Freshly back from my trip to Detroit where I was named to the Volt Consumer Advisory Board, and new news has already started to break.
After more than three years of debate on how large the Volt’s gas tank is, the real number has finally materialized.
One of my fellow advisory board members Colin Summers of California, who is a former EV-1 driver, was able to extract this detail from someone he ran into at our drive event.
“The gas tank on the Volt is 9.3 gallons,” he writes.
At no point has any official Volt team member or engineer confirmed this value to me in the past, and it is expected that we advisory board members will figure it out anyway once we take possesion of our cars in a few weeks.
After pointing out Colin’s report, I was able to confirm this number is indeed true.
It still doesn’t exactly tell us miles per gallon in charge-sustaining mode though as we don’t know total gas range. GM says it will be at least 300 miles, but perhaps more. At 300 miles, charge sustaining combined MPG would be 32.
We need to realize this inoformation is not as important as we think though. The Volt is really about the total car experience and the fact that the majority of driving will be done on electricity alone.
Source (Voltaday)
This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 29th, 2010 at 8:36 am and is filed under Efficiency, Fuel. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+12
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:40 am)GREAT —I’ve just scratched off one of my 26 questions I took to my test drive in NYC this March!
/ Anyone interested in the remaining questions, some others of which have also been answered, will find the full list at: http://gm-volt.com/2010/04/02/gm-volt-reader-test-drives-the-nasaman-report/
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:46 am)There are those who will cry that the charge sustaining combined MPG of 32 is not good enough but like we all know, most of the driving will be in battery depletion mode. So this is no big deal, IMHO.
+6
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:47 am)I’m still betting on 34. I don’t want to change any of my marketing materials.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:50 am)32 mpg (or anything close) would be an entirely conventional number. I’m sure some will be disappointed, though I’m not really troubled by it. The number is not shocking given the extra weight from the batteries, but it really points out that the revolutionary part of this car is the primary reliance on electricity for fuel, and not advancements in aerodynamics or other net factors.
+18
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:57 am)The charge sustaining MPG is irrelevant.
I have NEVER understood the fascination with this number.
Do some math; make some assumptions; and see the gas usage effects of CS 30mpg to CS 45mpg. It is a red herring.
If you drive in CS mode enough that this number matters, then you probably shouldn’t have bought the Volt to start with. Not to mention, at that mileage level, a LEAF wouldn’t work for you either.
+15
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:00 am)I find this to be disappointing, and I really don’t understand it.
After all, the ICE is only connected to the generator, not the accelerator pedal and therefore should be tuned to operate at maximum efficiency. If all the ICE is doing is powering the generator, then why is the gasoline consumption so high?
I really expected the CS gasoline consumption to be much better than this. I was expecting the mid 40 range. After all, if the Eco-Cruze can get 40+, then why can’t the Volt do the same or better?
It is not like this would kill the deal for me, as my personal gasoline consumption for my driving patterns would go from my estimated 1 gallon per week to 1.5 gallons per week, but still this is not what we have been told by numerous GM execs over the last three years.
Or do we really believe the 300 mile range that we have been told about as well? Is it going to be 400+ or 250? This raises serious questions about the believability of all released information, IMHO.
Sorry if I am Mr. Grumpy today, but this needs to be said………..
NPNS
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:04 am)Finally, closure on the tank size … and partial closure on the mpg.
I feel a little better.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:07 am)To really have the bragging rights of leapfrogging the Prius’s technology, GM has to equal or surpass the Prius MPG in the ICE mode. From this breaking news, they didn’t even come close to it, and I find that very disappointing! Now we can expect lots of negative news of the Volt.
Most people want a car that can be used for long trips that gets great gas mileage, and if it can drive 40 miles on battery power, that’s a plus and consumers will pay extra for such a car. But, if the Volt get’s only in the 30’s in the ICE mode, it will be a tough sell. That’s reality!!
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:11 am)If the 50 mpg bogey in CS mode still applies, and with 40 miles AER, the range becomes approximately 500 miles.
If GM is using HCCI, which I predict they are, than this will increase to about 600 miles of range.
This should make Nasaman and Rashiid happy!
+18
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:12 am)Jim,
I think it’s a pretty huge leap to go from “the tank is 9.3 gallons” directly to “the gasoline consumption is so high.”
Maybe. Maybe not. But the fact remains, CS mode mileage is simply STILL NOT KNOWN! And it’s CERTAINLY not yet known for all the various possible combinations of speed, driving conditions, etc. The example Lyle gave is nothing more than that – an example.
>> Sorry if I am Mr. Grumpy today, but this needs to be said…
No worries… it happens to everybody from time to time!
EDIT: Ninja-edited about four times. Couldn’t make up my mind on the wording. Mea culpa.
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:13 am)Not as bad as the day when we learned the price of the volt, a bit of a stinger, but who knows , maybe GM will surprise us and tell us that the total distance on one tank of gas will be 372 + 40 elec. = 412 miles.
-24
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:21 am)(click to show comment)
+13
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:23 am)I disagree with people who say the CS mpg number doesnt matter,
I was really hoping for 40mpg in CS, 32 mpg seems fairly poor.
Still waiting for real mpg numbers not an estimate.
At 32 mpg thats 2 Gallons to go 104 miles, same as a 51 mpg car, good but at 40mpg it would go 120 miles, same as a 60mpg car.
Russ:
The 300 mile range is the Gas only range, they have stated the total gas and electric range will be at least 340 miles
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:24 am)When we get the full specifications, we will probably see weight numbers that are contributing to the lower than expected mileage.
+14
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:24 am)Although I’m disappointed with Volt MPG in CS mode, I’m glad GM is the first to build an electric extended range vehicle because I know, with their expertise, they will improve on it.
We need to make vehicles like this so we can get off oil.
Thanks GM for being bold enough to be the first!
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:25 am)The Fireman’s magazine article said that the tank was 9 gallons, consistent with the 9.3 gallon number. It also said that in CS Mode the range was 400 miles.
Hard to know what a real range would be because there are many different drive cycles, and each one will produce a different MPG, but we’ll soon see. I’m staying with 44.4 MPG though, as Lyle says, the number is not terribly important. The more important number will be what Lyle and the other members of the advisory board get in the real world. My guess on that is something around 500 MPG given that, as a dedicated group of EV enthusiasts, they’ll likely charge more than once a day.
Bill Nye will be an interesting case study. He has said that he rents when he needs to drive further than his EV range allows, and that, while he as has to do this with some consistency, renting isn’t any big deal. It should be interesting to learn how he feels about renting when he doesn’t have to do it any more.
+5
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:27 am)Until you know the range you don’t know the MPG number. My guess is that your guess about MPG will not be that far off.
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:28 am)I agree, Corvette Guy! Whether it’s 30 or 40 mpg, it won’t matter much. I look forward to no-gas driving, free of range anxiety.
+5
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:32 am)So if the MPG in CS Mode turns out to be 45 MPG will you buy one? 43 MPG? 42.8 MPG? What number are you looking for?
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:42 am)Yes, posting seems to have some hiccups this morning. I recommend puttin’ the post on your clipboard before submitting.
In any event, you can alwa—…. bzzt / *no carrier*
+15
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:43 am)It’s irrelevant if you never take a long trip. Of course if you never take long trips what’s the point of range extension?
It’s not irrelevant. How can energy and fuel consumption of a vehicle be irrelevant?
+27
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:45 am)I think there are a lot of unwarranted assumptions being made.
Folks are:
1. Taking the 9.3 gallon capacity number,
2. Making an assumption that 300 miles in CS mode is the gospel truth,
3. Doing the math, and
4. Prounouncing themselves totally disappointed.
I for one suspect that GM has been conservative in its range pronouncements and that it actually will be more than 300 miles.
Call me an optimist, but until Lyle and the 14 others start compiling real-world data, I think all ths breast-beating is a premature.
+9
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:47 am)The Volt was not meant for someone that commutes 79,000 miles per year. Enough said.
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:58 am)That always seems to happen when a new post is uploaded.
I’m thinking it might have something to do with browser cache because when I switched computers the last time it happened, the problem went away.
In other words, something is being persisted on your local machine causing the post to fail some checks. Possibly the html validity checks. (If you put something like an ending div in your post, it will fail every time.)
+6
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:58 am)GM REALLY NEEDS some REALLY GOOD news before their IPO and since the CS mileage is pretty much the last unknown that might be that good news that will help them have a successful IPO. remember that Andrew Farah used to say that the CS mileage is over 50.
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:00 am)If you take an occasional long trip, why on earth does it matter? Does it matter to you now? Do you buy a car now on the basis of fuel mpg on the occasional long trip? NO!
That’s insane.
If you take many, many routine long trips, then maybe the Volt isn’t the way for you to go. Buy something else. If you don’t like the Volt, move on already.
The point of the range extender is to eliminate ALL range anxiety in all extreme conditions, not carry around excess, EXPENSIVE battery capability that is rarely used, and to make the car useable in ALL situations, even the rare ones.
Why do we have to go over this constantly?
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:03 am)I was told that the tank was 9.5 gallons; however that’s really close so maybe it was a generalization. What really matters to me, is the overall MPG and the cost per mile to operate the vehicle after purchase price, insurance, fuel, maintenance, etc. I have a 70 mile commute each day so I will be using CS mode every day. Factor in the extended time that one needs to use the AC here in Arizona and my EV range will probably suffer. I manage to get 21-22 MPG with my Ford Mustang GT in stop and go traffic so I’ll probably do pretty well in a Volt.
Off topic:
Has anyone reserved their personalized license plates with a volt theme?
-1
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:03 am)+1 x 10
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:03 am)I fail to see what weight has to do with it since you’re talking inertia. Since the ICE doesn’t directly drive the wheels, inertia is not a factor.
We have heard numbers between 3500 and 3900 pounds curb weight (although nothing official). This is close to other cars in this class.
-8
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:04 am)Normally, there is one gallon is for the reserve. 300 miles / 8.3 gallons still come out 36 MPG using premium gas.
This falls short of the 50 MPG the concept Volt was “sold” with.
-23
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:07 am)(click to show comment)
-9
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:09 am)I was expecting CS mode fuel economy to be about 38mpg. However, it’s looking more and more likely that CS mode fuel economy will be, disappointingly, in the low 30′s.
Of course, the CS mode oil-based fueleconomy is of no interest if you never go more than twenty miles from home. But I’d like to know, who does that?
Of course, if you’re perfectly OK with using MORE oil-based fuel under some circumstances, then the CS mode oil-based fuel economy isn’t a problem. However, if you REALLY care about reducing use of oil-based fuel, enough to spend $41K ($33.5K of your money and another $7.5K of MY money), then why wouldn’t you care about reducing oil-based fuel in all circumstances?
In other words, someone who considers reduction of use of oil-based fuel important enough to spend extra money on an EV, yet is still rational, would naturally recognize the need for a second vehicle to reduce oil-based fuel use in all circumstances.
Once one understands that a second car is necessary, on account of the low CS mode fuel economy, why not buy the optimal EV, which would be the Leaf? It has much longer EV range, so those dedicated to electric mode can use the car electrically in many more situations and the price is lower, so one can more readily afford the “out of town” vehicle.
For anyone surveying the situation rationally, the Volt is going to be a very tough sell.
+11
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:09 am)I agree with most others here that CS mpg is of minimal consequence —unless, on average, the Volt is driven much farther daily than 50 or 60 miles. But until we know what one or more of the new CAB members actually measures, it’s all rather akin to the famous ancient debate about the number of teeth in a horse’s mouth. How about waiting until the measurement is actually done?
Meanwhile, I recall many reports over an extended period of time that the Volt’s tank was only 6 gals. And many other reports (from GM) that the AER would be “up to 40 miles”, more or less typical of marketing phraseology. Now that we know the tank size was long understated by 55% (6.0×1.55=9.3), it seems plausible to me that GM may also be understating the CS mpg by saying the Volt’s range with a fully charged battery and a full tank is “up to 340 mi”. If so, and if we also assume 340mi is understated by 50%, isn’t it possible the actual average range could be 340×1.5 = 510mi, which would make the AER = 510/9.3 = 54.8mpg?
/Go ahead, call me a “mathematical optimist”, but I’m really just trying to “decode” marketing phraseology, and that’s not easy!
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:11 am)And if the range is 400 miles then the MPG number is 48.19. IOW division when you’re guessing at the numerator can’t produce a very reliable number. This doesn’t seem a difficult concept to me but then again I don’t worship at a car shrine.
-10
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:11 am)(click to show comment)
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:11 am)Again. No they don’t. The EPA sticker is all that matters.
-calculations (with unknown variables yet. lol.) don’t matter
-guesses don’t matter
-someones real-world personal mpg doesn’t matter (unless there’s thousands of them)
All that really matters is how many gallons of gasoline are used in a month-year-lifetime vs Prius. Volt will blow Prius and all others away handily.
+5
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:14 am)I agree and have always thought for marketing reasons and keeping the VOLT as a “No Sacrifice” or at least minimal sacrifice car realitive to it’s competition, leads me to believe GM has a vested interest in 400 miles of total range. I think the VOLT will have competitio, and MPG will be part of that. If you can buy a Ford Fusion Hybrid, Honda, Toyota, etc. thats larger with 40 + mpg for less money people will do it. The initial “No Gas” crowd is an awesome group of people of which I’m a big part of, but I don’t think thats a sustainable consumer market year after year after year. Don’t get me wrong they will sell ALOT of cars, but they can crush their competitors if they get 35 + mpg with a 400 mile of range.
Just my gut feel..
