We are finally in that long awaited month of November 2010, the month the Chevy Volt will enter retail production. Yet despite all these months and years of discussion and the full engineering of the car and its performance being recently laid bare, there is still no official EPA label for the car.
We believe the EPA may still issue an 11th hour label, though in the past GM has said it will launch with a temporary label if necessary.
I had the chance to recently discuss the Volt’s fuel efficiency with Doug Parks who is the Volt vehicle line executive.
Parks says for EV range, “we are saying 25 to 50 miles.” He notes that the EPA will test the car and then reduce the efficiency by essentially a fudge factor. “When the EPA runs their test, they get a number and they will cut it by 30 percent, and that will be our label number for EV range,” he said.
Park explains this 30% rule has been developed over time and is applied to every car. “There is an unadjusted number and then they cut it by 30 percent,” he said. “They’ve run tests overtime and they’ve gotten down to this 30 percent.”
To this date the EPA “is still in testing with this car,” he said.
Parks also explained why GM moved from the previous single value of 40 to a range. “There’s one thing about this car that we’re certain, if you tell everybody a number, no one will get it,” he said. “It depends on the driving, the climate and the terrain. We can say around a number but not an exact number, it’s going to move.”
Parks also believes people will regularly get more than 50 miles of EV range, but not less than 25. “We’re saying 25 to 50, but I guarantee some people will get more than 50, some will even get sixty,” he said. “If you go out there and drive 85 miles per hour and hammer it and pay no attention, you might get 25, but hopefully no one gets 25.”
Parks admits despite GM’s insistence on a range, the EPA will still only release a single number. “Let’s say we get an official EV range of 37 miles,” he said. “If they test it at 52 then they cut it by 30 percent it will be 37.”
He believes people may just complain the resulting EPA figure is too low. “We’d love to have people complain to the government ‘hey my car gets way more than that’,” he said. “Usually for the EPA, it’s the other way around.”
Charge sustaining fuel efficiency will be treated similarly.
“When you get to fuel economy, we say mid to high 30s,” said Parks. “We’re trying to under promise and over deliver.”
Parks thinks this will be the official EPA result, though perhaps higher. “We’ll get our label for the car, there will be the city and the highway and the combined, and they’re going to be in the mid to high 30s.”
“Maybe we’ll get a 40,” he added hopefully. Asked what types of values he has been seeing in testing he said ,”we see some people getting 45, 48 miles per gallon.”
Parks believes the official label will wind up having a lot of information. “We think the’yre going to give an EV range, a total range of EV plus charge sustaining, and then they’ll do a traditional city, highway, and combined fuel economy when you’re in charge sustaining mode,” he said. “In addition we do think they’re going to work in an MPGe, and probably have one of those numbers in EV mode and a different number in charge sustaining mode.”
He admits the labeling process has been very challenging.“We spent so much time with these guys trying to adhere to what they want to do and also help try to tell our story, ” said Parks. “One of the difficult things about this car is its so hard to put a single number on it.”
This entry was posted on Friday, November 5th, 2010 at 6:05 am and is filed under Efficiency. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:30 am)Can’t wait to see more real-world data on this. I was not aware of this 30% fudge factor.
BTW – Not sure how I missed this but according to their schedule, the Volt was on PBS’s Motorweek on Oct. 29th.
The Leaf test will air on Nov. 12th.
http://www.pbs.org/mpt/motorweek/upcomingshows.shtml
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:33 am)I think people know whst they r getting by now.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:35 am)Haiku for a Forgotten Label
fluttering paper
tires shirp, wind, no exhaust
label on lot floor
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:38 am)I still cannot understand why do we need to show MPG figures for any electric vehicle, since we do not use gasoline? Although the Volt has a range extender engine, that engine could be unused for 70% of the buyers, and those 9 gallons in the tank will last over a year. So why should we see MPG as important? I know that the actual cost per mile of travel is a real-life value, but there are too many variables to calculate that.
We need a better means to measure transportation cost that can be measured by independent sources, and that everyone can understand. That is why I suggested the cost per mile of travel, but that isn’t good enough.
