40 in the case of the Volt). The labels shows MPGe for the whole pure electric range in both vehicle types, and both show MPG when running only on gas after the battery is depleted. Having separate labels could make the EREV look better to the casual observer when compared side by side, and favor the Volt. However, the decision to have separate labels for PHEVs and EREVs isnt finalized.
When asked specifically about it Cathy Milbourn of the EPA said “no final decision has been made on any aspect of the labels.”
“Its out for public comment,” she added. “We want to hear from the public about what they would like to see on the label.”
An so they shall. Take the polls below, and I’ll send the results to the EPA.
You may also send your individual comments to newlabels@epa.gov.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 31st, 2010 at 6:23 am and is filed under Efficiency. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+43
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:34 am)I still like
MPC and MPG being separate.
+22
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:44 am)==============================
Me too. If they want to come up with a standard yearly driving cycle and then post how much it will cost per year to fuel the vehicle, that is more than enough information.
Throw MPGe out.
JMHO
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:44 am)If an electric car uses 200 wh/mile (0.2 kWh per mile), and the gasoline equivalent is 33.7 kWh, wouldn’t the mileage be (33.7/0.2) or 168.5 MPGe?
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:44 am)We should not forget that the software controls the gas engine and the software decides when the engine should be on. We have been told that under very cold conditions that the engine will come on to warm the battery even when not needed for propulsion. Also the software will turn on the engine to exercise the battery. The 40 mile all electric range does not always apply. How all of this gets tested by the EPA fuel economy standards and reported is a very complicated matter.
+16
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:49 am)They should drop the charge time. Nothing to do with performance, and too many variables to be meaningful.
+22
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:51 am)Absolutely require separate labels for PHEV and EREV. Don’t even know why they are debating this issue.
+13
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:52 am)This is the Star Ledger article I was telling you about the other day. It ran today instead of yesterday and is on the front page. They interviewed me about the electric car and the fact that I have a solar PV system to generate my own electricity. I gave the volt a plug also!
http://www.nj.com/starledger/
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:53 am)“MPGe is given by the formula: MPGe = (miles driven) / [(total energy of all fuels consumed)/(energy of one gallon of gasoline)]). For conversion an electric car with an efficiency of 200 watt-hours per mile would be rated at 79.7 MPGe.”
This would mean the Volt will get 80 mpg in EV mode. If the Volt does 40 mpg in CS mode, in the real world you will get something between 80-40 mpg depending on how much you drive in EV mode, the average driver probably 70 mpg. I think this is a good compromise (in favor of the Volt), the number is stable and will not change for each powerplant.
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:53 am)Call the unused gas “Rollover Gallons”, that have no expiration date.
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:56 am)I like this plan also. It is understandable.
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:14 am)The stickers are supposed to be used by the public to make decisions on what cars to buy. MPGe is fairly useless for this since all electric cars eventually will get the same number.. the compact Volt and LEAF both get 5 miles/kwh, a larger vehicle such as a full size SUV will similarly get the same ratings as other SUVs. This is due to the nature of electric components.
We will have gasoline powered cars for a long time, the stickers should inform the public on HOW MUCH gasoline the car will use.. have several ratings for 25,50,75 miles driven daily and then an overall gallons used by the average driver per year. For the Volt the 25 mile rating will get 0 gallons, for the LEAF the 75 mile rating will get 0 gallons, for the Prius plug-in the numbers will be different.
Thats my suggestion, keep it simple and just show how much gas will be used.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:17 am)For a series hybrid let’s simply put AER and size of the battery (kWh) then simple math will tell you electric fuel economy (label can do the math or not). In CS mode keep the known MPG the size of the tank doesn’t matter as soon as you get a minimum range in CS mode only.
A blended phev is way more complicated as it doesn’t wait for a depleted battery to start using fuel. But I’ll go with AER + MPG until battery depleted and MPG once it is.
All electric vehicules are the easiest just go with AER + size of battery (label can do the math or not).
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:18 am)What I thought was humorous is that the EPA made the label based on focus groups that want a similar label to what is now produced. Duoba says that idea is crazy and wrong.
Then you get to the reader poll here and people seem to agree that using MPGe is wrong (66%) with only 17% thinking it is good idea.
Next question; Which label do you like more? 74% conventional label. And only 17% saying neither label.
That is why the EPA is lost! Everyone contradicted themselves for the most part. You basically need a whole new label for these vehicles. I don’t know if the grade system label is best or not.
It comes down to making sure all cars are measured the same way for comparison. Maybe it can’t be done. Apples to Oranges to Nuts thing. In the mean time, I have begun to like the idea of Electric Only range and CS Mode MPG. Test the VOLT, Leaf, Mini-E, MiEV, etc under same conditions and post EV capability. Then use normal method for gas only.
Maybe some kid can do his doctoral dissertation and come up with a great method!
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:18 am)Blended range? Gas battery?
On label 2, change the wording of the “range” bar from “Blended Electric + Gas Range (battery)” to “Electric + Gas Blended Range (battery+gas)”.
Sharpen up the charge time rating. 120V or 240V? Is the car 480VDC capable?
I still think that, since the overall efficiency that the owner will experience strongly depends on the miles driven between full charges, the label should have a consumption chart that provides ratings at ten-mile increments out to 100 miles. Or 20 mile increments out to 300 miles. Whatever.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:19 am)1) I don’t think they have to separate out the EREV from the PHEV. Why? Because only techies know or care about the difference. The most important thing is that the consumer knows how much less gasoline they will burn for their specific situation. That’s why a website is the best way to go for customers that care. In fact, each dealer should have a nice touch screen display ready to go. These are getting very cheap and making a nice application would be trivial for GM.
The customer comes into the dealer. He Looks at the sticker and seems confused. The salesperson walks up and starts up a conversation to see what the customer feels is most important. At the right time, the salesperson directs the customer to the touch display and goes through several different videos that explains things very clearly (the salesperson can go do other things while the “movie” plays). Then, if the customer is very interested, the salesperson can walk them through their specific situation (miles to work, how many long trips a year, terrain, home charging, work charging, location, etc. Then, the results can be discussed. In many cases, the numbers will be very exciting. “What!? I will get over 300 miles per gallon when averaged yearly!?” Well, that would be the case for many drivers that live close to work, have a garage, employer that will provide a plug, flat terrain, temperate climate and few long trips.
This will also give the customer a very specific and substantiated number to boast about. Let’s face it, everyone wants to be special.
I say, go full out with the website and Internet application. It will fill the customer with glee.
2) The letter grade sucks. Who remembers that? It’s just so nebulous.
3) Let’s remember that we are in a transition towards EVs of all types. It’s best to think ahead when the only thing you can by is a hybrid or pure EV. Oh, that would mean just about every car would get an A or an A+. Thus, that system has no legs.
4) Using MPGe is OK because people are afraid of change. Hold on to the past as you guide them to the future. After a few years, drop the MPGe. As that knowledgeable scientist knows, it’s a bunch of crap. However, he already understands the technology. Ninety nine percent of Americans don’t.
5) Be prepared for yearly changes. It’s like going from the horse buggy to automobiles. So much to learn and adjust to. It’s going to be great. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good enough. I nice, well thought out system that has many people give their thoughts (like they are doing) is going to produce a great starting point. Remember, the future is EVs…
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:20 am)Regarding the labels, we all want to know what we can expect for our personal driving scenarios.
Some do mostly city driving, others mostly highway, with many of us somewhere in between. None of these labels seem to distinguish between city and highway driving, and that is important to me. I want more than just a combined mileage number!
The proposed E-REV sticker gives AER and electric power consumption per 100 miles. This is good information (again, I’d like a breakdown between city and highway). I agree with many here who feel the 1 gallon = 33.7 kWh is foolish, but remember the EPA is charged with trying to find a metric that compares all cars to one another in terms of efficiency, and with all these new multi-fueled vehicles, that is not so simple anymore.
I find the $/year for electric and gas useless, as my costs for electricity and fuel are different, and my driving pattern will be different. The MPG and MPGe numbers are sufficient.
I’m not sure how they get from 98 MPGe on electric and 38 MPG on gas to a 56 MPGe overall. I think it is important to include a utility factor and formula for that calculation, as again, this could be drastically different if you will use the vehicle for city driving trips of less than 30 miles for 95% of your driving (approaching 98 MPGe).
For instance, the combined mileage now for conventional ICE-driven cars is weighted 55/45 city/highway. I find with my driving, I am more 20/80. So highway mileage is more important to me.
So knowing the utility factor, weighting, or other formulas, I can get a better idea of what to expect with a new E-REV vehicle.
In general, I prefer the Label 3 layout, (Figure III-17 in the Federal Register Notice).
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:24 am)Impressive home and solar array, Tom! Enjoyed 1st pg of the article, but how do I get to pg 2?
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:31 am)Thanks Nasaman. I’m not sure. I have the hard copy here I didn’t try to read the rest online. I’ll check, but if the Star Ledger is like many other papers, they probably make you pay for access to the entire paper. I’ll see if I can figure it out and let you know later.
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:34 am)Good suggestion. The “Smartphone Interactive” patch in the lower right corner of the label should allow anyone with a camera-equipped smart phone to scan the patch and get a link to such a website.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:36 am)ATTN GM: Note that all 4 labels above present a “gas only” section, which for the Volt means the CS mode or Extended Range mode of operation. With this release of the several options for public comment, it would seem both appropriate and timely for GM to now offer at least “strawmen” examples of the Volt’s CS/ER mileage (e.g., city/hwy/combined) —stipulating that these examples represent only unofficial/unapproved examples following the EPA’s proposed format(s) based on estimated performance results, and offered for the purpose of discussion/comment only.
/ I’ve also posted this to Phil Colley at the Chevrolet Volt Facebook page
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:36 am)“MPGe is given by the formula: MPGe = (miles driven) / [(total energy of all fuels consumed)/(energy of one gallon of gasoline)]). For conversion an electric car with an efficiency of 200 watt-hours per mile would be rated at 79.7 MPGe.”
I hope GM is gonna change the display information based on this formula. Then you know if you are doing less than 60 mpg you should charge electricity more often because you are burning too much gas.
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:39 am)Exactly. The vehicle on the first sticker uses 34 kWh to go 100 miles or 340 Wh per mile. It’s rated at 98 MPGe. The Volt should be more efficient than that.
Don’t expect the Volt to get 168.5 MPGe however. That 8 kWh from the battery might take 10 kWh from the wall due to charging inefficiencies. If you could do 40 miles on that it would be 250 Wh per mile or 134.8 MPGe.
I still don’t like MPGe though, it’s based on a theoretical energy content of gasoline which could never be realized.
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:43 am)I think they need to add “at 120V” for the charge rates.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:45 am)How do you calculate the “gas only” mpg in a parallel design plug in hybrid?
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:54 am)The EPA/DOT obviously don’t know how a parallel hybrid works —or else they plan to disconnect the battery to prevent it from being recharged during the dynamometer testing.
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:56 am)The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced that the old “sticker” idea is woefully inadequate.
For example. Do we want a few hundred Volt drivers out there that have a horrible Volt situation (live in the mountains, drive 3 hours on the highway to work every day, live in super cold or super hot environments, etc.) going around telling people that they are getting normal ICE-like mileage? No!
We want those Volt drivers to be fully educated on what they can expect given their specific situation. We want that nerd in the office running around telling people that he just put another gallon of gas into his tank, after 3 months! For a huge percentage of Volt drivers, they might easily get over that 350 MPG that GM initially bragged about. It’s true! If they live close to work (20 miles with no work plug, 40 miles with nice employers), flat land, temperate climate, few long trips, etc. they might get thousands of miles per gallon!