-10
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:15 am)(click to show comment)
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:21 am)Roger that, NM. Decoding the market-speak isn’t just “not easy,” it’s probably not all that worthwhile. I mean, seriously, whom do you really trust — the marketeers, or the engineers?
>> How about waiting until the measurement is actually done?
Now there’s some radical thinking!!
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:21 am)The above phrase should of course be corrected to read, “the CS mpg = 510/9.3 = 54.8mpg?”
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:22 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:22 am)One spec GM has given us is the high and low initial battery range. The high battery range being 1.6 times longer than the low.
When applied to CS:
The low, driving uphill in Winter, is about 28 mpg CS.
Driving in most favorable conditions 28×1.6= 48 mpg CS.
In ordinary driving conditions 28 + (1/2 of the high/low difference) 10 = 38 mpg CS
This sounds reasonable. CS may be higher given the sophisticated power management system on the Volt. I am sticking with 38 mpg for the average driver. As mentioned numerous times before. CS mode may be in effect for only an hour per month. Yielding close to 1000 mpg.
=D-Volt
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:24 am)I thought this table might be useful, it shows the real world MPG
based on CS mode MPG and miles driven between plugging in the Volt
it assumes a 40 mile all electric range before switching to CS mode
”
50 75 100 125 150 miles driven
CS mpg
30 150 64.29 50 44.12 40.91
32 160 68.57 53.33 47.06 43.64
34 170 72.86 56.67 50 46.36
36 180 77.14 60 52.94 49.09
38 190 81.43 63.33 55.88 51.82
40 200 85.71 66.67 58.82 54.55
”
formatting looked great in edit mode, but doesnt seem to work good in the final display
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:27 am)It’s possible that the 9.3 gal is the physical gas tank max capacity, but the “actual” fuel capacity is much lower since the tank won’t be completely full or used down to the last drops (and it is fancy and pressurized). Thus the 310 miles of extended range could be based on 7/9 of the gallons in the tank or something like that, since it would be a bit unreasonable to quote a range based on complete usage of all gas in the tank. From not-quite-full to the low fuel light = 310 miles… or is it actually 9.3 gal? 310/7 = 43 mpg…
Or am I just overly optimistic?
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:32 am)Agreed.
People don’t generally buy cars based solely on mpg. Buying a car is an emotional purchase not a rational one for most folks.
I, for one, place mpg close to #10 or so on the list of things to check, but, not the things that matter to a purchase decision. All new cars (even HP ones) get reasonable mpg in 2011.
Even if Volt got like 16mpg in CS mode (what my current car gets on average), I still would buy one because of the EV mode. My average mpg would still be 250+ with my driving distance.
-2
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:33 am)“GM says it will be at least 300 miles, but perhaps more. At 300 miles, charge sustaining combined MPG would be 32.
We need to realize this inoformation is not as important as we think though. The Volt is really about the total car experience and the fact that the majority of driving will be done on electricity alone.”
I imagine for the Volt superfans a MPG of 25 would probably be OK. However, some people like to drive for distance on the weekend and this gives them pause. I think to the fans who can afford it, it is a big gadget on wheels. I don’t mean to throw a wet blanket on you guys but weren’t you hoping for something on the high side of 40.
This is looking more and more like an electric-gas gadget-filled sports car.
+5
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:34 am)That’s certainly no bigger a crime than all the aggressive pessimism that some people disgorge around here!
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:35 am)That sounds like a way for GM to get closer to a higher mileage number.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:35 am)Very important point —they MUST leave an air cushion in the tank to allow pressurization. So, combining your “optimism” here and mine in #33, I still think it is very likely that 50mpg is actually realistic …and that GM will pull an engineering & marketing coup d’état here after all!
+7
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:37 am)I did some math, with the one caveat that I used round numbers when they were friendlier. The net result won’t be much different, so I’m comfortable with the result.
I don’t know what kind of business you’re in, but in the one I’m in the notion of “operating expenses” (or TCO) is a fairly important factor for our customers. It’s not just the cost of the equipment, but it’s the actual recurring costs of operating the system that we monitor. And we monitor that as a total – of course we look at the piece parts, but it’s an optimization problem of a total. Local optima are not necessarily the best choice, though generally a Pareto analysis will help.
So I did a Pareto of my daily commute and gasoline expenses are a significant aspect. So is an amortized maintenance cost and other elements, but it’s hard to estimate what those are going to be so let’s just focus on the current facts.
My daily commute is about 75 miles. My current vehicle is ~7 years old with ~120Kmiles – a GM brand but it’s an import (think Sweden). It gets about 24MPG as an average over my daily commuting usage. I end up putting about 13 gallons of gas into it every 4 days. That makes my current effective MPG 23.
Now consider the VOLT.
For my daily commute, the first 40 miles each day will be in battery depletion mode and the remaining 30 will be in charge sustaining mode. 35 miles @ 32 mpg = 1.09375 gallons consumed.
NOTE 1. My entire trip to work is gas-free. If I happen to have an electricity source there, I can have a gas-free trip home. My daily commute is now an infinite MPG. This is a good argument for LEAF and other all electrics.
NOTE 2: Without an electricity source for a mid-day charge, I’ll use 1.09375 gallons of gas each day. 9.3 gallons/1.09375 gallons/day = 8.503 days. So let’s turn that into 8 days with a cushion. In 8 days, I’ll use 8.75 gallons of gas. 8 days = 600 miles. 600 miles on 8.75 gallons of gas = an effective MPG of 68.7 mpg.
Back to the TCO, with the VOLT my daily amortized commuting expenses due to gasoline drop from 3.25 gallons/day to 1.09 gallons/day – a reduction of ~66%. This effectively drops the cost of gasoline from $3 to $1. I haven’t gone back to the earlier analysis, but I think this will bring it more into par with some of the other maintenance/wear item costs that get rolled in.
Is it more interesting now?
Ron C
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:37 am)I see we’re getting the trolls out on this one. (And any discussion around Volt’s yet unpublished specifications.)
Probably best to (-) and not respond to them.
-26
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:41 am)(click to show comment)
-18
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:45 am)(click to show comment)
+5
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:47 am)So ….. worst case we are looking at 32 MPG in CS mode? Right on target with other cars in its size class (Cruze included). BUT you can go 40 miles BEFORE the engine even kicks in. Why all the hate this morning?
The ONLY problem I see with the Volt is the cost and MY budget. Still needs to get to around $25k before I look at buying one. (Lease is NOT for me)
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:47 am)Good point, emotion is always a factor and for some is probably the only factor other than price. When deciding to purchase or not purchase this car (and any car for that matter), I’ll be weighing many factors including cost per mile, environmental impact, durability, performance, appearance, and resale value. When it comes to appearance, the Volt beats both the Leaf and the Prius, in my opinion.
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:47 am)There is a video in youtube also on the volt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4mA0A2OHNU
On gas tank and 300 miles i am still confused, i still expects it to be above 50mpg
+20
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:50 am)Rant On.
I guess my real problem with all of this is this dribbling of information that leads to wild speculation. Why doesn’t GM just release the info we all know they have on this vehicle and let the chips fall where they fall?????
This car is to be in production in two months. What exactly are they waiting for? We are trying to figure out what this car will do, based on minimal information, and that is just ridiculous. I guess I am just getting tired of being treated like an infant by GM. They know what our questions are. Nasaman has articulated them quite well. Why can’t someone just sit down with Lyle for an hour and answer them one by one??? Lyle deserves that treatment, and so do we…………..
And if Lyle does not have an NDA, as he has said, then we will know within 35 days anyway!!! We all know that his car will be running non-stop for the time he has it in his possession…..
I really believe Lyle a lot more than I believe GM press releases at this point.
Rant off.
-9
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:50 am)So, either you can never drain the tank completely (7 gallons useable) or you can’t fill the tank completely (7 gallons useable)?
When did it become industry practice to advertise a 9 gallon tank that can only usefully hold 7 gallons?
Did you bother to look at GM’s web site to see how they treat “range?” I did.
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:53 am)I’m eager to see real world data posted from Lyle here as soon as he get’s his Volt.
In order to calcule the real MPG on CS mode, simply deplete the battery, make sure the tank is full, reset the mile-counter, drive (city/hw/mix 50+ miles – warm engine), refill tank to top and write down the amount of gas needed and the distance you have done (based on the Volt meter).
If CS MPG still remains below 45 MPG, I fear it will be a no go for me. My personal interest is about the efficiency of the design (full serial approach), and not on showing the ability to design complex stuff and wave a flag.
And below this mark, I can’t see the reason I should invest so much in a complex car, except if it is part of a hobby, which will then become an expense.
I always believed an efficiency-proven serial approach would raise new opportunities, like enabling a basic 5m-Volt (5 miles on a little battery and/or capacitors), and leave the option of 40 Miles as an upgrade option for those who can afford and when they would need it. You keep both short and long distance traveller’s world happy.
My penny
Have a nice day
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:55 am)The Prius would save you a couple bucks for that occasional road trip (over 130 miles or so), but it’s going to cost you a couple bucks more PER DAY (while commuting) compared to the Volt. Which would you rather have?
If you’re leasing a Volt you REALLY have nothing to worry about.
12000 miles per year = 231 miles per week
If you drive 6 days out of the week, then
38.5 miles per day (on average) is all you’re allowed without going over your annual mileage allotment.
On the subject of range:
All vehicles are designed with a minimum of 300 miles range, so it’s no surprise that GM is using that number to throw around. Even if they never quoted a number, we could use 300 as the rock bottom range estimate, because that’s what everyone in the industry uses. I’m with others who suspect that the actual range is somewhat greater than 300 miles in CS mode…by how much?… we’ll have to wait to find out.
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:55 am)+1 X 100…..That is the basis this vehicle was designed……for people commuting less than 40 miles or close to 40 miles everyday. Enough of this CS MPG. Let us just accept that we still can drive this car without using a single drop of gasoline.
Great Volt and Great website!!!
-8
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:58 am)Give actual odometer readings a try. Using the 365 that I collected, a standard 15K per year would result in roughly 89 gallons of gas being consumed @ 38 MPG average with nightly plug-in and heater use from mid-Nov to mid-Mar.
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:09 am)Here we go with another one that doesn’t know how to calculate mpg.
You need at least three tanks of gas to calculate a good average. This levels out any variations in fuel temperature or the gas pump’s cut off thinger. Best to use the exact same pump during the same time of day.
Even then, variations in the driver’s springy-pedal use can substantially alter the mpg measured.
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:09 am)So what happens to this site after the CS mileage number is revealed?
The only big news left will be ownership experiences, sales updates, and Gen II and III developments. The most fun to me will be the latter, as it’s still all about the battery. Gen I is a breakthrough, noble effort, but just the initial shot in a long war.
Ok, the Tesla was the first shot, but it brought out the big guns of GM and Nissan.
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:09 am)Wrong! You still don’t get it. Think “Gallons-Per-Year” and you will understand:
For the VOLT
>15,000 miles per year
>First 40 miles is all-electric in Volt
>40 x 365 = 14,600 electric miles
>400 miles on CS Mode
>(400/32MPG) = 12.50 Gallons-Per-Year
>CA Electricity ~$45 per month (less in other states)
>CA Gasoline ~$3.09 per gallon (much less in other states)
>$540 + $39 = $579 per year
For the Prius
>15,000 miles per year
>50 miles-per-gallon EPA Average (I’m just being generous…)
>(15,000/75) = 300 Gallons-Per-Year
>CA Gasoline ~$3.09 per gallon
>300 x $3.09 = $927 per year
The VOLT is cleaner, greener, and cheaper to operate. Does it cover the price differential? No. But my wife and I both “Enjoy” driving cars. We don’t want to ‘baby it’ just to get high MPG’s like you would in a Prius. And we like the Style and Features of the Volt better.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:14 am)Here’s something else to consider in the discussion: As a Prius driver, I know that the manual provides very specific instructions to follow if you run out of gas. It warns you to be very careful to not run out of gas in a Prius, because not only will you be stuck on the side of the road, you may not be able to start the engine even after you refill the gas tank (if you have also depleted the traction battery by continuing driving at low speeds). How will this be different in the Volt? My guess is that such precautions will not be necessary, since this is a series hybrid as opposed to the Prius’s parallel system.
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:17 am)I think it would be: CS mpg = (510 – 40) / 9.3 = 50.5 mpg.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:18 am)Things are really starting to heat up in the EV world. We are probably 3 months away from a Car and Driver Comparison test
Volt 1.0
Cruze Eco
Ford Fiesta
Prius – Plug-In
Golf TDI
Nissan Leaf
Hope it is comprehensive and includes total cost of ownership and efficiency comparisons
Consumer Reports will probably will do a video review too.
May the Best Can Win!!
-2
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:26 am)Good analysis. No arguments.
Now do it for a CS of 40 mpg.
I bet the actual fuel cost difference is about 50 cents a day. And that’s with driving almost DOUBLE the electric range every day. If that keeps you from buying a Volt, then you can’t afford it anyway.
+7
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:30 am)Thing is, the CS number is kinda a big deal.
And it may run along socio-economic lines. See, to me, it is a big deal since I will be dishing out nearly $40k for a car that will replace my Prius. It’s very true that it’s daily usage will be 40 miles and under at my place – probably about 4 times per week. It’s the other three days that concern me – those days when my wife and family hop on the freeway to see friends and family – all who live 30-40 miles one way. I’ve always envisioned plugging in our Volt at Mom’s or my brother’s place – and getting a few kws while visiting, then stre-e-e-etching that range as far as I can ( “Here, bro, here’s 45cents for the juice” )…to get back home again.