Maybe we need to educate the buyers to use another measure of energy that will not confuse, but could be understood by everyone, or at least by the knowledgeable buyers, such as the value of a kwH (the correct value is Joules, but who uses that?).
Untill we can agree to a better term, I see that MPG will stay for a while. But I can easily calculate my cost per mile of travel, either by my gasoline purchases and distances travelled, or by the electrical energy consumed on the same travelled distances.
BTW, my present Buick Regal gave me 20.3 MPG and according to the local gasoline prices, I am paying 12 cents per mile travelled. That is an easy number to compare with other tansportation costs (be it gas, electric, mule, or on foot!).
Raymond
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:45 am)The Leaf has had Job 1 right? Does it have an EPA label? Or maybe not since there have not been any Leaf’s in the USA? Maybe Statik could give the Leaf side of the story?
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:47 am)It’s been said before, but cost/mile cannot be on the label. Gasoline prices fluctuate daily even within regions and electricity rates vary widely across the country and are in many cases dependent on time-of-day or charge rate. Cost per mile is not a measure a efficiency, which is what we’re looking for.
kWh/mile in EV mode and miles/gallon in CS mode is probably as much as we can ask for. The labels have to be designed so that the average consumer can understand them…and let me tell you, the average consumer is pretty darn dumb (this is my opinion and in no way represents the views of my company).
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:52 am)“said Parks. “One of the difficult things about this car is its so hard to put a single number on it.””
Really? We at GM-VOLT have made easy work of it. Just kidding. Of course we haven’t because it is not possible.
““When you get to fuel economy, we say mid to high 30s,” said Parks. “We’re trying to under promise and over deliver.””
Hmmm. I like the Volt. Been a proponent for them to bring it to market since day one and am extremely happy that it has been well received by reviewer as well as it actually being in production. But…my memory runs more than several weeks so I”m not buying Park’s bull about CS mileage. It is what it is: better than nearly every other car on the road but well short of GM’s promise for nearly for years.
That’s OK, for 90% of driver’s their “effective” gasoline consumption will blow away anything that is in significant mass production except the Leaf. And, the Volt does it with a level of refinement, performance, and style that the Leaf nor nearly every lesser high mileage car cannot touch (MKZ and Lexus hybrid being the only arguable exceptions).
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:52 am).
Cost per mile (in slightly altered form) is on the label for cars on the lot now.
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:54 am)I agree. It doesn’t much matter unless there’s a table on the label
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (7:21 am)From the article
“Maybe we’ll get a 40,” he added hopefully. Asked what types of values he has been seeing in testing he said ,”we see some people getting 45, 48 miles per gallon.
This is a concern for me. I hope it comes out to at least 40 miles per gallon.
With the price tag being so high, uneducated consumers need to feel like they are getting something.
I would still like to see 50 mpg but I know that isn’t going to appear on the label.
Nov 5th, 2010 (7:25 am)I still maintain the simplest measure for the Volt is a typical daily driving cycle of say about 60 miles per day with overnight recharge. This will provide about 120 mpgg.(mpgg gasoline miles equivalent.) The 60 miles is already more than the vast majority of the people will use for daily driving. If your use more the mileage will be less and if your use less the mileage will be more. This model is uncomplicated. The largest variant rightly so is the recharge, which supplies the 40 electric miles each day to the 60 miles used.
Electricity cost is so much less then gas cost that it is not necessary to include here.
This is the whole point of the Volt.
+4
Nov 5th, 2010 (7:48 am)I don’t understand why the EPA cuts the efficiency results they receive in their tests by 30%. If their tests don’t accurately simulate what an average driver will encounter, then maybe they need to revise their tests. If they are cutting the numbers to lower expectations, then that really bugs me as it calls into question their motivations and objectivity.
+5
Nov 5th, 2010 (7:48 am)Looks like the Volt will be a car whose EPA numbers won’t reflect its true capability and worth. Chevrolet had better get a bunch of testimonial type ads ready as soon as possible. Lyle, start rehearsing your lines…..
+5
Nov 5th, 2010 (7:48 am)who buttons their jacket and keeps the tie outside?
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:08 am)“Park explains this 30% rule has been developed over time and is applied to every car. “There is an unadjusted number and then they cut it by 30 percent,” he said. “They’ve run tests overtime and they’ve gotten down to this 30 percent.”