So, it’s better to fully educate potential drivers so they know that they might only going to get 30 mpg even when they expect 100 mpg. It’s better to be transparent in this case because the word of mouth will sell better than a golden-tongued salesperson. I can see that super happy office worker smiling about his amazing mpg numbers. Then when the other office workers go into a GM dealer, they will get a realistic prediction of what they can expect. Nobody will then be called a liar. This just might prevent office fights.
America has 300 million people and GM will only be able to pump out a few million Volts. Don’t worry about telling people they won’t get good numbers. The percentage of people that will get great numbers will tell others and that market will easily buy all the Volts GM could possibly make.
The new GM is about truth, quality and customer experience. Let’s give them everything, including realistic expectations! For many, those expectations will truly be out of this world! No shady sales pitch needed. The Volt is simply going to knock the socks off of a huge market.
Dear GM dealers, if a potential customer looks to only get a small boost due to their specific situation (long highway miles, lives on a mountain, extreme temperatures, many Grandmothers, etc.) Be honest and show them the other wonderful cars from GM. That person will respect the truth and become a loyal customer for decades to come.
– VOLT INTERNET APPLICATION — needed in 90 days!
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:16 am)MPGe borders on ridiculous. You go 80 miles and get, perhaps, 80MPGe. Then you go 120 miles and get 60MPGe. It’s clear that the MPGe doesn’t tell you what the car is getting. Where’s the rest of the energy coming from? Fairy dust?
MPC + MPG.
It’s simple and everyone can work out how the car will perform for them.
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:20 am)I do too and that is what is told EPA many here at gm-volt.com have been asking for. Hope you’ll don’t mind me having done that. Label 2 PHEV – Extended Range Electric Vehicles gives all the information we need in a clear concise wording. The only question remaining is the issue of using MPGe. I, for one, don’t see a problem with it: it does give an indication to the owner about how much gasoline/petroleum the car is saving.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:23 am)You can account for this somewhat by stating standard conditions for testing and advising to what degree extreme conditions affect performance. That’s standard procedure for rating power plants in aircraft and such.
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:42 am)What restaurant do you own in Montclair? I live in Lyndhurst. I’ll drive my Volt there this winter and come eat at your establishment, lol.
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:46 am)I don’t like MPGe. Its misleading to me. For example, if 1 gallon of gas = 33.7kwh and 1kwh is 12cents, then 1 gallon equivalent of electricity cost $4.04. This will make people think it costs more to run electricity then on gasoline. Just keep the electricity and gas separate as far as energy measuring. If you HAVE to compare them, use money per mile. On electricity it will cost you 2.4 cents per mile. On gas it will cost you 7.4 cents per mile. However the problem with costs is they are variable with the price of gas and electricity… so it will never be perfect.
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:46 am)I vote for them to be separate and to use the conventional label style although I do see an advantage of having a letter grade. Why not use a combination label. One that looks like the conventional label with all the information as proposed, but with the inclusion of the letter grade. Seems like the best of both worlds. I especially do not think they should use the same grading formula for PHEV’s and EREV’s. These are still two distinct types of vehicles and should be labeled differently. There should be a label each for PHEV, BEV and EREV. IMO.
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:48 am)An electric car gets an “A+”. The gas engine work truck gets a “D”. How can the public ever figure that out without these new stickers?
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:49 am)OT, and closed-circuit for “James:”
Please check out #216 in the previous thread.
Jackson
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:04 am)Hey Jackson. How is life these days for you?
I remember you going through a rough time. I hope things turned out okay for you.
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:09 am)You guys are the experts, but I see two different labels for parallel vs series dual fuel vehicles above. Am I missing something?
Be well,
Tagamet
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:22 am)I’m glad to see that the scientific talent has the whatevers to call the EPA’s proposal for using MPGe what it is — crazy. I’m with Mike Duoba. If we’re using kWh give us kWh. If we’re using gas give us MPG or, even better, GPM. Either that or let’s forget about MPG and the kWh and just reduce everything to “Cords of Wood per Mile”. Ha ha.
As for the focus groups, obviously the EPA has forgotten that focus groups have given us winners like the Aztec and New Coke. I mean, why ask people who know nothing about EVs, who aren’t prepared to buy EVs, and who have no idea what a kWh is, whether they would prefer MPG or kWh. Duh! What they should have done is given the focus group members a quiz as to what MPGe meant after they finished — that would have been entertaining!
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:23 am)The label should emphasize that an EREV is in fact fundamentally an electric car. To me, it means that the rating should be in watts/mile for the electric engine and the label should state how many watts/gallon the gas generator can generate. Finally, the EPA can state how many watts are required to make a standard circuit (part city, part highway).
This is easy to understand : the less watts/mile required the better. The more watts/gallon the generator can make, the better.
The car company can translate what that truly means for the consumer by creating some scenarios.
The label should also state the MPGe cause people will need a way to compare an EREV car with a conventional one. MPGe does exactly that.
As for the PHEV, the primary engine is the ICE so it should go simply with MPG as usual. The MPGe of the EREV would serve as a comparison point with that tweaked conventional car.
So my point is : don’t try to carry an old system in a new reality. Just acknowledge the new reality and create what best describes it. The link between the old and the new should only be the MPGe on a standard circuit for comparison purposes only.
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:23 am)You’re right, Tag —there are two different labels. But the problem is (referring to the 2nd label down for “blended” or “parallel” hybrids) there’s no way to measure a separate mileage for “gas only” mode because there really is no controllable gas only mode. Once the (let’s say plug-in, latest gen Prius) discharges it battery running as an EV, it enters a parallel or blended mode that uses both gas AND its battery as any older Prius has always done. So the proposed EPA label window for “gas only” is meaningless for parallel hybrids.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:25 am)They have a “Gas Only” number for predominately blended PHEVs. That would be something like the plug-in Prius. Hard to have it operate in a “gas only” mode without disconnecting the battery. The serial PHEV like the Volt is OK.
OOPS: nasaman beat me to it.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:25 am)I didn’t like any of the proposed labels so I made one myself:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/28444753@N03/4944785465/
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:32 am)I wonder if we can assume a “final ruling” will be made in a timely fashion after a comment period of 60 days (assuming there is not an extension of the deadlline)? I would assume there will be thousands, if not tens of thousands, of comments that will need to be analyzed before any kind of a final draft can be completed. An article in the New York Times today suggested the first new generation of car stickers would not appear until 2012. Does this mean that we’ll need to wait at least that long before GM releases a figure for CS MGP?
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:33 am)One more thing : I understand that MPGe is open for debate since the conversion is ‘theorical’. Still we need a way to compare an electric car with a conventional one. Since the flawed MPG measurement is what is best known by the people, we must find a way to relate an electric car to that somehow. For the moment at least.
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:35 am)Hey Mike, Please do! I’d like to take a picture of the two cars for my blog. It’s Nauna’s Bella Casa on Valley Road. Hope to see you soon.
Tom
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:37 am)Here is the page 2 for Tom’s article Nasaman!
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/08/chester_township_man_is_one_of.html
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:38 am)Nasaman, Here’s a link to the whole article:
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/08/chester_township_man_is_one_of.html
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:39 am)You beat me to it Sandy!
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:39 am)No bordering involved. Just plain ridiculous.
How do you get this? 40 miles/ [8 kWh/33.7 kWh/gallon] doesn’t give me 79.7 anything. I get what BillR does, which is 168.5.
In any event, this just illustrates a problem with MPGe — no one knows what it means, probably including the geniuses at the EPA who are proposing it.
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:41 am)See my post #20 above —I’m trying to get GM to quote the Volt’s CS mpg (& Lyle told me this morning that he’s also trying), based on this EPA label release. But I’m not holding my breath!
+6
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:42 am)The $$$ Cost Per Year for gasoline is a constantly moving target based on the price of gas. It would be so much simpler to show “Gallons Per Year”. That is totally fair to all hybrids and erevs, and the all-electrics would love it because it would always be Zero.
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:45 am)Thanks Sandy for the page. Nice article Tom. After the last few days petty me is enjoying this more than anything:
“I get 50 mpg,” the Prius owner sniffed. “I doubt this does.”
Moloughney explained his vehicle wasn’t a hybrid, but an all-electric car that cost him about $3.50 to go 100 miles.
“He did some quick math and realized he wasn’t the most efficient car on the road as he thought he was,” Moloughney wrote in his blog. “Sorry to ruin your day, buddy.”
A day is ruined. The light bulb goes on for at least one Prius owner. Ba ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:50 am)Thanks, Tom & Sandy —An article well worth reading so I see why it’s on the paper’s front page!
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:52 am)Don, He looked like a kid that just had his candy taken away!
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:52 am)This is becoming a situation of paralysis from overanalysis. All these crazy formulas for what reason? Things just can’t be made to be simple when they are not. A car fueled by both electricity and gasoline is too variable in its utilization potential – in other words, it is too complicated to be able to be pinned down to a single number. It’s like trying to turn a 3-D image into a single dimension – a futile task that can only end up with less than satisfactory results.
Of all the examples they have come up with, the letter grades are in my opinion the most palatable system of measurement because they don’t try to be precise. Instead, they merely categorize the car within some sort of range within which there is a degree of variance (in both driver input and in fuel used), rather than try to pinpoint something that may end up being misleading.
My choice? I like the xy line graph, with the x (horizontal) axis being distance traveled and the y (vertical) axis being miles per gallon.
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:56 am)Now I got it (picture dim bulb lighting).
Thanks,
Be well,
Tagamet
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:57 am)What is size of your solar array? Do you have microinverters or conventional single inverter? What is orientation (if S is 180)?
I have 5kw at home and 13kw at office in SW FL. Best day at office https://enlighten.enphaseenergy.com/public/systems/3HnH2844 was 76 kwh. Orientation on both arrays is about 150. I also have home in NY and solar charts seem to show that I would get approximately 20% less sun up here (installation still long way off yet, though). Curious to know what NJ results are for comparison.
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:00 am)Since MPG-e equates to 168.5 for a 200wh/mile consumption, I don’t have a huge problem with the standard. It puts it into some form of perspective for a casual purchaser to understand relative efficiencies of the different types of vehicles. Perhaps they should normalize it for costs, since those are being assumed anyway. In this case make the largest number the kwh/m (or miles per kwh but I prefer kwh/mile). Then in smaller font the number 116.78 mpg-e (168.5 * 2.86/4.04, where 4.04 is the cost of 33.7kwh at the assumed $0.12/kwh) could be used. I believe this is more meaningful to a purchaser looking to make cost comparisons.
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:01 am)Thanks Tom M and Sandy. Great article.
Tom, you sound totally sold on EVs. I’m glad you never broke down and had a great experience.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:03 am)Because there is such a disparity in the efficiency of the ICE and the electric motor. A single simple number for stating economy wont work. When there was a single fuel, MPG was simple and effective number. All of the cars had the same basic efficiency (fuel consumed to mechanical power) so parameters like vehicle weight and engine displacement could be used to influence MPG.
Now with electric motors able to put 80% of the available power to the ground compared to the ICE able to only put 15% to the ground. Many people don’t even understand what 250 watt-hours per mile means because they never heard of a watt-hour.
Also the car designs are changing so rapidly every car is going to have to have a different label. BEV, EREV, HEV, PHEV, HFC, gasoline, diesel will all have to have a different label to reflect the efficiency of the ratio of the multiple drive sources. The only way around this is to convert the energy consumption to a standard scientific value like (BTU per mile) and state the results in that format.