I’m not a micrometer and calculator type – but we all will hear the Prius owners chant that we popped big bucks for a Chevy that doesn’t equal their mileage on the longer runs. We’ll be talkin’….”cumulatively, buddy, …..cumulatively…we’re leavin’ your rice charger in the dust!”…: )
So all-in-all, maybe the number isn’t HUGE – but it is very significant to real world use and acceptance.
RECHARGE!
James
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:33 am)Jim, remember the number you are looking at for the Cruze is hwy mileage, while the number for the Volt is combined mileage. Big difference.
I expect the Volt’s combined mileage to match the Cruze’s hwy mileage when it is all said and done.
-4
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:33 am)Talking about a best-case scenario… no Heater or A/C use ever.
No use of the Defroster either.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:36 am)GM Volt Articles of Interest
Went back to my GM Volt links and found the following articles. Wanted to Share….
Bob Lutz and Toyota
http://green.autoblog.com/2007/12/10/videos-bob-lutz-says-toyota-will-have-egg-on-its-face-come-east/
Bob Lutz and Global Warming
http://green.autoblog.com/2008/02/13/gms-bob-lutz-global-warming-is-a-total-crock-of-sh-t/
Bob Lutz on Hybrids
http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/06/pf/autos/detroit_gm_hybrids/
Behind GM’s Attempt to Change Its Image
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/06/AR2009060602212.html
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:36 am)In any modern car, it’s a very bad thing to run out of gas.
- any dirt or deposits will be sucked out of the tank into the pump/filter/injectors
- the pump will be dry and the system will have air in it making it very difficult to prime
- the filter will probably have to be replaced prematurely.
- excessive cranking may be needed to prime the fuel system causing undue stress on the starter motor and other systems
- during excessive cranking, there is no oil pressure. A very bad thing.
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:38 am)Children, children. You are getting way too excited. Calm down and wait patiently for the real numbers. Oh wait, did you say that Santa was just a couple of houses down? …. Oh, Oh, oh….
+5
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:38 am)Dude. He said it was California!
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:40 am)I wonder too if the gas pump is similar to ones used currently, where the gas is recirculated and used to cool the pump. In that case if too little gas is in the tank then the pump can overheat and prematurely fail.
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:42 am)Just charge it up, fill up the tank, drive till it stop and tell me the mileage. That’s the number I want to know.
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:46 am)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:46 am)I expect Volt’s combined to be at least double if not triple what Cruze’s hwy mileage is. The combined is going to include that huge city number and should be in the triple-digits.
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:50 am)The real issue is that if (a big if) you have the same ICE in the Volt, operating at the same efficiency, then the same power coming out of the output shaft is then used to turn a generator then go through an electronic control module then go to the electric traction motor. These last three things are not free, they have losses. What is hoped for is that the power coming from the Volt’s ICE is MORE than the power coming from the potentially same ICE in a Cruze because it is being operated in some optimized bands and with other tweaks for efficiency. There is no guarantee that the losses in the electrical system are less than the improved operation of the ICE, but it certainly is hoped for. I will continue to hope for close to 50 MPG.
(That would give 500 miles of range. Not too shabby.)
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:51 am)You’re correct about have a pool of sample data, and I already know this. I simply didn’t want to add more “it has to be done that way” topics after so many did, and believe it’s not necessary to say something people I assume already know.
There is one point I would like you to pay attention. I don’t want to bother about knowing if the MPG si 34.6 or 34.8. You need accurate test for it, and there are a lot of parameters to take into account. In my concern, as a user/buyer, I want to know if the average might be in the 30s, 40s or 50s. Filling the tank a few couple of times is already sufficient to answer that question.
You have to prove the serial approach is more efficient, and for that the gain in comparison with a similar-sized ICE car must be substantial.
(I apologize for my bad english)
-1
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:52 am)I worked near Anaheim for nearly 3 months. It only rained once and the temp was in the low 80′s every day. I didn’t use any gas at all except the taxi to and from the airport. The hotel was right across the street from the site.
I was trying to be funny, but, I guess it doesn’t work very well in text.
-8
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:54 am)Really? Only 40 miles on gasoline? Wow. Some days I drive down the highway for hours. Is is really realistic to have zero variability in daily miles?
-2
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:00 pm)What’s good for you may not be good for me or others, and I dare say many others. All I’m saying is that to sale the Volt in large numbers it will have to get better gas mileage in the CS mode. It’s great to have a car run on electricity for forty miles, but if a car of that price get’s only the gas mileage of a typical car, people will not buy it. I don’t know if you get that, either.
-6
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:08 pm)15000 miles in 250 commuting days is a 60 mile commute.
40/day electric is 10000 at 2 cents per mile EV = $200 electricity cost
20/day CS is 5000 at 32 mpg = 156 gallons x 3.09 = 482 gas cost
total = 682
Prius (non phev) 15000 / 50 = 300 x 3.09 = 927
Volt saves 245 / year ($50 less /year saved at MY current gas price)
This goes the other way perhaps, since one could assume weekend usage with x% AER included and a shorter commute, but it points out why the CS mpg is one essential component of evaluating Volt vs other choices in a particular drive pattern.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:08 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:12 pm)That’s true. But as nasaman has pointed out, when they said 300 miles they’ve also said the tank holds 6 gallons. Why expect only one of the two numbers to change?
At least to me it seems pretty clear that MPG will be between 40 and 50. If you want to know exactly what the MPG in CS Mode would be, at least for the City cycle, you’d spend $60 to get the SAE J1772 spec, look up the utility factor, and figure out what MPG in CS Mode would give you 230 MPG using the J1772 methodology. It’s not worth it to me because personally I’ll get 500 MPG regardless of what the CS Mode MPG is. But if it’s important to you spend the $60 and find out.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:17 pm)This would really depend on how smart purchasers are. The not so smart ones, or the ones who want to think that the car they own is still “the bomb”, will look at the MPG and think it matters. The smarter ones will do the CorvetteGuy’s analysis.
No doubt there is no shortage of dim bulbs but hopefully there will be a sufficient number of brighter ones.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:21 pm)Not true at all. If you’re rationally trying to reduce your petroleum use, it’s the delta in gallons/year that buying a Volt will achieve for you that’s important, not the delta in gallons/ trip. To put it another way, if you find yourself in charge sustaining mode a lot then the mileage in charge sustaining mode makes a lot of difference. If you find yourself in charge sustaining mode only rarely, then the difference between what a Volt gets in charge sustaining mode and what a Prius averages matters very little. That shouldn’t be hard to understand.
There are a whole lot of drivers whose driving patterns would keep them in charge depletion mode nearly all the time. The Volt should appeal to many. A bigger problem may be the cost of manufacturing the Volt and it’s effect on the retail price. That needs to come down over the course of the next few years for the Volt to have mass appeal, IMO.
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:26 pm)Methinks some of this is political. The VOLT is meant to be an innovative car that displaces gasoline with electricity. GM and Volt proponents on high, do not want consumers relying on a 45-50MPG ER CS mode for their primary transport. What would be the point of an EV that is efficiently powered by gasoline??
The CS number MUST be kept low in order to encourage AER driving. That is the VOLT’s purpose – all electric driving. We can expect to see higher numbers from CS mode with this Consumer test group Lyle is a part of. But let’s seriously consider the goal of this first mass market PHEV.
It is meant to get consumers driving an electric powered vehicle. To make them feel comfortable with the idea and process of plugging in your vehicle overnight. We do not want people thinking, “well why bother recharging my battery when I can just go fill up on gas and run around all day on that?”
CS mode is purposefully low MPG because it is meant only for intermittent use. The purpose of the VOLT is to transport the 85% commuters/drivers who travel less than 40 miles per day. That cumulative CD/CS mode yields a real world mileage on the order of 200 MPG equivalent.
-10
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:26 pm)(click to show comment)
-7
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:32 pm)There are many ways to reduce your oil consumption without spending $41K. If you’re so into it that you must spend that $41K, then you might as well really get the job done and reduce your local oil consumption to effectively zero (get a Leaf) AND reduce your long range consumption significantly (get a Yaris or something similar).
Or you could just chop your commute consumption in half by car pooling and then spend the $41K on solar panels and wind turbines.
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:34 pm)If all you’re interested in is hwy fuel economy, then go buy a Prius. Those of us that know how to calculate the benefits of owning/operating a Volt will probably do so. I think it will be a heck of a lot more fun too.
-5
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:41 pm)Lyle: First off the posting yesterday—a big congrats on GM’s recognition of your contributions to VOLT and indeed all EV’s.
If your input is correct, 9.3 galoons is a doable size. That gives a full 9 galoons to ER and mountain mode. The latter being vital to VOLT being a go-anywhere EV. Hopefully, Leadership will reverse its restraints against a full 100% driver-controlled ICE. I read sometime back an EU maker doing EV ER will give the driver this option.
Which yields the next question: What’s the range of ER mpg’s?
If it turns out Leadership winds up with a CRUZE getting 40+ mpg with turbo and VOLT gets
<40 without; GM will have blown an opportunity. More and more its clear there will be very few VOLTS on the streets in December.
GM IPO must IPO take IPO every IPO measure IPO possible IPO to IPO maximize IPO range.
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:44 pm)(click to show comment)
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:46 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:46 pm)You are complaining about an unknown. How do you jump from gas tank size to knowing the 300 mile figure is to totally empty tank and using EPA combined cycle? 300 miles could be worst case with aggressive driving til the low gas level indicator comes on. We don’t know. I am sure Lyle will perform some tests and tell us the results.
This also goes for all the other posters that jumped to the same conclusion.
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:55 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (12:57 pm)I do not pretend to be an engineer, but wouldn’t the mechanical losses of going from an ICE through a transmission, the drive shaft, the differential and then to the wheels be greater than electrical losses from an electronic control module and electric motor? Also, this ICE will be run at just a few sweet spots for highest efficiency. And If electric drive motors are as efficient as we have been told here by others (90+% – link: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/electrical-motor-efficiency-d_655.html ), then I still have a hard time understanding why they are performing at just an average rating for an ICE. I guess that is my real question.
Maybe some of the engineers here can help me get a better grip on this….
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:01 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:03 pm)With a specialized ICE the Volt could do 40mpg I think, so hopefully their will be a second generation soon. For the first generation, if people need the range extender to go far beyond 80 miles a few times a month but still drive in EV mode 70-90 percent of the time the Volt might be the right car, otherwise an EV or 50 mpg hybrid might be better.
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:07 pm)To put this in perspective, if you drove 3000 miles in CS Mode, an absurdly high number, you’d use 67 gallons of gas at 45 MPG and and 86 gallons at 35 MPG. Nineteen gallons a year is not exactly a huge number ($57 a year), and that’s a worst case scenario, especially if you are comparing it to a Prius which would use 240 gallons over 12K miles.
This is why, while I think the CS Mode MPG number will be closer to 45 MPG than to 35 MPG, I don’t see that it matters if I’m wrong.
But just as I’m sure you really didn’t buy a Prius to save on gas, I wouldn’t buy a Volt for that reason either. In both cases it’s all about the tech and, with the Volt, the EV ride.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:09 pm)Well, mechanical to electrical to mechanical to wheels turns out to be less efficient than mechanical to wheels. This is why the Prius jockeys with high mpg are the ones who never regen if avoidable. They conserve momentum and put the gasoline to direct use.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:10 pm)So I guess I will get less people giving me negative votes for my 30 mpg prediction for CS, 70 mph, highway (flat, averaged), regular gas.
Reality is closing in and as I have always argued, It doesn’t really matter because if you drive a lot of highway miles, get a diesel.
The Volt is only a few months away and it looks like a winner. Let’s hope the oil and economy gods are with us so gas prices don’t die with the coming double dip (endless running into a brick wall).
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:13 pm)The Volt does not ‘leapfrog’ the Toyota Prius. It actually does one of those “Incredible Hulk” jumps for about 60 miles and then crushes puny Japanese cars when it lands! VOLT SMASH!!!
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:14 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:18 pm)The original spec of 6 gallons and 300 miles came from the Volt web site, which has now been retired. Can’t get much more definitive than that. But why do you insist on just picking numbers you like? Lutz has said the MPG will be 40-50. The Fireman’s article, and you have to believe the author had the right figures because the technicalities are very important for what they do, said the tank was 9 gallons and the range in CS Mode was 400 miles. Why not use those numbers? Or listen to Farah when he says that 50 MPG was the target and they are on track. Or, if you really care, spend $60 and buy the J1772 report and find out.
As for the 230 MPG number, GM did get slapped down, but that was unfortunate because the slapping was done by people who were too stupid or too lazy to understand it. I’ll note that people who understood the J1772 standard weren’t doing any slapping. Personally I’m beginning to doubt that you understand J1772. Do you? And if you do, then tell me what was wrong with the 230 MPG number.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:22 pm)Nice fairy tale. The fact is that you can’t drive your Prius a block without creating pollution and spewing greenhouse gases. And that won’t change even if you “upgrade” to the plug-in. Your Prius will always use a controlled cold start every time you turn it on. Compared to a Volt, your Prius is a pollution spewing gas guzzling dinosaur. Maybe you can find a better ride?
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:24 pm)You folks might like to read this 2008 Atlantic Monthly article by Jonathan Rauch:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/electro-shock-therapy/6871/1/
In it he has conversations with Andrew Farah Volt’s Chief Engineer and reports the Volt’s Charge Sustain mode as “about 50 miles per gallon.” Read the article. It will remind you of the journey we Volt fans have been on for the last 4 years.