If this rule is applied to every car, that should be stated on the window sticker, along with the statement, “We fudge the numbers by 30% ‘just because’.”
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:09 am)Apparently Doug Parks. lol.
+13
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:20 am)So does that mean a 50mpg rated Prius really gets 75mpg? Thats news to me……
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:21 am)And we “educated consumers” want a value that makes comparisons straightforward.
1 rating when gasoline is powering the generator and regen
1 rating when power is provided by the batteries and regen
* Use the standard test loop currently used for all vehicles
Let the consumer/manufacturer make their private cases on how to maximize efficiency by use patterns (charging every night, hypermiling, etc.) and keep it out of the EPA ratings scheme.
I want to compare/see how efficiently each EV uses the stored battery power they carry.
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:25 am)Mr. Parks notes that the EPA will test the car and then reduce the efficiency by essentially a fudge factor. “When the EPA runs their test, they get a number and they will cut it by 30 percent, and that will be our label number for EV range,” he said.
Park explains this 30% rule has been developed over time and is applied to every car. “There is an unadjusted number and then they cut it by 30 percent,” he said. “They’ve run tests overtime and they’ve gotten down to this 30 percent.”
What?? Are you kidding? Is he saying that the mileage on the label is a worst-case, that you should actually get better mileage (maybe 30% better)? We all know the opposite is true. If the label says you get 30 MPG you know the reality is you might get 26-28 MPG. It is the consumer who has to add in a fudge factor! Their (EPA) tests are obviously not very realistic (hence the need for a fudge factor in the first place) and they still have some work to do on their fudge factors in order to bring their estimates into alignment with the real world (although I do acknowledge their recent changes in testing have improved this to some degree).
It seems odd that for all other cars the ‘real’ MPG is overestimated on the EPA stickers, in my opinion, yet Mr. Parks is saying for the Volt it will most likely be underestimated. I am guessing if this is the case, and I hope it is, it is due to the uniqueness of the Volt’s complex electric drivetrain and incompatibility with current EPA test procedures. Based on those early CAB results, I am hopeful that real world numbers are higher than EPA estimates, and that early purchasers and CABies get the word out on what we can realistically expect to see with this amazing vehicle.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:30 am)That label will be a great collectors item some day.
Tom
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:30 am)Nice tie. Goes with the color on the car. Nice car.
+5
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:33 am)Why an EPA label? To relay information to the consumer in understandable terms. The Volt operates in two modes. So there must be a two mode EPA label.
Volt (2 mode system)
M1 ~ Electric operation: 38 miles per charge (120V 8hrs or 240V 4hrs)
M2 ~ Gasoline operation: 38 mpg highway / 40 mpg city
Leaf (single mode system)
Electric Operation: 90 miles per charge (120V 16hrs or 240V 8hrs)
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:38 am)It is proper to maintain the original test and adjust by a factor to get “realistic” mileage. The tests themselves cover a detailed range of driving patterns and attempting to change them will do little to get better results. Maintaining backwards compatibility is important so the adjustment factor can be applied to all previous models for accurate comparison.
I just don’t understand what’s taking so long to publish the results, known for a long time now.
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:40 am)LazP,
The MPGe for the Volt will be in the high 90′s with the EV range alone if the AER range is in high 30′s. It will be somewhere between high 90′s and high 30′s for all other drive cycles. This includes charging losses. The 30% fudge factor is across all cars, apples to apples here. I have been saying this about the numbers the EPA will come out with for some time and get – votes for it but it’s reality. The Volt is still a value after the tax incentives when you look at total package.
As far as what he says about people stating they get better than the EPA estimates unlike the article states this is actually normally true. Just check out fueleconomy.gov and look at the ratings vs. what people say they are getting for most cars.
+4
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:48 am)I see a lot of comments about people getting worse mpg than EPA labels state. This is simply not true they normally get better. Remember they changed the MPG ratings 5 or 6 years ago. Just look at fueleconomy.gov. It cleary shows based on what people report to the site most people get better MPG than the label states. On avg say 20-30% better over the combined #. Wonder where that # came from!!