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:16 am)For those who have not found the link.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/08/chester_township_man_is_one_of.html
After looking better, I’ve see many who found the link.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:23 am)With all the variables, the EPA will need a web site or app that allows buyers to enter zip code and rate type for the fuel and electric costs. It’s a lot cheaper to run an EV or ICE car in Oklahoma than in Southern California. (In OK, residential rates are 4.71 cents per kWh after 600 kWh monthly in the winter and no higher than 9.68 cents per kWh year round.)
BTW, the yearly $81 tag fee in OK for a 2004 XLR is $400 in California!
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:23 am)Hey Tom, great article! Maybe your restaurant could sponsor a PPV fight to the death Cage Match between you and that Prius owner. (*just kidding!*)
Be well,
Tagamet
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:26 am)Hmmm. A lot of hater talk towards the MPGe idea.
Is every electrical propulsion system going to provide the same efficiency and get the same MPGe?
If the answer is no then MPGe is a nice bridging term to help the general public understand which system is more efficient here at the beginning of this new era.
Don’t dig your heels in so deep. The world is going to change one watt at a time and we’ll all get to the same place in the end.
-Book
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:29 am)To EPA: Q. What’s the logic of not designating a sticker-label ID (like ‘EPA-EV-1x’) so we can refer to them without having to use the same information we’re trying to critique. A. 0.
Now as to how EV’s are classified. The designation ‘Dual Fuel Vehicle’ needs work. VOLT being an all-electric motor drive-it should state exactly that. Never have I heard of anyone referring to electricity as fuel. That’s a bureaucratically-inspired stretch. In other words, No acronyms. No techie speak. No spin. No more confusion.
I suggest:
All-Electric Combination Drive Vehicle
1) Battery (Plug-in re-charge See xxx for electric charge times) And,
2) Extended Range Generator driven Gas Engine Drive. (See xxx for gas consumption)
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:34 am)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:35 am)I don’t have great orientation. I have two inverters. I’m facing South East, but more East than South unfortunately so it’s not ideal but I still get nice production. The system is 8.8kW and I’m averaging around 40kWh per day and have seen as much as 60kWh. I have a live link to my solar production from my blog if you want to see the production in real time. Click on my name to go to the blog.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:36 am)Realistically a Prius gets the job done. In fact you save more gas going from a 20 MPG vehicle to a Prius than a Prius uses, so significantly improving on the Prius MPG isn’t so easy — there just isn’t a lot of runway. However, the attitude that there can’t be any improvements over the Prius is annoying. Realistically Volt will most certainly be as big an improvement over the Prius as the Prius was over a Buick LaCrosse, though that may say more about the LaCrosse than the Volt.
Anyway, the death of the Smugmobile commeth. But like I said, petty me.
-18
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:37 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:38 am)Thanks Tag. Have you read the comments? Boy I’m getting flamed about how stupid electric cars are and how they pollute as much as conventional cars and how the grid will collapse when people start plugging in, etc… I’m not even going to engage or I’ll be fighting them all day! The crowd here is more of my taste anyway
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:38 am)(click to show comment)
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:41 am)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:46 am)yea, very ignorant group, unfortunately couldnt get it to accept a reply to a couple comments.
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:47 am)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:48 am)I agree that cost per mile (or per year) is more important than any mpg/mpge calculated number.
Just take the national average for electricity and gasoline and throw a number on the wall. On Jan 1st, reset the cost of electricity and other energy to last year’s average. Everybody already knows that the EPA rating won’t apply to their specific driving situation anyway. YMMV.
They are saying that gasoline will convert at 100% efficiency? That’s just nutz. We all know that an ICE is maybe 30-35% efficient depending on design.
Like I said yesterday. Throw out CAFE and MPG and just give the cost per year. And if you’re going to be really consumer friendly, give the cost per year for maintenance. If the engine requires premium, use the national average cost for premium. It can be significantly more money.
Give me a city estimate, a highway estimate and a combined estimate (55%+45%). Use standard drive cycles with fully charged battery for each test.
-12
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:53 am)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:59 am)The pioneers take all the arrows!
Priophyles seem to get very ego-involved in their vehicle choice, which seems to me a bit unfortunate to the extent that we tend to share the same goal. Plenty of room for all.
Be well,
Tagamet
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:03 am)Maybe you work at the EPA. Are you really so obtuse not to understand that the issue isn’t one of energy per se. It’s the type and source of the energy. Here’s the deal: A BTU that you have to get from Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela is not the same as a BTU that you have to get from the USA. Is that so hard to comprehend?
If you’re willing to suspend reality and happily pollute the atmosphere and support terrorism by driving your gas guzzling rare earth sucking Prius, fine. Just don’t try to sell that snake oil to people who know better. You’re as good at cherry picking data points and distorting reality as the guys over at Top Gear when they knock the Prius.
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:04 am)Charlie, you’re missing a few things:
The car is $600/month
BMW pays the insurance
There is zero maintenance. I have already worn out 3 sets of tires, replaced for free. Also, the prius needs frequent oil changes, tune ups, etc.
I drive 33,000/year not 15K like your example. My electric cost for the year is about $1,100. The gas for the prius would use $1,775.00 @ current $2.69/gal
Add up the $675+insurance+maintenance and it more than bridges the $125/month diffeence in payments.
However total cost isn’t the point here. The MINI-E is a prototype, it’s not for sale and never will be. It has lots of faults as all test “mules” do. Sure the prius is a better family car and can drive coast to coast without a hitch while I can barely get a half hour into Pennsylvania before I’d be out of charge but we were talking mile for mile efficiency and in that regard, it beats a prius like a rented mule.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:11 am)Thanks for trying Robert! Hope to see you soon!
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:12 am)Mr. President, is that you? (lol). OIC, it’s DonC filling in….
Be well,
Tagamet
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:13 am)Honestly, if I don’t like the way a car looks it doesn’t matter how great the mileage is. I don’t like the strange looking aerodynamic look that is so pervasive in hybrids. the only one i’ve seen that looks good is the Benz s400 hybrid and i “think” ive seen a prototype or model car of a bmw one that looks normal. Looks of the car #1. Mileage and EREV/PHEV stuff secondary.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:18 am)I thought for sure the post today would be about the Leaf going on sale. This is a huge day for the electric car movement – the first mass produced electric car is now on sale!
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2010/08/nissan-starts-selling-all-electric-leaf-sedan-today/1
+12
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:18 am)Of course your problem is that you can run the exact same analysis comparing the Prius and the Honda Fit and it will show that the Honda Fit is the better choice (exactly how many years will it take of saving that big $500 in gas to make up for a $10K – $15K price premium?). You want to have it all ways. When comparing more economical cars to the Prius you want to use MPG. For cars with better MPG you want to use economics. Then when you get to the Leaf, which eats the Prius’ lunch on both economics and MPG you want to use ….. range.
This is why you are completely full of BS. No matter what the facts are your conclusion stays the same. Bottom line: The Prius is over. Put a fork in it and move on.
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:21 am)Tee hee. I really liked the “rare earth sucking” part. LOL
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:22 am)I would like a lable that says this is how much electricity and gas you use for a 20 mile trip, 40 mile trip 100 mile trip and 300 mile trip. I would like to see the estimated cost of these trips. OUr local rates are averaging .0805 (including taxes) per KWH – I don’t know the carge needed to replenish the batteries – Please help to finish
Est GALLONS used per trip (estimated @ $3.00 per gallon used) 100 – 40 / 38 mpg
Miles EREV Avg MPG 38 first 40 all electric PHEV Avg MPG 50 Gas Only Avg MPG 20
20 0 / $0 Electrical .4 / $1.20 1 / $3.00
40 0 / $0 Electrical .8 / $2.40 2 / $6.00
100 1.58 / $5 + Elecrtical 2 / $6.00 3 / $20.00
300 6.32 / $19 gas + Elecrtical 6 / $18.00 15 / $45.00
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:23 am)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:24 am)Still rough, thanks for your concern.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:25 am)“They are saying that gasoline will convert at 100% efficiency? That’s just nutz. We all know that an ICE is maybe 30-35% efficient depending on design.”
MPGe simply compares the amount of ENERGY in a gallon of fuel, with how much ENERGY is used per mile. Energy content of the fuel could be measured in kWhs or BTUs, or whatever you like. MPGe is just a way of normalizing the value to that of something we are all familiar with. The conversion being demonstrated is not “chemical to mechanical to mechanical” (aka ICE), but electrochemical to mechanical (a.ka. battery to wheels).
If you want the Gas Only mode in MPG, then for easy comparison the All Electric mode must be shown using similar units.
Conversely, if Wh/mile is used to describe the All Electric mode, it should be used to demonstrate the Gas Only mode as well.
To use different units would DEFINITELY confuse the average consumer and it would require me to get out my calculator, since I never liked doing math in my head.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:27 am)You’re enjoying yourself far too much (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
-18
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:27 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:29 am)The best way to go is MPC (miles per charge) and MPG (miles per gallon in CS mode).
Keep it simple, unless you want to scare away potential Volt customers. We WANT GM to make more Voltech vehicles like, say, a Voltech HHR or a Voltech Orlando. That isn’t going to happen unless GM sells a lot of Volts.
Here’s how simple it is: I know from my electric bill that my cost to charge the Volt is $1.00 a day. Say I want to go 60 miles. Assuming 40 MPG in CS mode, my trip would cost me $1.00 and a half a gallon of gas. Easy – no calculator needed.
The EPA can always use a smaller sticker for the geeky stuff like greenhouse stuff, blended scenerios, annual cost of use, etc, etc, etc. The average Joe cares about battery range and MPG when using gas. That’s it.
As for the Leaf and the plug-in Prius, let them get their own EPA sticker.
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:33 am)(click to show comment)
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:39 am)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:41 am)Could have sworn people have been getting actual order numbers from GM on the Volt for weeks now… in fact I am calling my dealership and getting my order number this afternoon.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:42 am)AMEN! Of course at *this* point they can only sell 10K of them, but we can still hope that they will “see the light” and loosen up the production numbers.
Who is the CEO this week? (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:44 am)Hey Tom,
I posted a reply to a fellow concerned about hybrids acceleration issues after your article.
HTH a little. Tough room!
Be well,
Tagamet
-18
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:45 am)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:46 am)A copy of my comments to the epa:
I think you have made this sticker more complicated than necessary. I am a pure electric vehicle owner (GEM E-4) and a Dodge truck. I hope to soon be the owner of a Chevy Volt ONLY. Therefore, I have experience with gas only, electric only, and have followed the Volt closely.
It seems to me that in order to encompass all vehicle type, one only need to start with a vehicle whose energy load is “full”. Then under whatever driving methodologies (should be same for all cases) how many miles does the vehicle go. From that you could calculate mpg (gas used only) and mpge. You know that gas comes from a pump. You DO NOT know whether electricity comes from hydro (as in Seattle) or solar (private panels) or coal fired plant or natural gas powered plant, so you enviro ratings are not particularly helpful.
In summary, I think the label should predominately display:
Fuel capacity gas
“Fuel” capacity electric
Fuel capacity other
Miles driveable when full of all sources
Miles electric only (For electric (pure, PHEV, HEV)
This allows the consumer to compare based on their uses – do I drive Seattle to San Francisco all the time; do I drive under 40 miles per day taking the kids to school and practices and to the store; do I drive 60 miles a day commuting. The information I have outlined is all that is necessary for the individual to compare vehicles suitable for their driving habits.
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:47 am)Thought for the day:
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:51 am)Thanks Tag! Yes it is, like I said before I’m not going to engage or I’ll be replying all day. Maybe later in the day when the BS slows some down I’ll correct a few inaccurate remarks.
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:52 am)(click to show comment)
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:53 am)My Prius Lease is 330 month… That is for a Prius 2 (since the 1 is only available to fleets). The car price was 24,500. The Lease is for 3 years 45,000 miles – with a residual price to buy of 16750.