The Volt is the star of the automotive world according to this writer, who is less an engineer than a cultural journalist. Reminding us that this vehicle represents far more than just an electric automobile. It is a vehicle for global change.
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:26 pm)You guys are looking straight at the numbers and you don’t see it.
The VOLT design is for about 76% of American drivers who regularly cover 40 miles or less per day. The operative word is ‘regularly’. You guys keep claiming the VOLT should be the perfect car for all driving conditions for 100% of circumstances. (What’s more laughable is that you think the Prius already is!) Nobody here ever made that claim. Using the VOLT for its intended design, it just flat beats the crap out of a Prius for cutting America’s use of gasoline.
What part of going from 300 gallons per year down to 12.5 do you not understand?
-4
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:27 pm)32 mpg in CS mode? Looks like Volt advertising will be focusing on the joys of driving in battery only mode…..
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:27 pm)(click to show comment)
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:34 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:35 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:42 pm)(click to show comment)
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:46 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:51 pm)Thinking about it that way, then 90% of all the vehicles on the road [just estimating] are “toys”. Otherwise, everyone would be driving the Fiesta or some other similar small efficient vehicle.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with a toy that also helps get us off oil.
And in my personal situation, anything I buy, whether it is the Volt, a Prius, or the Fiesta, it is leaps and bounds better at gas efficiency than my current Trailblazer. So either way, it is a win for me. I just happen to like the Volt’s styling, the interior tech, and the fact that 90% of the time I’ll be driving on the battery.
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:52 pm)(click to show comment)
-16
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:56 pm)(click to show comment)
-20
Sep 29th, 2010 (1:59 pm)(click to show comment)
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:06 pm)Gas tank size is useless to us without total gas range. This goes for fans and trolls alike.
Nothing has really changed.
/out
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:26 pm)Those fretting about MPG should consider the revolutionary nature of the Volt. Prior to an EREV, we were stuck in the catch-22 of a) business won’t install charging infrastructure prior to there being electric vehicle demand for it, and b) very few people will buy electric vehicles without significant charging infrastructure in place to make driving it practical. The genius of the Volt is that it is a bridging technology that breaks this catch-22. People can buy it now. And when enough people are driving Volts, Leafs, and Plug-in Prius’s, the infrastructure will follow closely behind.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:38 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:42 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:44 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:48 pm)Guys, my posts earlier this morning weren’t making it through and I gave up.
Somebody else said it in comment #44, so go and vote that one up. PRESSURIZATION. USABLE VOLUME. That changes the numbers completely.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:48 pm)Well, it’s a thing to check off the ‘list’ anyway.
I agree that using one data item absent other data items to do calculations is just spinning your wheels.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:50 pm)Just came across a tweet with a picture of the Volt’s upper dash, apparently it has a light that shows it is plugged in and charging, it’s green. A detail I didn’t know. I’m declining posting the link because most of my posts with links don’t make it up for some reason, but just Google Chevy Volt, go to Updates on the left side, and then filter by ones with images for some nice shots people have taken recently.
+5
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:51 pm)The Volt will likely reduce gas consuption by 80-90% for most people who drive them. Is this not good enough for you? Why are you here?
Could you explain which side of the coin you see? On second thought, don’t bother. I don’t care.
+9
Sep 29th, 2010 (2:56 pm)You clowns kill me.
Premium gas is a problem?? For a car that doesn’t USE IT for 40 miles! Too funny….. a classic that comment is.
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:00 pm)That is complete and utter bs.
The US economy is 70% consumer driven. This means *all* consumption like 50″ TVs and high-end cars and boats and SUVs and $15k Wolf stoves and all the rest of the toys.
+9
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:04 pm)The Volt operates with full time electric drive to the wheels. Very good acceleration. Smooth quiet comfortable driving experience included. Whether you charge your Volt at home. Or charge your Volt at work or at the shopping center for free. Or use a solar system. The bottom line is you’re going to use no gasoline for the first 40 miles you drive. You haven’t sent your earned dollars to OPEC. You haven’t caused anyone to choke on your smoke. You may have helped a soldier protect America rather than protecting a desert pipeline in the Middle East. You may have saved an American job. You haven’t had to fight for a fueling space at the gas station.
The Volt really shouldn’t be compared to a Toyota economy car. The Volt is comfortable and quiet beyond anything prior, provides excellent torque, offers outrageous tech features standard, is stylish, and delivers triple digit MPG.
=D-Volt
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:13 pm)After doing a Google search on “Chevy Volt” followed by (update). Am surprised to see the buzz and generally positive comments concerning this vehicle. The next three months of news and feedback before launch will be exciting.
=D-Volt
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:17 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:19 pm)I have been following this blog since early 2007 and I am as enthusiastic as you can get about this car. However, Corvette Guys post about yearly mileage use of the volt vs. the prius seems to be a remarkable best case scenario unlikely to be achieved.
What are the chances you only drive 40 miles each day?
What are the chances you do not have to use heat/AC defroster reducing range?
What are the chances you don’t get stuck in traffic? (especially in California where he is from)
What are the chances you don’t have to use mountain mode? (although this is a real possibility in many states)
I was disappointed to see other posts pointing corvette guys flaws get voted down, just because they weren’t the great news we all want to read, lets keep an open mind when considering and presenting (lies, damn lies and) statistics.
I sincerely hope the CS mode comes in around 45mpg, however I’m am preparing myself for a number around 40.
Do I still want a Volt? HECK YES!!
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:19 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:20 pm)And this has exactly WHAT to do with the size of the gas tank or the CS mode ICE engine performance????
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:21 pm)A good source of information on the Volt would be:
http://media.gm.com/product/public/us/en/volt/home.html
GM, here, states “about 300 miles” and “about 350 miles” “on a full battery and tank of gas.” They had also said that the final decision on the tank size would be made closer to launch. And now we have heard that the tank size is 9.6 gallons. I like a few others believe that GM is holding the CS mileage as a trump card for just before the IPO. So far they have surpassed almost every expectation. If the CS mpg were far lower or even lower than the 50 mpg at which they were aiming, it would have been wise to let that information out early and then release the statement of AER being from 26 to 50, thereby overcoming any bad news. IMHO, all the trolls and nay stater will be swallowing their words and going into hiding when GM releases the real CS mpg.
Other interesting statements on the GM media website:
In http://media.gm.com/product/public/us/en/volt/tech.html Benefits, you will find this statement, “According to a Society of Automotive Engineers study published by GM in April 2008, the Volt will consume, on average, less than half of the gasoline compared to a plug-in hybrid and substantially reduce regulated emissions resulting from initial trip starts.”
“Chevrolet estimates that the Volt will save about 500 gallons (1,892 liters) of gasoline based on 40 miles of daily driving and 15,000 miles annually. For drivers that commute 60 miles (96 km) per day or 21,000 miles annually, about 550 gallons (2,081 liters) of gasoline could be saved.”
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:21 pm)(click to show comment)
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:21 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:22 pm)He’s talking about the light on the top of the dash that you can see through the windshield. No need to use the screens.
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:24 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:25 pm)Sounds great. Can’t wait for delivery in December.
=D-Volt
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:29 pm)I promise I’m not a troll
I read everyday but rarely comment, this was just one of the instances I felt compelled to add my 2 cents
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:29 pm)Oops. sorry. I thought you were talking about yourself and I voted -1.
my bad.
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:35 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:35 pm)He’s the troll and he’s playin’ ya.
“… a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:39 pm)I buy only from American companies. If everyone did the same, this country would be in much better shape.
-16
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:41 pm)(click to show comment)
+8
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:42 pm)Price-Price-Price. That’s the only argument the Prius trolls have. If you’re going to compare price, choose a hybrid closer to the Volt’s price:
From Car and Driver:
2010 Lexus HS250h
Base Price: $35,525 – $38,295
C/D Overview:
The first hybrid-only luxury car, the HS250h is a compact five-seater using the powertrain from the Camry hybrid. With a 2.4-liter four-cylinder and a Prius-style transmission, it’s opulent but not quick or particularly fun to drive. Think Prius with a Lexus badge and a $5000 premium.
The Volt even has this one beat, for just a few bucks more.
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:42 pm)Where pray tell do you think the report you cite provides support for your crazy statement? All I can find is that the report says is that a Volt could produce less than half the greenhouse emissions as a Prius. You keep citing this report but you never ever provide a cite to a specific page. Why is that?
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:45 pm)(click to show comment)
-9
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:46 pm)So Volt aspires to the sales volume of the HS250h?
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:49 pm)What’s hilarious about the subsidy argument is that while it was fine for US taxpayers to subsidy a Japanese car using an environmental disaster of battery made with rare earth elements from China, suddenly it’s a travesty that US taxpayers subsidize a US made car using a Korean battery.
Seems like transparent BS.
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:51 pm)Let’s say at that cost you’re spending 99.6c / kwh. Most people pay 12c or less.
80c per charge is irrelevant compared to the rest of the operating and capital expenses. It’s more like $250 per YEAR.
If you’re going to throw a number around at least make it reasonable.
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:52 pm)(click to show comment)
-16
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:53 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:53 pm)Yes the CS mpg will not matter much as far as out of pocket cost. With my yearly driving habits a CS mpg of 38 vs. 50 came out to be a 200.00 difference over 5 years and that’s taking two 1500 mile trips a year in it. Not enough to change much, as this is not the strong point for the Volt! It’s an EV without range anxiety for most applications!!!!
However if the range was over 400 miles they would have said this.
It’s looking like my predictions of 38 mpg CS mode highway (based on Cruze comparisons) are pretty darn close so far. Someone on this site said they wanted to buy my ocean front property in AZ if it was avg over 40 mpg. Well it’s in Yuma, hope you like the heat!!!!!!!!!!
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:55 pm)Anyone looking at it as “going as far as a 60 mpg car” will miss the entire nature of the Volt, with many drivers getting “nearly infinite mileage” per gallon of gas. Someone who constantly drives 120 miles before recharging probably should buy something other than a Volt.
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:56 pm)#26 MetrologyFirst
The point of the range extender is to eliminate ALL range anxiety in all extreme conditions, not carry around excess, EXPENSIVE battery capability that
is rarely used, and to make the car useable in ALL situations, even the rare ones.
Why do we have to go over this constantly?
I think the Volt will be a great car for people that can afford it and drive low to average miles. I do dissagree with your battery comment however. For one thing, the Volt hauls around a 24 kw battery and only uses about half of its DOD. The Volt also eliminates the seat for a small passenger with the large battery. I don’t see anything wrong with BEVs having large batteries at this timesince they are recycleable. Put your money where your mouth is and buy a Gen. 1 Volt, and let others pick the vehicle that is right for them.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:57 pm)I’m thinking troll. They just pull numbers out of thin air. Like $250 for electricity to charge an EV for a month. lol.
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:58 pm)(click to show comment)
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (3:58 pm)(click to show comment)
+6
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:01 pm)So, nobody ever commutes in a Lexus? I see Lexus, Audi, Mercedes, Porsche, Jaguar and an occasional Ferrari on the freeways. Just because you guys can’t afford a Volt does not mean it will not sell. They just will not be sold to you. The Lexus is a nice car. Now there is an American competitor for that market.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:01 pm)(click to show comment)
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:02 pm)(click to show comment)
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:03 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:06 pm)Well, to be fair, we are all speculating for a few more weeks until Lyle and others have a chance to put it through the real-world wringer, so I’m not taking all of those negative numbers personally, as I may very well be wrong.
Having said that, I marvel at some of the “fanboyz”-type comments made on this board, particularly when it come to financial bang-for-the-buck. Unless you haven’t been keeping up on current events, there is likely to be a material political shift to the right come November. Translation to future Chevy Volt buyers: Don’t count on that $7,500 federal tax credit extending out too far over the horizon. I don’t know about you, but I don’t know of ANYONE who would be willing to plop down $41,000 for a 4-passenger compact car that gets so-so mileage off the gas engine just because it can travel the first “25 to 50 miles” on electricity.
Unlike most people, I keep records of all of our household purchases, including gas for which vehicle, the current price, and the number of gallons purchased. Looking at my numbers, I’ve driven almost 10K miles exactly so far this year, consuming 394 gallons of gas that cost on average $2.76 a gallon, for a total fuel expenditure of $1,188. If I owned a Chevy Volt and ended up with 8K electric / 2K gas ratio for mileage, and used 32MPG for the extended range figure and .1035 per kWh for my electric rate (which is what it is for me), I’d pay $166 in electricity and $173 in gasoline, for a combined fuel cost of $339, or a savings over the PT Cruiser of $849 in fuel cost so far this year.
Now, say I go out and buy a 5-passenger Chevy Cruze LT instead. I’d plunk down $19K, and would expect 24/36 MPG out of the turbocharged 1.4L engine. How much in fuel cost would a Volt save me each year over a Cruze? $1,000? Man, that’s a lot of years you’d have to own that Volt to make up for the fuel savings, even if gas doubled in price!
The time may come when the numbers pencil out, but I just don’t see the Volt appealing to the typical car buyer until the costs come way down.
-9
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:13 pm)Yes, but the Lexus/Audi/Mercedes/Porsche/Jaguar/occasional Ferrari (and don’t forget BMW!) driver is all too often trying to, as financial planner Dave Ramsey writes, “impress people you don’t know or don’t like” with their wheels. The Volt just looks more like a standard Chevy than a Corvette; I doubt it will attract much of the “Look at me, I’m so vain” market.