-13
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:49 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:50 am)Oh, please! The professional photographer will position the model in the most uncomfortable way to get the look they want. Don’t blame Mr. Parks.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:57 am)Underlying all this hoopla about the sticker on the car is that our thoughtful government has mandated the car companies reach certain MPG figures or be fined. Do you give GM MPG credit for electric driving thereby increasing the company MPG?
Lots of political questions that are being forced to the front now.
+4
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:59 am)Raymond, your 1st sentence I’ve quoted above is a legitimate question many are raising. And the answer lies in your last two sentences above. Let me explain…
First of all, the EPA label (like the larger window label showing how a new car is equipped) is displayed simply to aid customers in comparing a car to other cars. It will likely be removed —perhaps even discarded— within 1-2 days, if not before you drive the car off the dealer’s lot. But these window stickers need to correctly and quickly convey information any customer walking by the car can easily absorb in a few seconds (not minutes).
From what I’ve read, there are several key people within the EPA as well as the DOE that want to avoid being overly “cerebral” in conveying this to customers, i.e, to avoid presenting the car’s efficiency in terms of kWh/mile for example. According to the EPA, the Tesla Roadster’s efficiency is 120 MPGe (2.0 L/100 km). In terms of energy, it uses 135 Wh/km (21.7 kWh/100 mi or 490 kJ/km) battery-to-wheel….*
For clarity, let me list these numbers for the Roadster in the order given by the EPA…
1) 120 MPGe
2) 2.0L/100 km
3) 135 Wh/km
4) 21.7 kWh/100 mi
5) 490 kJ/km
Although I’m a physicist accustomed to dealing with various number systems and many different units for specifying energy, the 1st one listed is really the only one that readily conveys information to me useful for comparing the Roadster to other cars when I walk up to its window.
Next let’s assume that a new Volt’s EPA label (in addition to several other numbers) includes an equivalent mileage number of 122 MPGe. In your own case, Raymond, you’d quickly recognize 122MPGe to be ~6 times your Buick Regal’s mileage of 20.3 MPG, so you’d realize the Volt’s operating cost/mile at gas prices in your area to be ~2 cents/mile as opposed to your Regal’s ~12 cents/mile. Admittedly the 122MPGe EPA sticker number doesn’t tell the whole story —only what applies for most people for most (78%) of their driving. But it’s quick & it’s correct —and it compares exactly to the ONE number every Volt’s instrument panel will itself display.**
/* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster (3rd paragraph)
/** I readily understand why several at the EPA favor including an MPGe number on the label — and based on the reasoning I explain briefly above, so do I
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:01 am)Me too. I’m uncertain why it doesn’t.
I’m not convinced it matters. I think every 2011 will sell without trouble. After that, there is a whole lot of real world data and the Volt can sell by word of mouth. The stories about how little gasoline is used by people is a powerful marketing tool.
I don’t think the GM engineers are leaving much on the table, but the disparity between the Prius and the Volt is sad to see. The only place the Volt doesn’t have comparable stats is the weight; I would have thought it wouldn’t have made as much difference as it appears to.
+8
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:07 am)miles per kwh city/highway (6 / 4)
miles per gallon city / highway (38 / 40)
Actual mileage WILL vary. Keep it simple and the above shows me all I need to know. BTW numbers are made up so no one get on me for them
.
Then give the ranges just like they do on today’s stickers. Let GM educate the public on how to get the best mpg so to speak out of their car.
BTW this is my first post here. I am a Leaf fan but before that I am a fan of automobiles. The volt intrigues me and I hope it does very well. So I am also a Volt fan too kinda. The fact these two cars are getting pitted against each other is fantastic for the auto world. I hope there is a GM vs nissan rivalry that will keep innovation knocking at our doorstep. I am a firm beleiver that without competition there would be slow or no progress.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:07 am)Oh, I completely agree with you. They will be sold out and fast.
But with me current economic situation, that won’t be with me. I’ll have to wait until the 2013 models.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:11 am)In a new vehicle I bought this year, the EPA numbers on the sticker have been good forecasts. If EPA is discounting by 30%, then that seems to be what’s needed to get from the lab measurement to realistic driving conditions. At least, that’s our experience.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:11 am)Welcome!