He is driving his MINI for 33K miles per year, that on a lease would have probably been about 500-600 per month. My lease incresed $20 per month for an additional 3,000 miles from 12k to 15k.
+11
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:56 am)I would buy a Volt-type vehicle if it was $50,000…. Point is people who are interested in reducing fuel consumption, may or may not care about cost. I can run cost analysis all day long until I make it say what I want. If you absolutely have to justify the cost – you should have considered a bus pass, would have saved a TON of money!
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:00 pm)LOL, one of the comments questioned where you got the electricity! As long as I’m logged in to both sites, I’ll keep replying to a few of the “less enlightened” comments (g). What’s important is that you know in your heart and in your head that you have a great setup!
Be well,
Tagamet
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:03 pm)It could say: “Say that three times and I bet I beat you to 70 mph!”
Be well,
Tagamet
+8
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:04 pm)And Wang was once dominate in office computers. The Prius is like the Blackberry. Great technology from yesterday which still has a leading market share. But in business the issue is tomorrow not yesterday. Ergo — the Tesla RAV4. Ba ha ha ha ha ha ha!
More BS. The Volt is $41K minus $3.7K — $37.5K. And the Prius isn’t $22K. It’s more like $29K. In point of fact the people I know who are leasing a Prius are paying more than $350/month, which is more than they’d pay to lease the Volt.
If you want to continue to think the Prius is the greatest thing since sliced white bread, and use all sort of intellectual rationalizations to justify this, have at it. The less delusional have other interests than admiring their Blackberry.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:16 pm)Pretty simple really:
Miles per kW/hrs (City/Highway/Combined),
Miles per gallon (City/Highway/Combined)-N/A for EV’s
Fully charged battery range,
Time to fully charge battery (120v/240v),
Efficiency rating compared to other vehicles in class (similar to appliance efficiency ratings stickers),
Pollution rating scale-numeric scale, letter scale or color-coded scale (who cares!)
MPGe is not recommended. Consumers can make individually informed decisions on what combination of fuels to consume based on above factors and their particular transportation, efficiency and environmental goals.
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:19 pm)(click to show comment)
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:30 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:34 pm)(click to show comment)
+7
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:36 pm)Its not that the Mini Lease would have been less, Tom lr Lyle would have more details on that program, its that had he driven the Prius lease for 33k miles per year it would have been a simmilarly priced lease payment, plus the cost of fuel and oil changes. (maybe not oil changes as those are free during my prius lease).
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:39 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:43 pm)OK, i’m going to post again…..
EPA should read like this..
PHV PRIUS:
EV Range: Up to 13 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 60mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
Chevy Volt:
EV Range: Up to 40 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 90mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
LEAF:
EV Range: Up to 100 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 90mph
Hybrid Mode: N/A
All depending on driver and driving conditions.
Now, let me slam MPGe real quick. The first thing Pat Q. Public will see is the MPGe. Great! They see some crazy ass’d number that they will NEVER attain. A number generated as a factorial based on a driving cycle that poor Pat Q. Public has no clue about. Let’s take Lyle’s example…
“MPGe is given by the formula: MPGe = (miles driven) / [(total energy of all fuels consumed)/(energy of one gallon of gasoline)]). For example, an electric car with an efficiency of 200 watt-hours per mile (like the Volt) would be rated at 168.5 MPGe.”
This does NOT tell me that I can drive 40 miles EV per full charge in the Volt and does NOT tell me I can go 12 miles EV on a full charge in a PHV Prius. And what wil the LEAF get? Infinate ∞ ?. Yeah, sure you can go infinite……lol
Makes no sense to me why the EPA wants to blend 100% EV range with Hybrid or OPEC Range to get some crazy azz’d composite number.
Putting efficiency numbers is fine. But the numbers now are more than enough and adding another figure would complicate poor Pat Q. Public.
/ok, there’s my crazy rant….
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:45 pm)lol….
I agree. Give me base strip model dangit!
+13
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:49 pm)I agree that the 10,000 volts the first year will make little to no difference in US oil consumption, and I agree that the Prius will have a bigger impact at first – I like the prius, I drive one, its great (except the VERY uncomfortable seats). But this is the start of a vehicle revolution, imagine the success of the Volt prompting GM to move voltec to more models, what if 15 years from now they are selling 10 different voltec models. If at the same time the PHEV prius HSD is moved to more toyota/lexus/scion models to compete wth voltec. Add Nissan, Ford, and other EV’s and hybrids to the mix and now you have a HUGE impact on domestic consumption.
We have to start somewhere – Look at the first year prius, government subsidized, low volume vehicle that barely broke 40 MPG, look at it now easily eclipsing 50MPG and sold to the tune of quarter million a year worldwide with no more US subsidies.
Imagine the Volt doing the same thing, 10 years from now volt for $32,500 MSRP (less than the average vehicle price sold in the USA which was $33,000 last year). 40 Miles EV range and 55 MPG CS Mode. Voltec in small pickups (I would pay cadillac prices for a voltec S10 with 20 mile range) HHR’s minivans etc.
This is a revolution – Volt year 1 will not make a huge impact on fuel consumption, but it will make a huge impact on awareness, which is what will get us to Volt Model Year 10.
These cars are not competitors – they are on the same team.
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:53 pm)(click to show comment)
+8
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:54 pm)You are right about that, no they wouldn’t. Nobody would allow unlimited mileage for ANY car much less an EV.
This whole thing started as a joke when I said to the prius owner “I bet you’re not used to parking next to a car that uses LESS gas than you do” I said it for fun but he seemed kind of offended(like how dare I) and tried to say the MINI uses more gas than a prius but he didn’t know this one uses NO gas.
I know we all like to argue points to death here, but let’s put this on to bed. You can’t compare a non-production prototype car to a production one, especially total cost. The value of unlimited mileage and the fact that I am not responsible for anything that happens to the car (yes, anything) is impossible to equate. Recently when I had the car in for a data download, they gave me a brand new drivers seat, new floormats, took off all the plug decals and put on new ones, new tires, one new rim that had curb rash and detailed the entire car. It looks like new. How much would that cost? $2,000?
+8
Aug 31st, 2010 (12:58 pm)Would you be so kind to point what pages are full of those surprising answers ? At 154+ pages, I’m not sure I have the time to study the entire document to discover the answers you are alluding to.
… if such surprises are for real, of course.
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:00 pm)Totally OT. Sitting here at a state park, reading this discussion on brand new Droid2. Envisioning the day (soon) when ap will be on phone for Volt. Totally geeky, I know, but exciting nonetheless. Just keep typing …I’ll keep reading …
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:05 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:06 pm)Man, I don’t care who is pushing it, it’s just plain STUPID!
And what’s with the “Gas only” sh|t? Neither the Volt nor the Prius is 100% “Gas only”. It should be “Hybrid Mode”. Why? Because the Prius blends mechanical energy from the electric motors with it’s tranny “at any given time” and the Volt will “dip into the battery pack” when needed for hard accel or passing “at any given time”……..Hybrid mode!
/do they not understand “Hybrid mode”?
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:07 pm)(click to show comment)
+14
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:08 pm)Let me get this right. “Taxpayers are burdened” when people qualify for tax rebates when they buy a Volt but taxpayers weren’t burdened when people qualified for tax rebates when they bought a Prius? Ba ha ha ha ha ha ha! Your double, triple, and quadruple standards are transparently FOS.
+11
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:10 pm)When the prius crowd kicks in, we are doomed. Guess you’re done posting for today
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:11 pm)The 79.7 was used in the article but now it is changed to 168.5 which seems pretty high, three times better than the best gas car.
+12
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:13 pm)PDNFTT
Keep talking to these weenies and they will just hang around yapping. A couple days ago, there were more posts about/with trolls than the subject of the thread!
Throw them off the island (give a – vote) and move on.
I know. I don’t always follow my own advise
+6
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:14 pm)With regard to the “Environmental Rating” CO2/mile emissions. It should be noted on the sticker that should you drive less than 10 miles per day – YOU, the human operator will emit MORE CO2 than your car (avg 1kg/day.) Full disclosure of this kind will help clear up the confusion in an otherwise well understood environmental concern.
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:15 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:19 pm)I do that on a daily basis after nachos and chicken wings at H( . y . )TERS.
/ok, not daily but on special occasions. But I do Emit quite a bit….lol
//pull my finger….
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:23 pm)(click to show comment)
+10
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:27 pm)Really ? You think that the proverbial Joe would buy a prius ? I would put my money on a pickup truck.
+12
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:28 pm)We do know how you are — not so hot with the facts. As a factual matter the Prius did not “easily” break 40 MPG. It squeaked by with 41 MPG rating. No doubt you’d also have us believe that it was a “clean” car, despite the fact it gets a pollution score of “3″ versus say, a current Buick LaCross, which has gets a pollution score of “7″.
-18
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:30 pm)(click to show comment)
-19
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:33 pm)(click to show comment)
+7
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:33 pm)As I pointed out to you the other day, so I’m sure you know, that if you look at the subsidy based on what you GET, the Volt subsidy costs taxpayers about 1/3rd what the Prius subsidy did. Why do you find it so hard to understand that paying a dollar for a dozen eggs gives you more bang for the buck than paying twenty-five cents for two?
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:34 pm)MPGe is totally wrong. The cost for imported oil is well beyond what consumers see at the pump (such as the $100s of billions spent each year to secure Middle East oil as well as the lives lost and affected). One could even argue that the nuclear bomb in Iran is being purchased with petro-dollars. What’s the cost of that!
We need a national industrial policy which reduces our usage of imported oil as rapidly as possible. Using MPGe totally masks this strategic reality (only a few per cent of US power is generated using oil). People are complaining about the US $7500 rebate for EV’s while Japan is subsidizing theirs to the tune of $14,000 a car. China understands — they have reduced their exports of rare earth materials used to make electric motors by 80% so they can get off of oil first through EV’s.
-18
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:37 pm)(click to show comment)
-19
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:40 pm)(click to show comment)
-18
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:40 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:45 pm)It’s not ‘first’ unless they ship one before a Tesla shipped. Like three years ago. Of course, some would say that hand-building 1,000 cars is not exactly ‘mass production’.
14 years ago, there were also other electric cars (EV1, Rav4, S10s, etc.) not to mention the Baker in 1899. The lunar rover was a BEV as well. NEV electric cars have also been around for a while. GEM (‘M’ stands for Motorcars) was started in 1998 and has sold around 40k cars.
If I were to say ‘first mass-produced electric car’ I’d have to go with Baker.
An order is not the same as a sale. Can you take delivery today? Guess it’s not sold or even built yet then.
+14
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:47 pm)Amen! +10
Be well,
Tagamet
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:50 pm)Then, we agree that there is a lot of education to do. We would be wise to use our energy toward that goal instead of debating if a 10 year old design is more tuned than a brand new one. It is. That’s not the point. It has never been.
The point is to have as many products as possible to displace oil. The more the better. People are interested to learn about a new product. The Volt is a new product. It’s an incredible opportunity to educate.
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:50 pm)(click to show comment)
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:54 pm)You can’t sell what people don’t buy. GM will stop selling them when no one is buying. They will build more EREV cars when people will buy more.
At least, now, they have an interesting alternative to the traditional guzzler.
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:54 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:55 pm)(click to show comment)
+7
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:55 pm)Much as I hate to leave this stimulating debate (all that’s missing is the ALL CAPS SHOUTING), I’ll bbl.
Be well,
Tagamet
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (1:57 pm)By the way, when does your wife return ?
-13
Aug 31st, 2010 (2:08 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (2:27 pm)Dear Captain,
methinks you pull me leg twixt your finger! Or is it, meTHANE your emissions betray the nose to foul play!