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:15 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:15 pm)And some people wouldn’t be caught dead in a minivan…such as myself.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:16 pm)Provoke was a poignant choice of wording.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:18 pm)No, the Volt hauls around a 16 kWh battery; the Nissan LEAF has a 24.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:18 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:20 pm)The news here is that the tank is 9.3 gallons. Anything more is speculation. If you want to speculate with some other info, WOT has stated GM quotes usable range with 2 gallons spare. Don’t know if this is accurate but I think WOT is in a position to know.
Personally, I’ll wait to hear what highway mileage Lyle gets and under which conditions before drawing any conclusions.
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:29 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:29 pm)The vehicle works. I’ve been w-a-a-a-y off the paved roads in it. It’s quiet, comfortable, holds a lot of people and stuff, gets good fuel economy and wasn’t expensive. I’m not going to subsidize GM’s inability to turn a profit on honest transportation by getting all wrapped up over what image I’m projecting with what I drive and overbuying into an SUV or something equally unnecessary.
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:31 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:33 pm)And that is your right. I personally would not drive one. My Trailblazer “works” too. It may sound selfish, but hey, I’m buying it for me, not for the economy, not for GM, not for you, and not for the tree huggers.
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:34 pm)#74 Coffeetime No, the Volt hauls around a 16 kWh battery; the Nissan LEAF has a 24.
(Quote)
You are correct Coffeetime, however my point is the same. The 16kw battery pack is still large and takes the seat from a small passenger. Thx. for the correction.
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:35 pm)http://media.gm.com/content/dam/Media/microsites/product/volt/docs/paper.pdf
Happytrails to you ’til we meet again.
-6
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:35 pm)That’s only partly true it does give us a range for CS mpg.
Total range will not be over 400 or they would have stated it so it will be between 32 and 43mpg. I would say 400miles would be pushing it though. But like I stated before that might be $2.00 diff per mo. in fuel costs for the avg driver with this range diff. “Whoa! $2.00 a month that’s a Volt deal breaker for me!!” In the words of a Troll!!
-20
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:36 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:40 pm)Which posts were they?
+6
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:47 pm)Any Volt supporter who tries to twist things or hide facts is not a true supporter to me. They cause more problems because the Volt can stand on it’s own merits and it will!! Hiding facts and twisting the truth causes people to not take you seriously and therefore future possible customers will loose faith in the Volt.
To the Volt supporters!!
Let it stand on it’s own 4 tires people and don’t let the ignorant people (true trolls) bait you.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:47 pm)(click to show comment)
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:48 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:53 pm)I would prefer the quality and styling of the Volt. It actually looks and drives like a car not a glorified golf cart. But this is a personal preference, I mean I spent 38,000 on my 2010 STI. So when you want to hit the greens in your leaf let me know.
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:56 pm)VOLT UNPLUGGED TOUR – breaking news!
If you haven’t heard already – GM is taking sign ups at the Chevy Volt website for ride-and-drives of Volt in 12 major cities – starting with mine ( Seattle ) Oct. 9!!!!
Check for your city.
Go and sign up – Hope to see you there.
RECHARGE!
James
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (4:58 pm)WOT said all
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:04 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:20 pm)I just signed up for the Seattle stop. Got a fairly terse reply:
“Thank you for completing the Team Chevy Test Drive Registration for Volt — Oct. 9 and 10 – Seattle. Upon arrival at the Team Chevy Test Drive, please present your valid Driver’s License to check in.
Thanks for registering.
-Team Chevy”
What exactly does that mean? Can I just show up on either day?
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:20 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:20 pm)It doesn’t matter what the tank size is … this is primarily a commuter car… in my case … my commute will not use the 40 mile electric range.. and the relatively few times I drive more it will be nice that I can.
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:25 pm)I guess that if you can’t understand it, you can’t accept it. The study indicates that an HEV saves about 25% over a conventional vehicle. If you know of a study that shows contradictory results show us where to find it.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:29 pm)If people were really serious about gas milage they would buy 8 passenger Chrysler mini vans and car pool effectively getting hundreds of miles per gallon. 40 miles of all electric driving will make 75% of commutes gas free and and unlike all electrics make it possible to have just one car for longer trips.
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:35 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:36 pm)(click to show comment)
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:46 pm)(click to show comment)
+6
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:50 pm)*grabs popcorn*
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:51 pm)I’ve gotta chime in here…
People who are upset about MPG in CS need to be realistic.
The Volt is an EV with a back-up genset. Any time you design something there are trade offs. I have a genset for back-up power at my home. It doesn’t produce power as cheap as my utility. It’s a BACK-UP! I could go out and spend $30k on a genset and get a better price per kW but why?! I’ve use my genset once a year. Same will go for my gas in my VOLT
The system has draw backs like the fact the gas goes through chemical, mechanical, chemical transitions… not very efficient. So be it. Don’t like it? Buy a Prius and burn gas all day.
I’m sure the boys @ GM had some tough choices.
They could have:
-Connected the IC to the wheels when in CS mode= better CS MPG but its not an VOLT anymore!
-Spend more $ & time on a better engine= $45k+ ??? and 2012 release date?
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (5:53 pm)Thanks for the tip, Mike —glad to oblige you (& satisfy my own curiosity). It fails to post here, but the link works… http://twitpic.com/2sxktr (and it’s worth a look)
/this is 1 of 2 small co-located dome-shaped sensors —the other one controls the headlights, as with many GM cars
-16
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:04 pm)(click to show comment)
+6
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:10 pm)I will not rationalize why I’m buying a Volt.
I just want one because I think it’s cool.
JMO!
NPNS!
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:11 pm)(click to show comment)
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:13 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:23 pm)Just an added benefit. If the iPod happened to help the environment, even a little bit, then sure I would say let them give out a tax break. Don’t act like 10k people getting it is gonna make a huge difference with the amount of debt the nation is in already.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:36 pm)Hey, I hear ya! Years ago we bought a new 32′ boat, and if I had to rationalize the initial cost and ongoing expense (fuel, moorage, insurance, etc.) to the number of trips we took until we sold it, you’d be right to lock me up in a mental institution.
Cars are most definitely a non-rational purchase for many folks, but I believe that the mainstream new car buyer never goes shopping without an eye on value and economic justification, and if Chevy isn’t a car intended for mainstream buyers, then maybe they should’ve come out of the gate with a Cadillac version first.
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:41 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:44 pm)First let me say, anyone here who reads your post and then reads the report on the posted link can see that the report has been reviewed by independent parties. “By mandate of the Engineering Meetings Board, this paper has been approved for SAE publication upon completion of a peer review process by a minimum of three (3) industry experts under the supervision of the session organizer.”
The report essentially details what advancements need to be made to make to next step towards winnowing off of oil as our major source of energy for transportation. Clearly, the HEV technology does not offer any further decrease in gasoline usage: in fact by design the HEV only insures its continued usage. Only vehicles that are powered by electricity will allow further reduction; they fall into two categories: the BEV, and the ER-EV. Fuel cell powered vehicle are a future consideration but for the immediate future battery powered vehicles offer a significant reduction in petroleum usage.
There are those individuals here that would have you believe that battery powered electric vehicles, especially the Volt will not reduce consumption of petroleum significantly compared to their favorite vehicle, an HEV. Read the report and decide for yourselves.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:44 pm)? Not sure I agree with this one, on a technical level.
First, vehicle *mass* affects a range of quantities, such as weight, inertia, even drag. Weight directly impacts drive power requirement at any given speed on hills. Inertia has impact on drive energy requirement when speed changes, due to the inefficiencies in collecting and redeploying braking energy (ok this is Kinetic Energy but it’s a similar idea). Drag increases with vehicle weight due to the energy lost in the tyres (& suspension when the road is not totally smooth).
Second, in CS mode *all* of these things, along with other losses such as air drag, are capable of placing a load on the ICE. People keep saying “it’s just powering a generator”. This is true but the “just” is potentially misleading because the generator in turn powers a motor which has to push the car along. So any energy pushing the car along is, in CS mode, output by the ICE (via several energy conversions which are quite efficient, but not 100%). In CS mode, the battery may help “average” things out over time, but the energy still all has to come from the fuel tank.
The alternator on your existing ICE car is “just a generator” – but surely you’ve noticed the drop in MPG when you turn on the heated screen, heated seats, headlights, etc?
Hope this helps
M
-1
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:45 pm)# 206 Charlie H said:
At Toyota, …. They ended up with a car that sells for about the same as a midsize car and only a little more than a compact car and really delivers the goods on fuel economy.
Please tell me what fuel is and what and what it is used for. I’ve heard it has back-up uses but know very little about it.
-16
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:48 pm)(click to show comment)
-16
Sep 29th, 2010 (6:58 pm)(click to show comment)
-17
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:03 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:11 pm)Good idea bud… that way GM can ALWAYS follow Toyota rather than lead. I think you’re on the wrong website, try Toyota.com
Remember Toyota when they said Li-on is not going to work in cars??
If it wasn’t for GM this race to put EV’s on the market would be 5 yrs behind. And yes I know credit also goes to Tesla for building a $100k sports car.
The first Gen is gonna be expensive, not work perfectly, and be obsolete in a several years just like the first horseless carriage, cell phone, Walkman, bla bla bla… and yet I still want one.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:25 pm)Bummer. If CS mileage is <40 mpg, that nixes my idea of building an electric car with a small generator that would run nearly continuosly. The idea would be to make the car affordable with a smaller battery and only the generator. If the Volt had somehow managed to pull off 50 mpg, that would point to the feasibility of a simple car that should be able to exceed the Volt CS mileage.
But, as I have been predicting and based on working the calculations backward, getting anything over about 38 mpg seems unlikely.
While I really do not care that the Volt CS mode might fall in the mid to low 30's, I do care about the actual technology and its inability to achieve anything sufficiently exceeding what an efficient ICE can produce, related to mpg.
Bummer…
-15
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:27 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:28 pm)“The first generation Prius, at its launch, became the world’s first mass-produced gasoline-electric hybrid car. Japan sales goals were 12,000 units annually, at a price of US$16,929 per vehicle. Rivals and analysts estimated that the first generation Prius cost as much as US$32,000 to produce, meaning that each NHW10 model was sold at a loss.” December 10, 1997
In 1997 (first year of sale), Toyota only sold 300 Prius; although reaching 17,700 the following year, sales dropped continually until 2003. The first year, 2000, it was sold in the United Sales, volume was only 5,600. At that time, the EPA rating 41-42 mpg. The second year of sales in the U.S. reached 16,000.
The first years sale of the Volt will be an interesting outcome. Sales of all 10,000 Volts in the first year will indicate how well EREV is being accepted and set a record surpassing the first Prius in sales.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again,
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:33 pm)Stay Tuned,
Lyle is going to get himself a Volt shortly!
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:43 pm)WSJ and 10 other publications say otherwise…
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118659859395791929.html
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:46 pm)You’re wrong. The plug-in will do a controlled cold start every time you turn it on, just like the standard Prius does. This is simply one of the prices you pay for having a parallel setup. If the Prius didn’t do it this way, the possibility would exist that when the driver needed more power than the battery could provide, the engine would undergo an uncontrolled cold start. That would produce a lot of pollution.
The choice is between having a car that doesn’t always accelerate when you want it to or a car that heats up the catalytic converter every time you start it. Obviously Toyota picked the lesser evil from a customer’s perspective.
So no, you can’t go to the grocery store without having the engine kick on.
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:49 pm)There is no reason that CS mode mpg shouldn’t exceed 36 mpg that is currently seen in the Cruze. The engine on the Cruze with a curb weight of 3102 lbs will get a lower EPA rating than the same engine in the Volt driving the lower mass generator.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:57 pm)Vote -1 Vote +1
LRGVProVolt
Hope your right, but for my (future) application, I want the Volt to have a minimum of 40, preferably 50mpg (wish in one hand, #@#$ in the other)
With the Volt CS mpg can be a minor issue, but with my application the equivalent CS mode is critical.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:58 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (7:59 pm)TEST – none of my posts have taken today… not sure why but I’m trying to figure it out!
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:00 pm)(click to show comment)
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:04 pm)(click to show comment)
-3
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:29 pm)For the record, your prediction was 30 mpg or LESS (your emphasis). I suppose you added the “regular gas” constraint after the premium requirement came out.
“Here is my prediction:
The Volt will get around 30 mpg or LESS when cruising at 70 mph on the highway. When the Prius is right next to it the Volt will get less mpg.”
We’ll see.
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:39 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:43 pm)Actually based on vehicle weight vs. the ice used 38 is a good number for a car with similar power to the Volt! I always thought anything over 40 with the ice they ended up using would be great. If they were able to stick with the 1.0 turbo I think it would have been better ~43.
-13
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:44 pm)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:44 pm)Geessshhh…you guys sound like a bunch of elementary school kids. Chill out and lighten up a little.
When they put you in the ground, the only thing left is what you left behind, so take heed and and a leave a little something behind you can be proud of, not this BS.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:51 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (8:56 pm)I think you’re right on that <30mpg 70mph guess. Same for electric usage. You will probably go 30 miles at 70mph and 40 miles at 35-40mph. Takes more horsepower (wattage) to go faster to overcome friction and wind resistance (which is also friction).
I'm liking the idea of the Prius Add-on from Enginer – they have a 4 kWh Lion battery replacement which can make the Prius a mini-Volt, giving you ~20 miles of EV driving versus the stock NiMH mini-pack. Also goes from 3kW to 5kW power output. Good for city driving, local commuting, hopping around. A used Prius + Enginer pack would be about 1/2 to 2/3 the price of a Volt.