+6
Aug 31st, 2010 (2:35 pm)http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/hybrid_sbs.shtml
This is the Government website with the adjusted official fuel economy…
42 City – 41 Hwy for the 2001 Prius.
It had a $3500 tax rebate
Sorry Loboc – just trying to keep the facts straight
-13
Aug 31st, 2010 (2:45 pm)(click to show comment)
-13
Aug 31st, 2010 (2:49 pm)(click to show comment)
-18
Aug 31st, 2010 (2:53 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (2:56 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (2:58 pm)(click to show comment)
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:00 pm)I would agree with you but….
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2010-07-30-suvs30_CV_N.htm
And
http://transportationnation.org/2010/06/04/analyst-suv-sales-growth-absolute-proof-of-short-attention-spans/
Not a good sign if you ask me. I see brand new SUV’s at my son’s school all the time. What these peeps do for a living to afford one of these is beyond me….lol
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:02 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:03 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:06 pm)(click to show comment)
-18
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:07 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:10 pm)(click to show comment)
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:10 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:12 pm)lol….
METHANE MAN!
http://www.mrmethane.com/
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:14 pm)Slow learners or I want to do like my neighbourg kind of people ? I agree with you that change takes time (or a good crisis).
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:15 pm)(click to show comment)
-12
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:21 pm)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:24 pm)I think maybe looking at taxing/increasing fuel prices is the wrong way to go. May make the insurance prices skyrocket for an SUV? Or make MPG and weight a factor that increases your insurance premium?….lol. I dunno, just taking crazy azz SWAGS. How bout increase SUV insurance premium due to to it’s kinetic force in that it WILL cause more damage to the smaller higher MPG car?
Obviously fuel price fluctuations don’t seem to do Jack for promoting EV or Hybrid’s
but that’s JMHO
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:26 pm)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:33 pm)So why doesn’t Toy sell the Prius I to the general public? Currently they only sell to “Fleet”.
I’m a broke azz mofo and would like one but sh|t man, only sold to Fleet?
Sup with dat?
Also, do you have any idea if they will have a PHV Prius I for the general public?
Anyone?
Anyone?
bueller?
bueller?
/just curious bro.
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:37 pm)You know, I thought the mindset of “keep up with the Jones’s” was gone but prolly not. You’re probably right.
I tend to kepp below the Jones’s. That gives my son a vision of what he can work to achieve. The Jones’s kid is a spoiled brat.
-13
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:42 pm)(click to show comment)
-12
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:47 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (3:56 pm)(click to show comment)
-4
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:01 pm)Bureaucrats at the EPA are attempting to obfuscate and have it both ways. They want to be above objective criticism. How can you compare as B+ and A- to C or D grade. With a really massive increase in fuel economy soon forth coming from hybridization, EREVs, PHEVs, semi-diesel HCCI, throttle-less ICEs, they don’t wish to point out that a Volt achieves fuel economy in excess of triple digits,as will many others. Their very ‘Raison-d-etre’ comes into question.
Secondly, they reserve the right to muck up an objective measure, with “other considerations”. Why should an ICE car that meets the same zero emissions levels as a pure EV, be deemed only worthy of a B or C on toxic emissions, while the EV get an A on its same toxic emissions environmental grade?
That is a license for the enviro-cranks to extol their pet preferences regardless of what objective facts say.
The EPA and NHTSA too, is a bureaucracy grown fat and sluggish, with increasingly nothing to do, except create mischief. There was a real need when we were just beginning the battle against toxic emissions. But those regulations and the technologies to implement them are now in place. The modern ICE under US regulations, never mind the EV can and is already essentially a Zero toxic emissions vehicle; and maintaining is a lot less manpower intensive than actually doing.
It is past time for the budgets of the EPA and NHTSA to be cut by a third to a half or more. Liberal Ralph Nader urged that every bureaucracy be killed and where necessary, re-instituted a year later with the stipulation that no former employee could work there. Only this way could you prevent the agency from becoming co-opted. A non-liberal would simply question the continued need, else we would still have Buggy whip manufacturing regulatory agencies with hundreds of thousands of employees today.
It is startling but true, to discover that less than 25 EPA individuals are all it takes to certify cars from the manufacturers for emissions and mileage ratings. You might wonder what do the other tens of thousands of EPA employees actually do?
Then this will force a concentration on priorities, and essential work and not asininity like a self imposed CAGW mandate on Americans. CO2 is probably not a problem for the world, and that is debatable; but Americans have made the sacrifices to have become a Net Carbon sink. We emit no net CO2. Our expensive land set asides, for among other things, CO2 sequestration, consisting of National Forests, Wildernesses, Parks and private forests, ranch-lands, and farms do more than enough to offset all the CO2 we Americans emit with our industries, cities and transport. Something the peer reviewed scientific literature establishes very well, but is assiduously and studiously unmentioned by the enviros. So why should we sacrifice some more for somebody else’s problem, if indeed it is even a problem? And not merely a figment of imagination of some Gaiean-spouting, Nobel Savage-longing, fevered brain; or Charlatan rentier seeking some unearned rents?
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:02 pm)I hope you understood I meant in CS mode….lol. My bad, I didn’t mention that.
Either way, that is how GM designed it. “BAD” is relative because the Volt only uses 50% of the batt pack anywway. so dipping slightly past 50% to pass for a few seconds aint gonna hurt none.
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:06 pm)Cap’n Jack… What have we told you about feeding the trolls?
If you keep it up, they’ll just follow you home… lay out more of their puke on your carpet… drink all of your rum without so much as a thank you… just let ‘em go.
In a little over 60 days both the VOLT and the LEAF will be reeling in all of the press and you won’t hear ‘jack squat’ about a P…OS for the next 18 months at least.
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:09 pm)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:12 pm)Hey dude, when will you get in the “test drive” Volt? I will be in SOCAL on Thanksgiving week. If you have one by then i’d like to stop by for a test drive. Just remember, my brokeazz can’t afford to buy one…..lol…….or the LEAF!
/brokeazz CA!
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:12 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:15 pm)It is still up in the air when the demo comes in. Not getting solid answers from factory. When one does show up, I will have photos posted here. You’re welcome to stop in for a test drive.
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:17 pm)(click to show comment)
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:27 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:28 pm)There it is again, more of this nonsense. The battery and generator isn’t tied to a rope behind the car to be “dragged along for the ride”. It can “drag” itself no problem as can all objects at constant speed. Do they not teach this stuff in high-school anymore?
Oh and I don’t want to hear “rolling resistance” as a counter-argument, you’re wasting far more energy merging into freeway traffic with a conventional ICE car that you ever will “dragging around” that extra “dead weight” in a Volt (which it was designed for, by the way).
@lternate Delegate: Only offer the rebate to cars that regularly use either the 70% to 80% depth of discharge for the entire pack.
If we’re going to save anything, let’s be efficient about it.
Oh yeah, good idea, and then have the battery pack only last 2 years, much more efficient.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:28 pm)Was going through Wiki about Tzero
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_Propulsion_tzero
AC Propulsion also produced a portable internal combustion powered generator mounted on a trailer known as the Long Ranger that could be towed behind the car and feed power to the batteries during travel. The trailer used a 500 cc Kawasaki engine with a 9.5 U.S. gallon (40 liter) fuel tank and achieved 30 to 35 mpg over at least 20,000 highway miles. It is rated at 20 kW DC output and can maintain 60 to 80 mph.
What ever label EPA comes, lets see how smart GM came with a 1.4 ltr engine based range extender and how many miles they can juice out of it.
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:30 pm)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:34 pm)Yeah, I thought that was s pretty cool idea. But AC prop killed the trailer project. The one last trailer they had they sold it to a Rav-4 EV owner. You see the pic around from time to time.
http://www.evnut.com/rav_longranger.htm
That’s the same trailer built as the one you see in the pic on Wiki
-13
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:35 pm)(click to show comment)
-13
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:37 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:39 pm)Eric dear, let’s just do a little third grade math. The Prius got a $3700 rebated for increasing mileage over a Honda Civic. And how much was that? Let’s see, the Honda Civic got 28/35. The Prius got (not the BS numbers you throw out) 42/41. What’s that? A whopping 30% efficiency performance. The Volt gets you about 500% better efficiency over a Prius. So what do you think is the better deal: $7500 for a 500% increase or $3700 for a 30% increase? Is this even close?
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:43 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:44 pm)(click to show comment)
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:45 pm)(click to show comment)
-13
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:56 pm)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:59 pm)I was thinking of building something like the one Unni saw. But a little more oooomph, say 27-30KW (~40hp) with a 600cc motorcycle engine. But mount it vertically instead of how they have it, horizontally and on a smaller trailer. That would shorten the length of the trailer. I had a CalMotors electric motor in mind for the generator, small pkg/water cooled.
I see that a big $$$ opportunity, but as long as the OEM’s don’t void the warranties……yeah right huh…..lol
)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:59 pm)Hmmmmmmmmmm. Lets see: here’s the gas tank and we put liquid fuel into it that is called gasoline. And this is a battery pack that we put electricity in. Now
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (4:59 pm)Truly no need to worry about that.
As mentioned, those are the official numbers: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/hybrid_sbs.shtml
This is just demonstrates just how far you’ll go into the swill to make up facts. He said people in the real world didn’t break 40 MPG. You pompously said that you just had to correct him and that the Prius “easily broke 40 MPG”. Of course he was right and you were completely full of BS. The Prius is rated at 41 MPG based on the current EPA drive cycles that everyone in the world recognizes as overly mild. In fact it’s why GM says you can expect “up to” 40 miles in EV Mode — you can probably get more than that using the EPA current cycles but they’re not representative of real world driving.
So now you’re shucking and jiving and are down to saying that, on the EPA cycles that existed at the time, you know the one that so overstated MPG that the EPA ditched them because they gave misleadingly high MPG numbers, the Prius “was easily a 45 MPG car”. Whether you know it or not, you’re admitting that he was right and you were wrong — the Prius didn’t break 40 MPG in real world driving. But hey, if you want to use those cycles, that’s fine. But let’s use them for the Volt as well. So now the Volt has a 75 mile EV range and gets 500 MPG. In your world, not mine.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:01 pm)DON’T REPLY, PEOPLE;
VOTE!!!!!
To this point, 55 comments (not including those which may have been posted while I was editing this) were made by the following people:
EricLG
Charlie H
usbSeawolf2000
As much as I would like to add him, john1701a only made one comment.
When you add the responses to troll comments that were generated (which have nothing to do with the topic of the thread and very little to do with the site), you again approach last week’s shameful 1/3 of all posts being one-sided and wholly negative.
I’ve done my best to stay out of things, today; even though it’s my experience that the really motivated ‘attack troll’ isn’t deterred by being ignored (though ignoring them sure doesn’t hurt).
The shame of it is, it all goes away with the vote.
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A REGULAR COMMENTER TO VOTE!
This is your site too. If you find it a more valuable experience when we’re not under siege by a small cabal of jerks, click the neg buttons in the offending comments. We can at least remove the @$$h0|e$ from the top view.
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:02 pm)(click to show comment)
-9
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:03 pm)Some more complicating factors in EPA rating the Volt (brought to you in part, by “conspiracy guy”):
- It’s possible the Volt may dip into the reserve 8 kwh’s on the battery — i.e. at times the Volt may pull more than 8kwh’s out of the battery in order to reach or approach targeted 40 miles AER.
- Use of mountain mode
// unrelated to EPA rating but …. seems like there’s still some lingering ‘between the lines’ indication that the Volt may indeed be packing a mechanical connection from ICE to the wheels — guess we’ll find out when we find out.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:06 pm)lol…..
I try that on my own posts and I don’t see my post get the neg or pos value……
Or is that not allowed?
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:09 pm)Let me add another for you…..
Maybe add the percentage value of electricity used in hybrid mode for the drive cycle tested so the “consumer” can see how often the car needs to hit the electric juice to bump to higher MPG.
/yeah just kidding, EPA please don’t add that……
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:11 pm)I think they should have an “Expected Annual Energy Consumption” number posted on a scale of vehicles in its class. (like a refrigerator)
An expected annual cost based on the national average for Electricity and Gas would be ok.
Drop all politically charged terms like “Greenhouse Gases” and even “Pollutants”.
“Environmental Rating” number is fine as long as its not a veiled political statement.
Gas Only MPG is too misleading since no one using the car as intended/designed/instructed will ever see that as an average.
Ken
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:12 pm)lol…
yeah, that DOES sound a little suspicious. Especially when they said that both the genset AND traction motor are bolted into the same housing.
/see what you started!!!
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:13 pm)(click to show comment)
-9
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:14 pm)One of the efficiency ratings that I most like to see is when a car is tested at a specific speed (steady state, no accleration, standard temp, no wind) and the mpg is measured with a scangauge ii. I think Wayne Gerdis does this on a lot of his reviews:
i.e.
40 mph — 65 mpg
50 mph — 58 mpg
60 mph — 50 mpg
70 mpg — 47 mpg
then do the sam tests for BEV’s or in CD mode for PHV showing wh/mile
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:14 pm)I don’t think that will work bro.
A fridge or a home appliance operates in relatively the same temp, room temp. The EV/PHV/PHEV on the other hand depends on wether, terrain and the driver.
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:19 pm)I love the way you guys have to pull numbers from different years and different cars in order to get your arguments to work. The Prius saved 3000 gallons over a comparable mid-size car? On what planet do you live? The Prius got 41 MPG. A comparable Honda Civic got 31 MPG. Assuming you’re driving even 12K miles a year, that’s as savings of 94 gallons. So it “saved” what, 940 gallons over ten years. That’s a subsidy of $3.35 per gallon for the Prius. (Plus in your 25 MPG number it doesn’t matter).
And let’s not forget the cost of money. At 5% a year, a $3150 in 2001 is worth $5130 in 2011. So in inflation adjusted dollars, the Prius subsidy amounted to $5.46/gallon.
IOW the numbers demonstrate that, compared to the subsidy for the Prius, the subsidy for the Volt is a bargain.
-12
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:21 pm)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:23 pm)You are sooooo hilarious. Having failed to make an argument about the relative merits of the cars, now we’re off on the “bail out” tangent. Coming from a Prius owner this is very very very very funny.
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:24 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:28 pm)And BTW,
Don’t forget to start again from the top of the thread, and search for names. There are already some posts at the -9 level, needing only a single vote to trigger invisibility. There is little as satisfying as sending an @$$h0|e comment into justly-deserved exile; I highly recommend it.
Don’t forget too that these snakes vote for each other, it never hurts to pile on a little “extra.”
We are at war for our own site. Please do your part. Don’t let up until they stop coming back.
Remember to Volte!!
-16
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:29 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:30 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:34 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:37 pm)Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. ROTFLMAO!
Lets see: Case #1 – Internal Combustion Engine fuel container = gas tank
fuel = gasoline; a petroleum product.
Case #2 – Electric Vehicle fuel container = battery pack
fuel = electricity
It doesn’t seem that hard to understand; we put gasoline in the tank of an ICE vehicle; we put electricity in the battery pack of an electric vehicle.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:39 pm)NOVEMBER 11th!
http://translogic.aolautos.com/2010/08/31/exclusive-chevy-volt-production-will-start-november-11-2010/
Couple of weird bits of info, like allocation numbers going out on November 17th, but this looks promising.
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:41 pm)(click to show comment)
-12
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:44 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:47 pm)It is just that we cannot bear to see our beloved Captain assailed by an undeserved negative vote; and cannot help but counter with a positive before you can refresh the page.
Either that, or your browser is cache-ing the page …
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:50 pm)I don’t know if you noticed, but you weren’t included in the ‘short list’ this time.
And besides, mommy says that when I turn 16, I can have my very own laptop!!!
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:54 pm)That is awesome.
We couldn’t get “End-dependence Day,” but surely this roll-out date is no less appropriate.
It will be a small beginning perhaps, but a major hurt for Islamofascists will come of it.
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:55 pm)everyone give this guy a +1 so gm execs can get this happening asap!
26 Vote recorded.
Thank you.
+1Texas Says
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:56 am) .The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced that the old “sticker” idea is woefully inadequate.
For example. Do we want a few hundred Volt drivers out there that have a horrible Volt situation (live in the mountains, drive 3 hours on the highway to work every day, live in super cold or super hot environments, etc.) going around telling people that they are getting normal ICE-like mileage? No!
We want those Volt drivers to be fully educated on what they can expect given their specific situation. We want that nerd in the office running around telling people that he just put another gallon of gas into his tank, after 3 months! For a huge percentage of Volt drivers, they might easily get over that 350 MPG that GM initially bragged about. It’s true! If they live close to work (20 miles with no work plug, 40 miles with nice employers), flat land, temperate climate, few long trips, etc. they might get thousands of miles per gallon!
So, it’s better to fully educate potential drivers so they know that they might only going to get 30 mpg even when they expect 100 mpg. It’s better to be transparent in this case because the word of mouth will sell better than a golden-tongued salesperson. I can see that super happy office worker smiling about his amazing mpg numbers. Then when the other office workers go into a GM dealer, they will get a realistic prediction of what they can expect. Nobody will then be called a liar. This just might prevent office fights.
America has 300 million people and GM will only be able to pump out a few million Volts. Don’t worry about telling people they won’t get good numbers. The percentage of people that will get great numbers will tell others and that market will easily buy all the Volts GM could possibly make.
The new GM is about truth, quality and customer experience. Let’s give them everything, including realistic expectations! For many, those expectations will truly be out of this world! No shady sales pitch needed. The Volt is simply going to knock the socks off of a huge market.
Dear GM dealers, if a potential customer looks to only get a small boost due to their specific situation (long highway miles, lives on a mountain, extreme temperatures, many Grandmothers, etc.) Be honest and show them the other wonderful cars from GM. That person will respect the truth and become a loyal customer for decades to come.
– VOLT INTERNET APPLICATION — needed in 90 days!
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:56 pm)(click to show comment)
Aug 31st, 2010 (5:58 pm)You seemed to notice plenty fast when you were “on” the list …
I understand that having been “burned” makes you skeptical; but this is not about stereotypes or cliques. I’m not ready to surrender control of this forum to a minority sorehead agenda, at least not without a fight.
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:07 pm)Thanks, that link with Rav Long Ranger Hybridizing Trailer was good. Now i see a minus point for making Nissan leaf charger at front of the vehicle. It its was at back , The Long Ranger can be connected well.
-15
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:11 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:12 pm)here’s my idea
in Australia we use litres per 100 kilometres
first 64kls = 0.0 Litres per 100kms (pure electric mode)
then x.x amount Litres per 100kms after that
its that simple MPGe is ridiculous!
this IS the way it will be done when the GM Holden Volt goes on sale down under GUARAUNTEED
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:17 pm)Did anyone post the entire report from the EPA?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20015069-54.html
In the “Green Tech” section of CNET News, Martin LaMonica did. On page 7 of the report, in the section “Demonstration of the “MPG Illusion”, the report states what we have been saying here all along:
“This “mpg illusion” demonstrates why it may be more meaningful to express fuel efficiency in terms of consumption (e.g., gallons per mile or per 100 miles) rather than in terms of economy (miles per gallon). A consumption metric would allow for more accurate energy usage comparisons among vehicles.”
Even the EPA can back up the statement, “Think Gallons-Per-Year” and not “Miles-Per-Gallon”.
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:25 pm)I see no reason to feel GM doesn’t have infinite wisdom on when and how to release any info on Volt. We’re lucky the test Volts weren’t camophlaged and we don’t think they are special edition Cruzes, for that matter.
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:40 pm)Production starts on 11/11/10! Well that’s an easy number to remember. Can’t wait to get the call from my Volt rep saying mine is moving through the line!
-Book
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:56 pm)Is “nasaman” and “nasaman1″ the same person?
-12
Aug 31st, 2010 (6:58 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:00 pm)Yes. It’s a work-around for inadvertent blocked “Nasaman” posts.
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:01 pm)I agree, but don’t forget, it only takes 10 trolls working together to regulate all of our comments into the abyss…..
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:01 pm)I got you the first time, no need to repeat it. What I’m saying is that it’s virtually not true. Studies show that adding 10% to the weight of the vehicle decreases fuel economy by 1%-2%. You wouldn’t even notice it. And that’s in a standard vehicle, not one capable of regen braking. And that’s adding weight to the base weight of the vehicle, not having a 10% higher base weight. In reality the Volt will probably have less than 1% worse economy than another Volt without the battery or without the genset (take your pick). But that loss is way, way more than made up by the fact that electric drive train is way more efficient than an standard drive train and by the fact that it’s using a small engine (70HP instead of 250HP). So your argument that the extra weight is inefficient holds no water when you can’t show how a vehicle can get better efficiency without that extra weight.
*Almost* the same efficiency, yes. And I understand poor efficiency quite well, thank you. The problem isn’t with me understanding it, the problem is that you haven’t showed it.
Yes, why should GM base their engineering on hard science, better they base it on wild speculation and unjustified claims. Then their engineering would be top notch!
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:01 pm)Alert: Norton blocked this page on my computer. Did anyone else get a warning message ?
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:10 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:15 pm)I haven’t read the whole thread, so forgive me if someone has beaten me to this. The CA legislature just passed, and the Governator signed, a bill allowing carpool lane access to Volts, Leafs (Leaves?), and plug in Priuses. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, LOL. A big plus for Volt sales in SoCal, if they can make enough of them. That’s what kickstarted Prius sales in my neighborhood, where lots of folks commute on the brutal 110 and 405 freeways.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:35 pm)Didn’t get any warnings with Avast or Avira.
Also, just got my order number, YAY!
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:49 pm)Breaking News…
Automotive News article:
DETROIT — Chevrolet is asking its 3,000 dealers to prepare for the late September launch of the new Chevrolet Cruze compact by purchasing competitors’ vehicles for test-drive comparisons.
Chevrolet is encouraging dealers to have a Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic on site so prospective 2011 Cruze buyers can immediately measure the Cruze against its segment competitors, said Margaret Brooks
I’ve never heard of that before. Wonder what they would purchase to compare against the Volt?
+7
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:50 pm)Charlie H, EricLG, usbseawolf2000, carcus3, Troll Alert, john1701a, and other supporters of the Prius / Leaf:
Here’s a list of sites that would be more receptive to your points of view.
http://www.priusownersgroup.com
priuschat.com
practicewhatyouprius.blogspot.com
http://www.allaboutprius.com
http://www.priuspoint.com
——————————————-
nissanleafelectric.com
nissan-leaf.net
http://www.leafdrivers.com
teamleaf.wordpress.com
Please, feel free to leave GM-volt.com and post your facts on these sites. You’ll never change DonC’s mind, and I hate to see you get pummeled by posters who don’t share your unique vision for the future. The posters on the above sites would be more sympathetic to your opinions, and you wouldn’t get neg -1′ed so much.
Please, enjoy your new websites. You’re welcome – public service is what I do. Goodbye and good luck !
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:53 pm)The accent is on reducing consumption of petroleum. Once Americans realize how many dollars are saved on not using petroleum and how this new found wealth will bolster our economy, the trend to EV technology will gain momentum.