I had a question that I want to learn about from the Volt when it comes online. What will the battery-pack charge level be after driving on the motor for 300 miles? Will it be fully charged to 80% or drawn down to about 40%? I'd like know how the charge versus drive power of the charging motor is used while driving. Drive faster, more power to the wheels, drive slower more power to charing the pack? I wonder why they didn't use a small turbo diesel for the engine.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:05 pm)GM is worried that the Volt will seem like an “eco car”.
They’ve given it 150 hp, and a Sports mode, so people that spend $41K can have a car that’s fun to dive. That 9.3 gallons might be to allow the worst MPG conscious driver to still achieve 300 miles range after the plug-in battery is depleted.
I think the series-hybrid, controlled RPM engine, large battery for acceleration-assist, ECO MODE mpg can deliver 40 to 50 MPG.
If you want the high MPG, I believe the Volt is capable of delivering it in CS mode, if you drive ECO and gently.
If you want performance and “fun”, I think the SPORTS mode and a heavy accelerator foot will give you 300 miles range, but at a MPG cost.
If your CS mpg sucks, it’s your fault.
If you want 50 mpg, drive gently in ECO mode.
This will all come out in a few weeks, as people start reporting what it’s like to drive an actual Volt.
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:14 pm)The report states that EREV technology will reduce petroleum consumption by 50% –
http://media.gm.com/content/dam/Media/microsites/product/volt/docs/paper.pdf
Figures 5 through 7 show gasoline consumption based upon operation systems differing
upon ability to use electric power first. A conversation PHEV using a blended operating strategy where the battery energy offsets fuel during most inefficient engine operation is depicted in Figure 5. A Urban-Capable PHEV using an Initial EV operating strategy where battery energy is the sole source of propulsion during EV range is depicted in Figure 6. And Figure 7 shows the Characteristics of E-REV operation where battery energy sole source of propulsion during EV range same as in th Urban PHEV but differs in that operates as an EV on ALL Cycles: one requires the engines to be on for full performance while the other has full performance as an EV.
this also has an effect on GHG! “ ….This type of vehicle can operate as a full
performance ZEV, during the time the ICE is not
operating, and can avoid the cold start emission”.
“Overall, more petroleum energy savings are realized as the AER of the PHEVs increases.”
Quoted from: Page 112 of Well to Wheels Analysis of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Toyota now realizes this and has decided to make a Plug-In Prius since the current HSD Prius has reached its limit and can’t give us further mpg gains without going to PHEV.
I hope this sheds some light on the differences between the different HEV, PHEV, and E-REV vehicle types.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:16 pm)Were you complaining about the SUV tax break years ago ?
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/biz_tips/20030403b1.asp
If you weren’t, then STFU about $7.5K tax breaks for a cutting edge technology.
If you were, show me a URL to some blog comment you made, and I’ll salute you for integrity.
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:18 pm)<blockquote joe:
What’s good for you may not be good for me or others, and I dare say many others.All I’m saying is that to sale the Volt in large numbers it will have to get better gas mileage in the CS mode.It’s great to have a car run on electricity for forty miles, but if a car of that price get’s only the gas mileage of a typical car, people will not buy it. I don’t know if you get that, either.
[Sorry, I couldn't figure out how to excerpt Joe's comment from his post. It should appear in blue as a quote.]
32mpg… ouch! I’d have to agree with Joe. I understand that in the real world, CS mpg really doesn’t matter, but I don’t think most consumers will think that way. They’ll think, “hmm, I can buy a Volt that gets 32mpg or I can buy a Lincoln Hybrid for the same money that gets 41mpg. And, I have to remember to plug in the Volt.” People buy cars to make a statement… 32mpg doesn’t fit with the statement Volt is making. I hope 32mpg is wrong. If it’s right, I understand why they’re only making 10,000 of them.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:19 pm)Well put! I believe you are correct on this analysis, Truman.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-14
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:25 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:37 pm)Your missing the point of using the available electric charge up first before having to use the generator/motor. On average 75% of your travel will only involve 40 or less miles during which you won’t need to use gasoline. The remaining 25% of the time, you travel beyond the AER and then have to use gasoline.
Think about your daily travels; how often will you just hop on over to the local grocery store or make short trips that day and never use gasoline. And then when you do travel out for longer distances, where do you go? One place may be a visit to relatives in another city.
For example lets say you travel 150 miles to another city to visit someone. You will charge over night and then the next morning leave and travel the first 40 miles AER plus another 110 miles in CS mode using gasoline. However, if you plan your trip like I do to stop for a bit to eat then you may have the opportunity to do a partial charge. When you arrive at your destination, your relative lets you charge over night on his/her 110 Volt outlet. Your visit over the next few days only involves local travel under the 40 mile AER limit. Your relative will love riding around town in the Volt! No need to use his/her gas guzzler and the ride in the Volt is quiet and smooth. Upon waking up the last day, having had a wonderful visit,, you take off in your Volt in CD mode for 40 miles and repeat the same routine as when you drive out of town a few days ago.
You will be using gasoline so infrequently that the relatively small difference between the high and low CS mode mpg will go unnoticed because you will realize the total savings over the long haul that a Volt gives its owner. Wow
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:56 pm)wow hundreds of posts on a subject that Lyle will be able to tell us all about from his own experience very shortly. Can’t wait to hear the real facts about the car from Lyle.
I’m in the camp where I would think CS mode of less than 40 would be a gigantic negative.
I could get a Leaf, charge during the day when needed, do my normal 60-70 day and with a daytime charge to an easy 100+ miles all electric.
I’d also like to be able to drive 500 mile trips or further (i’ve taken many 4000, 6000 mile vacations over the years) without burning a lot of gas.
I had thought a leaf and a volt made a great combination for 2 car families, but 32 mpg CS mode might mean a Leaf and a Fusion make more sense?
Sep 29th, 2010 (9:57 pm)We should not get to upset at this point, I do believe that this car will attain better then 32 MPG in CS mode. The 9.3 gallon tank is not what they base the estimated range on. it would be based on about 90% if total tank capacity. So calculations should be based on the 90% which would be 8.4 usable gallons. MPG would therefore be about 37 MPG and that would be worse case millage. I would also point out that most drives will not drive in a worse case manner.
-3
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:02 pm)Kinda funny how range anxiety vanishes when gas goes to 4 to 5 bucks a gallon, I will take a Leaf please and leave you suckers to the gas pumps.
-1
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:28 pm)I’m glad you recognized that $100K tax breaks for dentists buying Ford Excursions was a bad idea.
Of course, since you gave no URL, you get no salute, but I’ll take you at your word.
After my money paid for those $100K Bush tax breaks which led to no progress in the American automotive industry, now your money will help pay for tax breaks 1/13.33 the size which might help save millions of US jobs.
Politics – Elections Have Consequences.
And the fact remains, the tax break for the Volt is a good idea.
-10
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:48 pm)(click to show comment)
-10
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:51 pm)(click to show comment)
-2
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:55 pm)The fact that CS mode is being so heavily discussed means that it is highly relevant to the success of the Volt. What I cannot understand is why it is so bad? If the Volt can save on energy loss through things like regen breaking why does it not return significantly higher MPG than a normal ICE only car? There either must be very poor performance from the engine or some fundamental massive inefficiency in the series hybrid architecture.
The first should be fixable. If its the latter then EREV will have a tough fight to stave off the BEVs from one front and the parallel based hybrid plugins like the PRIUS on the other. After all the plug-in Prius can already do 50MPG in CS mode. Add a bigger battery then who in all honesty would buy a Volt against it on purely rational criteria?
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:56 pm)When gas is at $5/gallon, that tow truck bill for when your Leaf runs out of electricity will just cost more.
I bet someone will start a website – DeadLeavesByTheSideofTheRoad.com
Allow people to upload those amusing photos of Leaf’s being towed…
Can you make it to that restaurant with the charger ? Go for it ! What’s the chances the wind will change direction?
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (10:59 pm)(click to show comment)
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:00 pm)*BREAKING NEWS
NEW VOLT TOUR
Power to the People – Chevrolet Unplugs Volt and Hits the Road
Cross-country drive brings the Chevrolet Volt directly to consumers
2010-09-29
DETROIT — A caravan of Chevrolet Volts will embark on a 3,400-mile, cross-country drive showcasing how easy it will be to live with the world’s first electric vehicle with extended-range capability.
The tour, dubbed “Volt Unplugged,” will give consumers an opportunity to test-drive the Volt, meet the people behind the development of the vehicles – Chevrolet engineers, designers and others – and participate in activities at each stop.
“The Volt Unplugged tour will give people a chance to get behind the wheel of the Volt and find out for themselves what makes this vehicle so special,” said Tony DiSalle, Chevrolet Volt product and marketing director. “This drive will demonstrate the one-of-a-kind capabilities of the Volt, the only electric vehicle able to drive such long distances under a variety of driving conditions and climates without having to stop to recharge.”
The tour is similar to July’s “Freedom Drive,” where the Volt completed a three-day 1,776-mile drive from Austin, Texas to New York City to demonstrate the Volt’s extended-range capability. Stops on the Volt Unplugged tour include:
* Oct. 9 and 10 – Seattle
* Oct. 13 and 14 – San Francisco
* Oct. 16 – 18 – Los Angeles
* Oct. 20 – San Diego
* Oct. 22 and 23 – San Antonio
* Oct. 24 and 25 – Houston
* Oct. 28 and 29 – Miami
* Oct. 30 – Orlando
* Oct. 29 and 30 – Washington, D.C.
* Nov. 1 – Raleigh, N.C.
* Nov. 5 – 7 – New York City
* Nov. 18 – 20 – Chicago
-10
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:01 pm)(click to show comment)
-10
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:02 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:06 pm)Yes, but what is the “standardized test” for vehicles that can be driven in multiple modes ?
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2010/09/lexus-ct200h-gets-134-hp-42-mpg-average.html
For instance, the Lexus CT200h claims that it will get 42 MPG EPA rating, combined.
It has an EV, ECO, NORMAL and SPORT mode. I haven’t seen any mention of how the EPA test is done. Is it the worst possible MPG ? The best ? The “normal” MPG ?
Really, I don’t know. The EPA is not exactly bleeding edge… They are trying to figure out how to deal with plug-ins, but how do they deal with other fairly new features ? It took them a few decades to figure out that people use air conditioning and drive fast on highways.
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:10 pm)(click to show comment)
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:16 pm)I’ve read most of the comments and seen all the estimated CS mode figures. however, I belive I’ve read that the engine cycles off and on while in CS mode. This would substantial impact any calculated figure. I belive the 50 mpg is good and will be on the low end when on the highway.
-12
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:18 pm)(click to show comment)
-3
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:19 pm)I DID DRIVE TO THE GROCERY STORE WITHOUT THE ENGINE STARTING.
YOUR INFORMATION ABOUT THE PHV MODEL IS OUTDATED OR A MISPRINT!
STOP MAKING CLAIMS THAT HAVE BEEN VERIFIED INCORRECT.
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:23 pm)No, the other cars that are in the Volt’s class are the Prius (sort-of, but the Prius is the standard by which other green cars are judged) and the Leaf.
The Cruze is a different kind of car aimed at a different kind of customer. It’s competing with good old Honda Civic and the Toyota Corolla.
I’ll be surprised if many people come in looking for a Volt and leave with a Cruze. Maybe if they decide they can’t afford a green car and then decide they’re really a Honda Civic kind of buyer and then cross-shop the Civic/Cruze/Corolla, and the come back for the Cruze… But that’s a totally different thought-process than coming to look for a Volt and then leaving with a Cruze — and it requires the Cruze to be a much more competitive vehicle.
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:31 pm)You’re correct for the 2nd-generation Prius that I have in my driveway, but the 3rd generation Prius waits until the engine is needed the first time to do the cold-start.
I figure that the difference had something to do with emissions regulations — I wonder if they required that the catalytic converter be heated up within a certain amount of time when the 2nd-generation Prius was designed, but there’s been a subtle change in the regulations now that hybrid vehicles are common, and better understood by the regulators? I’m speculating pretty fa outside of my area of expertise — but, hey, this is the Internet.
+1
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:35 pm)I’m also hoping the series hybrid architecture is fundamentally sound – it leaves open many future possibilities (more efficient gasoline engines, other fuels, different size batteries, lots of software flexibility, etc). I’m not convinced it is not 40 – 50 mpg yet, but we’ll know soon enough.
The Volt is heavier than the Prius, and has more horsepower. If a lighter, less powerful version of the Volt could attain the same/better MPG as a Prius, then the architecture is OK.
As for a plug-in Prius, if they could go back to the high-torque electric motors, and give at least 81kW (110 hp) in contrast to their current 59 kW (80 hp) electric motor, I might consider a plug-in Prius. As envisioned for 2012, the plug-in Prius is too weak for that 13 miles “all electric” range the Advertisers are hawking.
Competition is good – more plastics, more aluminum, better li-ion batteries, more efficient electric-gadgets (windshield wipers, lights, radio, etc). Someone is going to have an EREV for the masses soon enough, whether they call it EREV or not.
-10
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:50 pm)(click to show comment)
+4
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:53 pm)I don’t know Charlie H, but I personally know a few people who didn’t complain at all when “hard working professionals got a business deduction” back in the pre-WallSt-meltdown days, and now whine about “their tax money” subsidizing Volt purchasers.
I happened to complain about the former, and support the latter. Spending my tax money to help sell gas guzzlers while ignoring Peak Oil struck me as more blatantly shortsighted than usual. Helping an iconic American Industry with heavy economic multipliers gear up for a 21st century technology for the cost of a few weeks of occupying Iraq (which nixed the whole idea of oil Production Sharing Agreements and signed service agreements with China, anyway) seems like a strategic use of American taxpayer money.