Any label they adopt should make clear how much savings there is in gallons not consumed. Another way of seeing this result is identification of those vehicles that cost less to operate because they use less petro. A label that shows a ranking of vehicle by how many gallon per year is used, is exactly what is needed.
At the same time, the label should contain enough information to determine the cost of a trip. I voted for Label 2 PHEV- Extended Range Electric (series) Type because it does all the things I just mentioned. For a long time, petroleum has been the main fuel for automobiles. New fuels have basically been liquid sold in gallons. Because of that the MPG factor has and will be standard until the day comes when we no longer use liquid fuels.
As we move away from petroleum, we need a yard stick to rate progress. Gallons per year is a measure that would give us the ability to judge how the new models sold permit us attaining the goal. On the other hand, gallons per year does not allow as to determine how much fuel we need during a planned trip. MPG estimated tells exactly, through simple calculation, our reduced consumption of liquid fuel. That estimated MPG for the use of X number of Kw is easy to use. If, as I believe, the public will realize that reduction of petroleum is important and they adopt such a paradigm, MPGe has merit. Any prospective new car buyer can look at such a label with MPGe and say this car will reduce petroleum consumption more than that car. And after taking other factors, such as quality, features, and appearance, for example, finally make their decision on which car to buy. JMHO.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Aug 31st, 2010 (7:56 pm)What’s a calculator?
+6
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:02 pm)Thought for the evening:
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:03 pm)Congratulations!
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:07 pm)Harrier I like your sticker except for the combined mileage. I’d prefer a chart based on distance driven. See below
(I didnt have time to make it pretty)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:11 pm)The answer to that question is easy.
The Toyota Prius and PHV Prius
The Nissan Leaf
are two that come to mind. Still side by side, I would immediately choose the Volt for the first test drive based solely on appearance. Quality of exterior/interior, features of each car, etc. would also be considered. JMO, the Volt would then be the measure of what to surpass. I don’t think they will come close.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:12 pm)I submit my getting a negative vote on what I thought was just a simple answer in comment #234 as an example of someone thinking I deserve negative votes for merely posting anything.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:13 pm)Now if Arnold would permit EV’s to operate without a front license plate. I sent an email to the California EPA asking that the front plate law be changed. Besides not having the State manufacture millions of front plates. EV’s (and all cars involved) will run at a higher efficiency.
30 million cars getting more MPG will really add up. Higher effciency and cleaner operation. Isn’t this the goal? Then do it.
=D-Volt
-8
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:14 pm)They have done this before, with an Epsilon platform car. I believe it was the Saturn Aura vs the Camry and Accord. I didn’t know they wanted the dealers to pony up for the other car, though, and I don’t know if there was a similar requirement for the Saturn dealers. In any event, they’d probably lease or rent, rather than buy outright.
-9
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:15 pm)That unwelcome message is counter-productive.
The point has always been to quickly electrify the mainstream, ending traditional vehicle production but not necessarily delivering the purity of an absolute. Using a modest amount of combustable fuel is just fine.
What are the goals you wish to achieve, where only this particular configuration of Volt is acceptable?
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:17 pm)This mangle of posts has to rank as the most vile I think I have read for quite some time.
Also, the number of posts by a few of you guys is extreme (no life?).
I would vote for a limit to number of posts any one person can post per topic. That way, people will put more thought into each post and not just spew hate and ignorance.
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:18 pm)The tax rebate for the Prius was $3150. A Prius owner whining about tax credits for EVs is asinine. Here’s a page that lists all the vehicles that were eligible for tax credits. Let’s see, of the hundred or so vehicles that were eligible for a tax rebate, your beloved Toyota has not one, not two, but THREE vehicles on the list — Prius, Highlander, and Camry. http://www.groco.com/readingroom/tax_hybridcars.aspx
And how about “Cash For Clunkers”. The Prius worked that one, didn’t it.
So you’re in the idiotic position of sucking down tax credits right and left and then complaining about GM buyers getting credits? You are too too much.
-14
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:19 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:20 pm)Have you guys seen this? Volt is now in China.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS218192175220100831
Interesting things to me were
– It will be a Chevy not a Buick
– It will have Onstar (first time outside the US)
– A product made in the USA will be sold to China
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:21 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:26 pm)kdawg: Have you guys seen this? Volt is now in China.
GM could sell 100,000 Volts in China this week if they were available to ship. 50k in South America. 20k in Australia…ect.
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:26 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:27 pm)I hate to say it, but the Volt is really three cars. Electric only if you plug it in and practice range control. Or “Hybrid” if you fail to plug it in. Then finally it is EREV with a very variable mileage depending on distance traveled.
The Volt may need an i-pad for a sticker so all of these parameters could be explored. Or is this what “smartphone interactive” is?
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:28 pm)Ran out of edit time.. i’d also change the MPGe to KWh/mile or $/mile.
-12
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:28 pm)(click to show comment)
+6
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:32 pm)Blah, blah, blah…your Prius comparisons are a wasted effort because you don’t factor in the Volt being much more of a car than the Prius. Performance and handling, the Prius won’t be able to come close to the Volt. Start thinking BMW 1-series as to what class car the Volt will be compared.
The Volt is going to be seen by car experts as superior to the Prius in so many more ways than you realize – or want to admit. The day will soon come and you’ll see.
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:36 pm)I’m a big Leaf supporter BTW. I think it’s great.
The Prius? Not really. I keep saying it’s a complete loser and here is why: No one buys a Prius because it looks good or is super comfortable or has great acceleration. They buy it because it gets the best MPG. So what happens when a product with one major selling points is eclipsed by other products? It goes away. That’s just the way products work.
Applied here, this means that as soon as the Prius is no longer is the MPG champ the main reason for buying the Prius doesn’t hold anymore. If you want to know what being second or third in a market that is based on one metric means, just look at how the Honda Insight is doing. Personally I know people who own a Prius. They’re not necessarily dumping them, but they’re not planning on buying another one either, and a couple are trying to figure out if they can get out of the lease because they’d rather have a Leaf or a Volt.
My prediction is in six or seven years the HSD Prius will no longer be sold in NA. Could be later. Probably not sooner. But as soon as the Leaf and Volt start being delivered to customers the Prius’ raison d’etre is gone. Hybrid technology will not go away, but it will become integrated into cars with other selling points rather than being the selling point of a vehicle whose appeal is primarily dedicated to the technology.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:37 pm)The Volt is quite a bit more than the common Buick. China sales seem to be doing well on these.
=D-Volt
The Volt lurks:
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:42 pm)Just for fun I aimed my phone at the sticker posted above, low and behold. The electric range of the Volt is 47.4 miles City and 45.6 Highway with a combined range of 46.8 miles! Range is calculated at standard atmospheric conditions at sea level. Range depleted mileage is calculated 57.2 mpg city and 55.4 mpg highway.
Ain’t technology great?
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:48 pm)The label should have three mpgs for plug in evs.
mpg for 40 miles per day…. 60 milesper day and 80 miles per day.
Then cost per year for the three. That’s it.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:51 pm)Thanks guys for the heavy negative voting, made getting through these comments go a lot faster.
I’m disappointed in the November 11th production start date. I had been pinning my hopes on November 1st, and fantasizing about a little earlier. I will be meeting up with most of the extended family over Thanksgiving and was hoping to have the Volt to show to them.
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:53 pm)# 253
JEC Said:
This mangle of posts has to rank as the most vile I think I have read for quite some time.
Also, the number of posts by a few of you guys is extreme (no life?).
I would vote for a limit to number of posts any one person can post per topic. That way, people will put more thought into each post and not just spew hate and ignorance.
If they do that, they should also limit each post to five lines of text. JMO
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:55 pm)(click to show comment)
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:56 pm)(click to show comment)
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:56 pm)(click to show comment)
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (8:58 pm)(click to show comment)
-9
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:06 pm)I’m sure they did well, but I thought the real winner was Hyundai.
And not a $40k car. Who wudda thunk ?
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:07 pm)(click to show comment)
+6
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:16 pm)Control or civility?
Keep up the good work. The Volt deserves a better crowd than the Prius people that can’t afford one. Buy a Prius, use gas, buy a Volt and you don’t.
Volt guys, just keep posting and ignore the nonsense. If everyone bought a Prius we would save half of our petroleum. If everyone then traded in their Prius for a Volt we would save ANOTHER 75% of our petroleum.
Jeez, those prius guys are more annoying than mosquitos.
-9
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:27 pm)I live on Earth. How about you? I am familiar with the tax credit because I bought mine in May 2006. Where were you and what were you driving?
FYI, the $3,150 tax credit started in 2006. 8 months later, it was cut in half (due to the sale volume reached) to $1,575. 5 months later, it went down to $787 and then phased out beginning Oct 2007.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/tax_hybrid.shtml
2004-2009 Prius model is rated at 46 MPG. A comparable mid-size Camry is rated at 25 MPG. Civic is a compact car like the Volt. Apples and Oranges.
Without providing calculation for the Volt, you simply claimed the subsidy for the Volt is a bargain? Back up your claim. You still have not provide the source of your claim regarding the 5x emission and 3x consumption.
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:29 pm)“These cars are not competitors – they are on the same team. ”
Except that one is sold only in the US and if sold in Japan will have a huge tariff put on it.
The other will be sold in the US and Japan with huge subsities in both countries.
But remember the Japanese put huge tariffs on US cars because they are not competitors.
-9
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:40 pm)I am here for constructive discussion, not to change anyone’s mind. I don’t know about you but I learn from these discussions. It made me research to backup my statement and the process makes me a more knowledgeable person.
It appears your message (of trying to change other’s mind) is more suitable to Jackson and his soldiers. I ain’t joining his pity party and I know there are many readers here that can think independently and are open to facts.
-8
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:41 pm)Another claim that absolutey cries out for realism.
10K Volts in 2011.
30K, maybe 45K in 2012.
No commitment thereafer but GM could produce 60K per year. By 2014, there could be maybe 200K Volts on the road.
Out of about 160 million cars. Even if they used no gas (s-u-u-u-r-e), it’s not going to cut our automotive use of gas by half, let alone our national domestic use of oil (oil is used for plenty of other things).
Further, the Volt is a 4-passenger sedan (stroke of genius that, when everything else in the sedan category holds 5) and it’s priced w-a-a-a-y beyond the norm for a sedan.
In other words… cutting fuel consumption in half replacing Volts with Priuses… not happening.
Shucks, GM can’t even build as many Volts as Toyota can build Priuses and you seem to think Toyota (which has, so far, been most ambitious in electromotive personal transportation) is just going to stand still.
It is to laugh.
-8
Aug 31st, 2010 (9:56 pm)Gen1 Insight got more MPG than the Prius with the same price ($19,994). It was not practical 2 seater but the Prius was. The point is, the “better” car has to be as practical or more to take away Prius’ MPG halo. You can tune the car to have extreme MPG but the balance of cost and benefit has to be maintained or improved. Volt costs 2x more than Prius and it is a 4 seater compromised car that actually emit more pollution and use more energy to run it. It appears to be a waste of Lithium where it can be used more wisely.
Gen1 Prius did not get any incentive but it managed to succeed, despite Insight’s higher MPG. Volt is getting $7,500 incentive starting from Gen1. I wish Volt a lot of luck because it will need it and I am American company to succeed.
With the nationalist ideology aside, I support HSD because it is the most cost effective solution to cut down on foreign oil dependence and lower the emission. It is not costing tax payer anything now. By looking at the results (not ideology), America is benefiting a lot from HSD which makes my position and belief system an American nationalist.
+5
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:03 pm)That is the whole point that he will never get. +10 and mega-kudos! Well said.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:14 pm)I love squashing laughing mosquitos.
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:19 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:19 pm)Yes —the site software for some reason has blocked most nasaman posts for the past several days, so I started using an “alternate ego”: nasaman1. But it now seems to have re-learned that “nasaman” is OK, so hopefully my shuttle avatar and I are back to stay!
/Thnx Lyle for your help & patience with this!
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:35 pm)(click to show comment)
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:36 pm)Are you actually introducing the ‘Vette into the conversation?
Boy, are you ignorant.
+2
Aug 31st, 2010 (10:52 pm)Performance, handling, economy, comfort, technology, made in USA, etc. etc.
Volt has Prius beat on all. Welcome to the second decade of the 21st century, Toyota fanboys…..the Prius is yesterday’s news.
-9
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:06 pm)PRICE
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:07 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:09 pm)Why make up fake units?
Standard SI units for consistency.
Vehicle A (EV only): 200Wh/km (or mile if you really want to keep that :p)
Vehicle B (GAS only): 700Wh/km
Vehicle C (EV mode): 200Wh/km for __ km
Vehicle C (Gas mode): 700Wh/km for __ km
Voilà. No fake units, and consistency for comparability, especially on an international basis.
I doubt any other country would pick up MPGe. And if they did, the calculation would probably be different again, further confusing consumers as they do now.
In Canada, they love to play people on the imperial vs US gallon values stating the higher imperial MPG, when most are familiar only with the US MPG values and what they mean. So people who don’t do much research get suckered into buying a car that’s 35 MPG thinking it’s really good, when in fact it’s really only 20-something US-MPG.
-11
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:11 pm)(click to show comment)
-8
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:16 pm)Someone else brought up performance and handling. I pointed out, it has limitations. What’s your point? I mean, besides a desire to be gratuitously insulting?
As John1701a points out… Price. And you forgot passenger and cargo capacity.
“Made in USA?” Please explain, then, why Detroit lost all that market share?
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:24 pm)(click to show comment)
+6
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:39 pm)They bitch and moan about price every day. It’s the only argument they cling to. They can’t afford a Volt so obviously they can’t afford a Corvette either. And I do quite well selling Vettes, and Volts too. I’ve written up double our allocation so far and looking forward to more. Thanks for asking.
The Volt is a performance electric compared to Prius. It’s not a sports car like the Tesla. It’s not meant to be. So their sad ‘price argument’ is irrelevant. The Volt is better equipped and will out-perform the Prius. Those who can afford a Volt are going to enjoy it.
-10
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:46 pm)(click to show comment)
+8
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:49 pm)Sure, buddy. We ALL believe you. Good night.
+4
Aug 31st, 2010 (11:58 pm)My favorite car to sell was the ‘Vette. More than a few test riders/drivers could barely step out of the car without trembling knees. Honest to God, this is one helluva car. I’ve managed to introduce more than a few people to the proper way to paddle shift to keep them from looking like a dork (or you can substitute whatever name you want here) when test driving friends themselves.
As much as I didn’t like the idea of getting $5k over sticker for a Z06, the car was worth it. Still is.
To little Charlie H, I’m not being gratuitous in my insult. You were, with that petty volume argument referencing the ‘Vette.
The Prius comparison to the Volt comes from a very limited experience from behind the wheel. A couple of Prius drivers who had the pleasure of taking the Volt out for a spin, openly showed awe for all aspects of the ride quality. The Volt outclasses the Prius so much that it transcends the economy car category that the Prius is king of.
From what I have been witness to, the Prius is second rate.
-1
Sep 1st, 2010 (7:04 am)From what everybody has been witness to, the Prius sells.
I’m a realist; I’ll admit the Volt is better when it can outsell the Prius. That day is a long way off and may never arrive.
-2
Sep 1st, 2010 (7:15 am)So many negative votes in response to real-world data paints an interesting setting for Volt.
How about this from GM’s press release yesterday about Cruze, which uses the same engine that will be in Volt… not exactly what had been expected:
Cruze LS models feature a 1.8L Ecotec engine, rated at 138 horsepower (103 kW) and 123 lb.-ft. of torque (168 Nm) at 3,800 rpm. With the standard six-speed manual transmission, the 1.8L will deliver an EPA-estimated 26 miles per gallon city, and 36 mpg highway. With the available six-speed automatic, the 1.8L will deliver an EPA-estimated 22 mpg city, and 35 mpg highway.
Cruze LT and LTZ models feature a the 1.4L Ecotec turbocharged engine that delivers Ecotec 1.4L turbo, delivering 138 horsepower (103 kW) and 148 lb.-ft. of torque (200 Nm) between 1,850 rpm and 4,900 rpm. Paired with a standard six-speed automatic, the engine delivers an EPA-estimated 24 mpg city, and 36 mpg highway.
The Cruze Eco model, which goes on sale later this year, will be the most efficient model of the lineup. Eco models will feature the 1.4L turbo and a standard six-speed manual transmission. Combined with enhanced aerodynamics, weight optimization, and reduced rolling resistance, the Cruze Eco is expected to deliver a class-leading 40 miles per gallon on the highway.
Again, what are the engine efficiency expectations for Volt?
-3
Sep 1st, 2010 (7:57 am)Now *that* was funny.
Tell me, car dealer: Which do you sell more of ? lol
-5
Sep 1st, 2010 (8:03 am)One sale/city/month ? Welcome to the “new GM.”
And GM is dead. It is just a pus pocket that needs to be lanced.
-4
Sep 1st, 2010 (8:06 am)Something bad enough that “we don’t talk about it.”
GM muggles, talking about their voltemort.
-3
Sep 1st, 2010 (8:30 am)ROTFLOL.
+2
Sep 1st, 2010 (9:17 am)Once again the Feds are trying to present something to a public they consider hopelessly
inept at understanding such esoteric concepts as MPG, etc. They are trying to come up with a single number to describe something that cannot be described by a single number. They did exactly the same thing back when MPGs first came out – they had but one number, no city versus highway versus combined MPG that later came out. Of course, we all also remember that their
test loop was hopelessly invalid, resulting in estimates that often missed the mark by 30%.
Nor did they ever note what “combined” actually meant. I doubt that any two drivers in this country ever matched their situation. Two people, one 5 feet tall and one six feet tall, and the
Feds will calculate an average and claim that individuals are 5 foot six. Of course, which of trhe three commonly used averages they used won’t be noted either. Same thing here – they give range indicating 30 electric miles. We all know that’s BS, since GM consistently claimed and targetted 40 miles (including ruining their styling in the process). As must be obvious to everyone, one or two numbers cannot represent data which requires 6 or 7 or 10 or more
numbers providing range data under a variety of ambient temperature and terrain
conditions. As long as they follow this brainless method of trying to make things simple and destroying practically all relevant data, they are simply wasting taxpayers millions of dollars and producing junk. So what else is new with our incompetent and totally inefficient and undemocratic
representative government? Do what I do. Pay no attention to anything the Feds do or say.
They’re so incompetent they couldn’t do anything anyway. Ever had any dealings with the brainless twits at the IRS? If so, you know exactly what I’m talking about. If nothing more, by so
completely disregarding the will of the people, our presidents and congressfolks have created a situation that should make it patently clear to everyone that our representative government is
a sham democracy. The people, not those brainless twits in Washington and the state capitals
should decide the issues. This country hasn’t progressed very much over those folks back in Robin Hood’s day who thought that “If only we could get rid of evil King John and bring back Richard
everything would be hunky dory.” Giving representatives this much power is only asking for corruption, etc., which we now have in plentiful supply. Let’s focus our attention on the issues, not the birdbrains in Congress and the WH. Those folks’ opinions should be totally irrelevant.
+1
Sep 1st, 2010 (10:17 am)Your comments are nearly always unwelcome and counter-productive.
You are here as an obstructionist @$$h0|e.
What you guys think of yourselves is irrelevant; you may or may not be deluded on the subjects of your posts: but you are yourselves deeply deluded concerning your own motives, and methods for posting. This is painfully obvious to many. That you drag others down your personal black holes with you is inexcusable.
As for EricLG, he and Seawolf are so two-dimensional that I hope we all soon learn to see them ‘edge-on.’ Even John and Charlie have (historically) made positive comments.
+2
Sep 1st, 2010 (10:28 am)We’ve had that happen here before. It ain’t pretty. On this occasion, Lyle actually turned off voting for awhile. It’s interesting to note that prior to this, there was no concerted effort on anyone’s part to organize the regular posters to neg-out the trolls.
Yes, that is a danger. But not seeing our legitimate Volt discussions detoured down a rat-hole week after week is worth the risk of using the tools we’ve been given.
It is important to keep the “short list” as short as possible, to reduce this danger.
-3
Sep 1st, 2010 (11:08 am)Because you’re not a welcoming sort of individual, it would seem. This site has always had a low tolerance for posts that are outside the groupthink. It seems that the Volt has attracted a simple-minded outlook on life where the message of “get off oil” is regarded as some sort of Scripture and the reality that the Volt will have negligible impact in accomplishing that mission is a most unwelcome message.
Your opinion and nothing more. I just love it when people think they can get inside other’s head and read motives. You can’t.
And the reality is that GM and the Volt are receiving heavy public subsidies. The input of people who aren’t drinking the Kool-Aid is inevitable. You might just as well grin and bear it.
Disaster is looming at the polls this year and GM is going to find many enemies elected to Congress. No, they’re not my friends, either, but GM is going to have to play nice and with your heavy interest in the success of the Volt, I’d recommend you start developing a more tolerant view of criticism.
Despite your insinuations, I’ve not seen any evidence of concerted effort by the Realists to vote down particular posters. If such was done, it happened while I was away. If it occurred, it was probably well deserved. Your current organizing efforts may well beget other’s organizing efforts. As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
I upvote posts frequently to restore the Realists to view but I usually only downvote items that are particularly nasty or horribly badly informed (several recent idiotic posts on global warming got downchecked by me). Thinly disguised profanity sometimes gets a downcheck. If you can’t express yourself better than that… -1.
-2
Sep 1st, 2010 (1:23 pm)Voltbots were just following orders.
-3
Sep 1st, 2010 (2:08 pm)I posted a report from our US government (Dept of Energy). DonC came out swinging with accusation and attacking Prius with unsupported claims. Who is the @$$h0|e?
You, on the other hand do not take well, the views that disagree with yours. Instead of constructive discussion, you want to suppress our posts. I think it just adds curiosity to the readers.
Sep 5th, 2010 (5:57 am)good article, this is the stuff that keeps me going through the day. I’ve been searching around for your site after being referred to them from a colleague and was thrilled when I found it after searching for some time. Being a demanding blogger, I’m happy to see others taking initivative and contributing to the community. Just wanted to comment to show my appreciation for your work as it is very interesting, and many writers do not get acknowledgment they deserve. I am sure I’ll be back and will send some of my friends
Sep 6th, 2010 (8:50 am)The reason a sticker is needed though is because dealers know squat about their product. I still can’t believe the gov’t mandated that dealers remain open. This is getting sooooo old. But, I can’t believe the level of incompetence dealers have about their product. Would we buy a computer this way? Some probably do – and then they wine when they find out they could have gotten a better deal and a better computer. I think dealers should be mandated to have a computer of all brands, even competitors, that show mpgs mpges and how much it costs to buy the car. Not all Americans have access to computers, and then there are some who do but never thought to check the internet for vehicle comps. I still can’t believe how many people don’t know what the Volt is! Even our local dealer in Michigan thought a Volt was a hatchback version of the Cruze.
Sep 12th, 2010 (8:22 am)Wonderful piece of writing and definitely helps with becoming familiar with the topic better.