If someone is against all wasteful Government spending, then I’m glad to hear another voice calling for shutting down some of those 800 military bases in 140 countries.
If Charlie H is not a hypocrite, then I’m glad to hear it.
-11
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:55 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Sep 29th, 2010 (11:58 pm)32 mpg relies on what? No reserve in the 9.3 gallon tank.. what if it’s 300 miles on 8.3 gallons.. and then you have to ask, that’s 300 miles on 8.3 gallons on the interstate, where you don’t really get to take advantage of regenerative braking and you’re at high speeds.. It could be 40 in the city, or even higher. Where you’re driving at lower speeds and you get to take advantage of the regen braking.
Hearing 9.3 gallons doesn’t necessarily translate to 32 mpg. We soon will know.
-10
Sep 30th, 2010 (12:02 am)(click to show comment)
-10
Sep 30th, 2010 (12:09 am)(click to show comment)
-6
Sep 30th, 2010 (4:49 am)Exactly the point I’m fighting for so long time. Prove the efficiency of the serial approach first, then deal with battery stuff. Not the opposite way.
IMO, GM should have focussed exclusively on the drivetrain, added by a very very small battery (5 miles), it’s SOC kept constantly idle in the middle.
The battery part of the actual Volt design is killing the concept. This “40 miles” battery mode has brought, and will bring so much trouble and confusion towards the aimed “Joe Six Pack market”.
*grmph*
+1
Sep 30th, 2010 (5:34 am)40 miles initial battery range is just right. The result being 80% (plus) driving done with no gasoline. Needing just one Arco station stop each month or two.
My typical driving pattern is:
M-35
T-38
W-35
T-35
F-48
S-5
S-10
No Plug No Sale.
+1
Sep 30th, 2010 (5:35 am)Lol. You don’t think they did that? And extensive other modeling and testing and intermediate builds?
Companies don’t spend a billion dollars on R&D if the science is a dead end. They’ve been working on/with Volt’s technologies for decades. This is not something that was thrown together in 3 years.
I haven’t even see one yet and I’m very impressed.
+4
Sep 30th, 2010 (6:05 am)Ummmm, it all about gallons of gas used per year. Most people do not drive more than 40 miles per day during the work week. Even running kids to and from various activities. On the a majority of the weekends people rarely travel more than 100 miles per day. Then you have your holiday weekends and a couple others where you put on anywhere from 300-500 miles in a couple days. Maybe you take a 1 long driving trip a year where you put on 2000 miles with limited opportunity to charge up.
44 Normal weeks @ 2 gallons of gas = 88 gallons.
7 Holiday/Special Weeks @ 10 gallon = 70 gallons.
1 Big Trip Week @ 40 gallons
Total = 198 gallons per year.
I am talking the normal 2-3 kid family. This car makes perfect sense for the majority of Americans as it fits our lifestyle. Yes there are a few nerds here that will freak. You guys probably can get by with a Leaf when the only trip is to the Video game store and back to mom’s basement. Then just rent a car to get to the once a year Star Trek convention.
Sep 30th, 2010 (6:27 am)You know what saves oil? Telecommuting. For those jobs which can be done via computer networks (and there are quite a few) – telecommuting has saved a ton of money and oil over the last few years.
My example: 60 miles to my office. I go to the office less than 1 day a month.
Possible example: If my company fails, I may take a job that is 38 miles away. Similar type of job but I expect that job will limit telecommuting – so the Volt may be a moderately good option there. So will the Leaf at 100 miles/charge. I just can’t face another car payment, though and having a car that is 27-28mpg and no car payment is a considerably good option here.
I’ve always felt that conservation is a great way to “get off oil” but our commutes from the houses we buy so far away from work hurts us so badly that if we still want this lifestyle, we have to get specialized electric “save the world” cars so we can “have it all” (the suburban house, the good feeling of saving oil). It’s not about saving money or we’d be buying lower-priced used cars and conserving. It’s about being part of the technological re-revolution (ie. going back to the electric cars we had in the late 1800s and early 1900s). For the first couple years, buying a new Volt is more about “doing good” than being a cost-concious shopper. It’s like going solar – it’s expensive up front but 5-7 years down the road you get your ROI and then it starts to pay off. Similar for the Volt – you will not “save money” buying a Volt compared to keeping a paid-off car or buying an inexpensive good-mileage used car.
-2
Sep 30th, 2010 (6:38 am)FYI – I’ve cared about the environment for years. There’s a reason I have a 3 mile commute; it’s walking the walk. Some days, literally.
But whether I’m a hypocrite or not is irrelevant. What did Friedman say the other day about China’s moonshot? That we wouldn’t replicate it without a gas tax.
Once the $7500 is exhausted, then what? GM’s selling a $41K car into a market of $2.69 gas and far cheaper cars. End of Volt sales. Look at the Prius; it does OK because it’s reasonably priced for what you get and sales STILL correlate to fuel prices. Fuel prices up, Prius sales up. Fuel prices down, Prius sales down. Enough people care about fuel cost to spend an extra $2-3K and keep Prius sales above the 10K level but they only sell well when gas spikes. When the spike is over, sales taper off. What chance does a car with a $20K premium have?
If we seriously taxed gas/oil/carbon (pick any one), we’d be looking at a market that included a wide variety of innovative, fuel-efficient small cars and an increasing assortment of BEVs/HEVs/PHEVs/EREVs. We might or might not get a 2+2=3 expression of El Lutzbo’s insanity but, if we did, it would at least have a fighting chance of selling.
We’d also see the lifestyle changes that would drive down the consumption of oil; people WOULD car pool. People WOULD ride the bus – and demand more mass transit services (which has a beneficial effect on the working poor). People would stop building houses way out in the exurbs and forego the notion that they’re some sort of feudal lord on their 3 acres and move back into town where transit options are more plentiful and commutes are short. Traffic jams would shrink and we could stop building 6 lane expressways that rip through established neighborhoods and turn them into ghettos.
Sep 30th, 2010 (6:44 am)Also, have you computed the cost per mile for the charge?
Say 40 miles on a charge. That is an 80% full battery down to about 30%. 50% of the 16kWh pack – or 8kWh. If recharge is done efficiently (and AC to DC is not 100% efficient) that is 8kWh at (here) .17 per kWh. $1.36 /charge or 3.4cents/mile. A 40mpg car would cost about $2.75/gal and 6.8cents/mile. So on electric, it is 1/2 the “per mile fuel” charge in my area for that 40 miles. Driving 10,000 per year, that is $340 saved if only driving electric. It will also be 250 gallons of gas saved and maybe 4-5 barrels of oil to make the gas.
Someone correct me if the 30%-80% is not the technical spec for the battery charge range.
+1
Sep 30th, 2010 (6:50 am)It’s a fine mileage number for a huge amount of people since the first 40 are all electric so they will rarely even be in CS mode. This is the commuter’s EV with no range anxiety. It was designed to optimize EV mode effiency and they succeeded in that IMO.
PHEV Prius meanwhile will be more of a highway car for people who have REALLY short commutes; it’s EV mode will be just fine for some but clearly not as excellent as the Volt’s, but of course it’s hybrid mode is superior. Then the Leaf will get many buyers who almost NEVER go over 80 -100 miles, and both the Leaf and Prius will enjoy price advantages over the Volt for years. Volt is the only one that actually looks cool and sporty and not eco-freakish, IMO.
All 3 are cars will hit different sweet spots on price and performance and are all great solutions for their time.
Sep 30th, 2010 (7:00 am)CS mode mileage is not important in most cases as this is still better mileage than most cars.
For those who are bent on mileage, remember this, a 1960′s Corvair (not corvette) can to-this-day still acheive 30+ mpg. (mine tops out around 28mpg).
Also, no matter what anybody believes, there WILL be a maximum amount of gas mileage you can get from a gallon of gas. Given the size and weight of an average car, I would say that 40 – 50 mpg is about all you can get from a 4 cylinder gas engine, because the gas and engine have to produce a minimum amount of horsepower to make the car go.
So, when GM comes up with a specific engine for this configuration, then mileage will undoubtably go way up.
IMHO
+1
Sep 30th, 2010 (7:03 am)At steady state, the only thing weight affects is the rolling resistance….which is a VERY small percentage of the power required to overcome aero drag (absolutely the most important factor in determining power required).
You are correct that in a more dynamic mode, such as breaking or accelerating, weight will begin to be more of a factor. One thing to remember is that you get more regen. in a heavy car…so the regen capability somewhat lessens the effect of increased weight. Ricardo Engineering wrote up a paper on this, but I don’t have the link handy.
-7
Sep 30th, 2010 (7:14 am)No, I don’t think they did that (model the other options). El Lutzbo and John Lauckner worked out the basic design on a paper napkin and then told Engineering to hop to it.
GM Engineering doesn’t get to tell the Vice Chair and Car Czar, “That approach isn’t the best option.” Not if they like being employed, anyway. GM was – and probably still is – a totally top down culture. Look at their amazing marketing missteps. The SSR, the hybrids that don’t sell, the Sky/Solstice that didn’t sell, the other hybrids that don’t sell, the wide range of GM vehicles that sell principally to fleets. You don’t get that kind of failure when the guys on the lower rungs are allowed to say, “Sorry, that won’t sell.”
El Lutzbo became fixated on “leapfrogging Toyota” and drove the process his way. And then he bailed.
+5
Sep 30th, 2010 (7:21 am)This is what I fear of: spending so much time and resources on a drivetrain which shows to be unefficient. You can add all battery you want and construct your marketing around it, it’s just hiding the dust under the carpet and put a green stamp on it.
Beside all interesting aspects and the engineering challenge that keeps me truthfully impressed, there is one paradigm which is, imo, THE paradigm, whereas “How much of the energy stored in it will effectively be used to what is was aimed for”.
-8
Sep 30th, 2010 (7:22 am)The maximum regen rate generally isn’t that high and the efficiency isn’t 100% (more like 80% recovery up to the maximum regen rate and then the friction brakes take over). This does mitigate some of the negative effect of the mass but to maintain decent performance, a heavy car needs a bigger motor, which needs more support. more strength in the drivetrain, which adds mass… “Antisynergistic” really should be a word.
-10
Sep 30th, 2010 (8:09 am)(click to show comment)
-10
Sep 30th, 2010 (8:26 am)(click to show comment)
-6
Sep 30th, 2010 (8:31 am)I do kind of miss the early days of the Volt–when GM claimed it would get 50 mpg in CS mode and cost in the 20′s. I remember thinking holy horse **** it destroys the Prius in every conceivable way. Still love it, though, but I just can’t afford it now.
-10
Sep 30th, 2010 (9:11 am)(click to show comment)
-10
Sep 30th, 2010 (9:24 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Sep 30th, 2010 (9:28 am)My deposit was made; Criswell Chevy, Gaithersburg, MD.
+1
Sep 30th, 2010 (9:29 am)Good example. Let’s say 15,000 miles per year.
198 gallons x 32 mpg = 6336 CS
15000-6336= 8664 CD
8664 at 2 cents/mile = 173 electric bill
198 x $3 = 594 gasoline bill
total fuel cost 767
Regular Prius 15000/ 50 mpg x 3 = 900 total fuel cost
Volt saves 133 per year in fuel cost
PHV Prius
CD say 13 miles/charge x 300 days (some days less than 13 miles driven)
=3900 miles CD x 2 cents/mile = 78 electric bill
15000-3900 = 11100 miles / 50 mpg x 3 = 666 gasoline cost
total fuel cost = 744
PHV has 23 less fuel cost than volt and 156 less than plain Prius.
I am not one who says any one person should be required to cost-justify their car versus alternatives, but cost is a factor. These examples show that driving patterns matter and that CS mode will be significant for many potential buyers.
Volt works best for those who approach 100% EV, at which point you start to lose buyers to the Leaf.
Sep 30th, 2010 (9:36 am)To me, the SUV break was reprehensible. But to clarify, the 7500 is a tax credit (dollar for dollar tax reduction), while the up front depreciation of SUV’s is only a faster write-off against income. Those deductions were going to come over several years anyway, and only saved tax based on one’s marginal tax rate. I estimate that the present value of the SUV break was typically less than the 7500 credit.
Still bad, though.
I don’t mind the 7500 credit so much, since I support subsidies for getting us off oil. I’d prefer to see a gas tax that drove the market to action as it saw fit, but whatever.
Sep 30th, 2010 (9:48 am)But to be fair, usb, for any normal trips beyond moving around the driveway or parking lot, there will be a warmup cycle on gen2 (04-09) Prius. For gen3 Prius, there will be a warmup cycle unless the engine is already warm.
For PHV Prius, there will be no warmup cycle until near the end of AER, unless power demand is so great that the ICE engages temporarily.
Sep 30th, 2010 (9:57 am)#288 Metrologyfirst My deposit was made; Criswell Chevy, Gaithersburg, MD.
Enjoy
-10
Sep 30th, 2010 (10:09 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 30th, 2010 (12:41 pm)For those not familiar with Bill Nye, here is a two part series covering how the Allison Hybrid bus works. I happen to know one of the engineers shown, and he now works on the Volt program! The EVT in the hybrid bus is similar to what’s in GM hybrid SUV/pick-ups and seems similar to what was shown in the patent document posted here a few days ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoCNIs14-gU
HB
Sep 30th, 2010 (1:29 pm)The reason of low MPG should be bad choice of ICE. It is drivertrain engine – not genset engine. The automobile engine main feature – variable rpm and extremly quick responce and therefore twice less efficency than ICE for genset application. Such low MPG kind of deluting serial hybrid and EREV paradigm. I was predicting at least 50 MPG for seral hybrid sedan in CS mode.
Sep 30th, 2010 (2:07 pm)I was wondering how long the gas in the gas tank would last if I did a lot of city driving. Would a special additive need to be put into the fuel up to prevent gasoline degradation such as ethanol separation for example?
I say this because I would anticipate not using >40 mile range very often. maybe I only need 40 gallons or less of gasoline a year total. So adding a little gas stabilizer (if such a thing exists) would not seem like a problem for me.
Sep 30th, 2010 (4:03 pm)I agree people who buy a first generation Volt should not use the range extender more than 20 percent of the time. Hopefully the second generation can do 40mpg.
-1
Sep 30th, 2010 (8:07 pm)What other claim by GM has been conservative? Electric range of 40 (25-50 miles), priced comfortably below 30k (43k)? I can’t understand why anyone thinks that adding 2 forms of drivetrain improves efficiency, the cruze is going to have better highway mpg than the volt. You think GM didn’t tune the cruze to operate efficiently at a narrow rpm band close to 60-75 mph in overdrive? 90% of the comments again are just adjustments of expectation to whatever GM has, or will deliver. If it got 9mpg and went 20 miles on electricity under average conditions this board would still love it. GM will build 8-10,000 over the next 13 months, and maybe what 15000 the year after that, and then what? I know everyone here will buy one, but if you have any tangible hold on reality you will see the market for a $43,000 civic competitor with a plug is very limited. This is a PR stunt for ‘new GM’, it has been since the day they had their hand out, same was true for chrysler, what happened to all their nifty jeeps and sports cars that were EREV, 40 miles EV then 55mpg after that? They were a hoax, they couldn’t possibly have built them, nor built anything close for a profit and we’re slowly seeing the same thing with the Volt, this car has been overhyped and will not deliver. However, whatever it manages to actually do will be touted here as the greatest achievement of man since we went to the moon.
+1
Sep 30th, 2010 (8:13 pm)If you have a daily round-trip commute of more than 40 miles then MPG in CS mode obviously does matter. Are you saying that the Volt isn’t for people with a 50 or 60 mile round-trip commute?
Frankly, your logic is pretty mudled. If anything people that drive less than 40 miles most of the time are the people that shouldn’t buy the Volt because in addition to carying around unused and expensive battery capacity, they are carying around a heavy ICE that will almost never be used.
-6
Sep 30th, 2010 (8:17 pm)Espousing ideas of a free market are taboo on this board.
Sep 30th, 2010 (8:44 pm)Your dreaming that will be the case, lol I only drive more than 50 miles a day twice a year or so, So I will rent a car for 40 bucks a day.
Problem solved without supporting the arabs and other gas junkies all year long, and I save 8 grand over the price of a revolt.
Oct 1st, 2010 (6:14 am)I think this thread holds the record for the number of posts voted down to below a viewing threshold.
Those with multiple trolling posts should really limit their posts here. Only a few are reading them.
As for the real topic of this thread. I thought it was interesting that the Volt went with a 9 gallon tank. Does this mean that it is actually two tanks? I seem to remember that the battery bifurcated any tank above 6 gallons. Congrats to Lyle and all posters planning on owning a Gen 1 Volt. I believe that they will be highly desirable cars in the future because they are overdesigned.
Oct 1st, 2010 (8:09 am)Here you go. This is exactly why this is a PR scandal for GM. You just don’t put numbers on mileage like that and then wildly under-deliver–on a car that is being hyped for efficiency. And for this information to come out last-minute almost points towards deliberate coverup on the part of GM, like they’d wish we’d forget about their past statements.
If they just hadn’t thrown these figures around, it wouldn’t have been such a big deal, but now they’ve got to deal with the consequences of not delivering.
+1
Oct 1st, 2010 (8:20 am)If you are speaking of average, 24% will use RE because 40 EV miles cover 76% of the daily commute. That 40 EV miles was a big assumption. In reality, it ranges from 25 to 50 miles.
If you want to look at the worst case, 25 EV miles would cover 60% of daily commute. 40% will use RE.
For the best case, 50 EV miles would cover 85% of daily commute. 15% will use RE.
Note that this does not include other daily trips (other than a typical home->work->home commute). The actual question of the survey: On a typical day, how many miles one-way do you travel from home to work?
The assumptions to above calculation are:
1) The miles from “home to work” is exactly as “work to home”.
2) You never stop by anywhere else on your way to work nor back to home.
3) You never charge at work.
Survey: http://www.bts.gov/publications/omnistats/volume_03_issue_04/html/figure_02.html
Oct 1st, 2010 (8:47 am)We import about 50% of our crude oil consumption. About 25% of those are from OPEC countries.
HEV like Prius can cut down fuel consumption by half. If everyone switch to HEVs, we won’t need to import oil at all. We just need about half of the American to drive HEV to eliminate dependence on OPEC oil. Unfortunately, HEVs are only about 3% of new vehicle sales.
Increasing the number of HEV gives the best bang for the buck. It pays for itself and the technology is mainstream.
+1
Oct 1st, 2010 (8:51 am)If so, people vote them down without reading them? Figures.
You should read those posts; the heavy negative ratings are simply proof that a significant number of visitors to this site (i.e., Volt Fanboys) hate facts.
+2
Oct 1st, 2010 (9:31 am)Thanks for digging that up; I hadn’t seen that survey. I’m surprised by the number of people who drive 1-5 miles each way.
Let’s assume for a moment, as so many on the site do, that this survey really means something. When you stop and think about it, subsidizing a Volt for the 1-5 mile drivers is entirely pointless. If they already own a midsize car (22mpg), they use, on average, (260*5)/22 gallons of gas each year commuting. That’s only 59 gallons!
The maximum additional fuel use avoided would be (40/22)*2*52 = 189 gallons. That’s presuming that they drive at least 40 miles per day on every non-work day and that they charge every day and that the Volt actually meets their weekend needs. Leave that boat and the third child at home!
The subsidy is just about $3/gallon of gas avoided!
The next bucket up is hardly better, the subsidy is $2/gallon for gas avoided.
If you consider the significant premium in purchase price of a Volt over a Prius to be part of the “subsidy” to avoid gas use (and you should), the first bucket of population is spending about $7.25 per gallon, combined their own money and ours, to avoid each gallon of gas. The second bucket is still spending close to $5 for each gallon avoided.
That’s 51% of the population, right there. This is a ridiculous level of subsidy on a per gallon basis. And even if we do spend that $3 or $2 per gallon to avoid that particular gas use, this simply results in a small bit of downward pressure on the price of gas. As a practical matter, someone else will just suck up the tiny quantify of fuel that the Volt pilot skipped.
Then, if we set our fanboyism aside and look coldly at the numbers GM has provided most recently, we’re looking at a 32-33mpg vehicle once the juice runs out. How many miles in a Volt on a long-distance trip will it take to erase those gallons of fuel consumed?
If you look at this from the perspective of a consumer who’s interested in reducing oil use, the most popular choice of car that radically cuts fuel consumption is the Prius. The Prius uses 2 gallons per 100 miles on the highway. The Volt uses 3 gallons per 100 miles on the highway. Any fuel avoidance that the Volt could be considered to have “banked” with its short range trips is “withdrawn” at the rate of 1 gallon per 100 miles traveled.
What’s really unfortunate is that those first two buckets of population are likely to include people who really care, as I do, about oil consumption, and have done something to reduce their use of fuel. They’ve obviously made choices that result in short driving distances to and from work. They’d likely be very interested in further reducing their oil use and they’d be interested in a BEV or other advanced tech solution but, unless they’re bad at math, they’re going to see no point to spending $7 per gallon of fuel avoided.
Oct 1st, 2010 (12:46 pm)Beautiful analysis, Charlie.
“As a practical matter, someone else will just suck up the tiny quantify of fuel that the Volt pilot skipped.”
This is the crux of the matter, usually framed as supply and demand. This is the reason I only buy green tech that is cheaper, or at least no more expensive, than the less-green alternative if conservation is the only benefit. I don’t care to spend money for appearances sake. Unfortunate, but reality. Thankfully, conservation often puts more money in my pocket, and I avidly pursue those opportunities.
The Volt fails on both counts. Badly. Driving in EV is fun, and I am not averse to spending money for entertainment. In that case though, I’ll buy 100 miles of EV fun a day instead of 40.
Oct 1st, 2010 (1:33 pm)Those short trips are the MPG killers. PHV covering those trips in EV would provide the best bang for the buck in term of petroleum displacement and cutting down emission.
+1
Oct 1st, 2010 (1:36 pm)Great post. Obviously voted down because it is TRUE!
For all of you who say that CS mode is not important, it sure was important when GM said “50 MPG” wasn’t it? Now the CS mode mpg get’s discounted and now it “CS mode doesn’t mean much”? Wow, talk about rosi colored glasses GM has been handing out to you.
If CS mode means nothing and you “wont be using for most of the time”, why waste your hard earned money on something you “wont be using for most of the time”.
Charlie got it right, the VOLTARDS just don’t like the truth!
Oct 1st, 2010 (8:04 pm)Lyle, congratulations on being named to the Volt Consumer Advisory Board!
Oct 1st, 2010 (8:17 pm)Does the small 9.3 Gallon Volt fuel tank prevent gas from spoiling or degrading due to ethanol separation, etc., if I do not drive beyond 40 miles very often?
This is a critical item. What did GM do about the problem of slow or low gas consumption?
Does anyone know?
+2
Oct 2nd, 2010 (12:26 am)It would be nice to see a non fanboy/fangirl discussion on the real options for reducing fuel consumption in the US. While the Volt and Leaf represent a partial (and relatively more expensive) way to reduce petroleum consumption at the pump, we as a nation have not begun to put incentives in place that will provide a greater outcome/fuel savings for many (not just the affluent).
1) Develop a true energy policy that does not change every 4 years
2) Encourage less commuting to work by providing incentives for telecommuting
3) Encourage the purchase of cars that currently get 42-50 mpg in city/highway driving combined
4) Put federal incentives in place to discourage road expansion and encourage public transport
5) Provide tax credits to companies to encourage production/manufacturing/processing to occur during non peak hours (to even out electricity use, traffic flows, etc.). A 24/7 society is not for everyone but for many, it may have benefits and offer work/personal flexibility
6) Come to terms with the fact that having a large % of the driving public using vehicles that are 2x what is actually needed (size, performance, weight) is detrimental to our long term prosperity as a nation (especially if it is a non domestic vehicles
7) Broaden the mix of fuel options to have clean diesel, dual-fuel, and CNG play a greater part in the fuel mix to lessen the risk of price shocks when gasoline prices increase
The Volt, Leaf, and upcoming EVs WILL NOT make a dent in our importation of oil. One or all of the options noted above will see reductions in oil consumption (quicker, less costly, and across a larger public).
-4
Oct 2nd, 2010 (1:59 am)So far, everything I have said about the Volt has been true. 35 MPG was the amount the GM official stated at the Barret Jackson Auto Auction in Scottsdale, AZ this February.
One of my main concerns still is: the Volt engine stays on until the Volt is fully recharged after the batteries are depleated (and) that there is no way to enable the engine to run PRIOR to the battery being exhausted. Does this also mean that the engine is running when the Volt is at a stop light? (The engine in the Prius and Insight at least stops running when the car is at a dead stop).
-2
Oct 2nd, 2010 (7:22 am)K Newman,
I think your understanding of Volt operation is incorrect.
First, you can exit CD mode early by engaging mountain mode;
Second, when the battery is depleted, the car will act like a Prius type hybrid, using a mixture of battery-only/ICE-only/battery+ICE modes. Certainly the ICE will be off at stops.
Oct 2nd, 2010 (11:55 am)Even if the CS mode is merely and outstanding 32 mpg/CS, that would only translate to something like an extra dollar and ninety cents a month more for gasoline, compared, to say something like a 42mpg CS mode economy if you are driving something like 18,000 miles a year, and are easy on the electrical EV mode “demand” (light acceleration), with normal to light driving characteristics.
I’d much prefer that there not be a very much higher “sensational” CS number, in the balance against any possible reduction in the long term reliabilities that GM is very famous for.
(on to the next topic….) (pardon the run-on sentence).
-3
Oct 2nd, 2010 (12:09 pm)Dan, it is impossible to guess for any one unknown driver how the 18,000 miles will divided between EV and petrol driving. Ranges, ideals, worse case scenarios … pick your poison, and be explicit in the assumption.
-2
Oct 3rd, 2010 (1:12 pm)There are two issues relating to it. 1) Gas stale 2) Combustion engine lubrication desiccation.
For #1, Volt will display a light so the owner can work on consuming the entire gas tank. That 300 miles only on Range Extender would be a painful experience. This would mean a week of driving without plugging the Volt in. The owner would learn from that experience and would not fill up the entire 9.3 gallons. It would result in sub-standard range extender. RE may even become a burden.
For #2, a light will display also. The gas engine would turn on to lubricate itself. This wouldn’t be as painful as #1.
-1
Oct 3rd, 2010 (1:17 pm)I am glad to see someone with common sense taking action and express the view point.
+1
Oct 5th, 2010 (9:53 am)Wow, just as fanatical as the Leaf forums. No matter how it works out, as long as we dramatically reduce our oil addiction, I’m for it. I’m hoping that both Nissan and GM succeed in making the transition off petrol. For me I’m going cold turkey and getting a Leaf. Long trips just don’t occur enough for me to go with a PHEV (I’ll use my good old motorcycle with over 210k miles that gets over 50mpg).