+4
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:23 am)“One of the difficult things about this car is its so hard to put a single number on it.”
——————————
How about #1
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:24 am)I have said this before and I will say it again.
For a car like the Volt, which can be driven under so many different conditions, it is almost impossible to determine a single number to rate the car. The car has two distinct modes of operation, so there has to be more than one number to represent those modes.
But of course, the bureaucrats have decided that we are all just too stupid to understand that an EREV car does not use gasoline in the same way as a car with no battery pack, so they are going to make it fit in their predefined models whether it makes any sense or not!!!
And a 30% fudge factor??? Are you kidding me? Only the government would use a number like that and consider it to be a good number. I could do as well by throwing darts at a board……… I could just hear my customers laughing at me if I tried to give them figures based on a possible 30% error rate!
If people really want to find out how the car will work for them, GM should set up a small computer at the dealership that asks the user several questions about their daily driving patterns, and then displays some sample results, based on where and how that person drives.
Sorry for the rant, but governmental rule by committee stupidity just really bothers me….
NPNS
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:24 am)EPA fuel economy label values have been discounted differently over the years. The EPA and Highway values are a byproduct of the testa. The tests were not developed originally for fuel economy but for exhaust emissions. The FPT cycle is a drive developed by CARB in the 1950′s to represent a typical drive to work in LA in the 50′s. It is run at 68-86 deg (usually 72 deg ) with the AC OFF. AC systems back when then caused a large variation in the results. The Highway test was developed to foil a trick by one of the manufactures, not GM by the way. This manufacturer chanded, added 15 degrees of spark advance, when the number of seconds the throttle was pressed exceeded the time required on the FTP! When the spark was advanced the NOX emisstons went up a factor of 4. Another manufacturer disabled all emission controls whenever the hood was closed because that made their vehicles run better. This worked because the hood has to be open to run the FTP to prevent over heating on the test. So more requlations followed. The 20 deg F (Cold CO test) and the 50 deg F tests were developed to make manufactures control emissions at lower temperatures.
Back in the eairly 70′s EPA took the fuel economy from the emission tests and applied them to CAFE and Fuel Economy Lables. They applies a 10% fudge factor. To make it easier the manufacturer only had to test projected high volume configurations. The manufactures became very adept in picking the configurations that maximized the fuel economy lables. They conveniently did not test vehicles with higher CD’s or many options or fatter tires. They could also sort through their development vehicles to find the one that obtained the best Fuel Economy. Side note – putting big fat tires on your vehicle could cost you 15% or more in Fuel Economy. As are result people could not attain the Label Values. So over the years EPA has changed the fudge factors and required more combinations to be tested. They are adding even more test’s to factor into the labels in the future.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:27 am)Actually there isn’t anything nefarious here. In fact it’s a good thing. The EPA drive cycles are very mild. They don’t want to change them because that would very much confuse the results for CAFE purposes — they’d be moving the goal posts so to speak. Consequently they run the car through the mild test cycles and then apply an adjustment factor for how the car will more likely be driven. This change was BTW precipitated by the Prius. When cars had a label of 23 MPG and people got 18 MPG there wasn’t too much outcry. But when the label said 50 MPG and people got 37 MPG they started screaming. Similar reduction in percentage terms but much bigger in absolute terms.
I believe but an mot certain that auto manufacturers have the option of having the EPA run the car through more stringent cycles and not applying the “realism factor” and that they opt for the factor.
-2
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:27 am)Wow, what a tired topic. TODAY is the day everyone should talk off-topic, instead of yesterday. Any conspiracy theories? How about global warming? Is Obama going to the center? Why do we have 5 fingers and toes? Will the Volt Dance be on Kinect?
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:36 am)OK, I’ll bite:
Morgan Threewheeler to Return with Harley Power – By Bob Golfen
Anglophiles rejoice. A new generation of the famed three-wheeled Morgan that closely follows the principles of the original will be launched as a 2011 model, the venerable British automaker announced Wednesday.
Morgan Motor Co., well-known for keeping the faith of traditional sports-car construction, said the 2011 Threewheeler will be powered by a V-twin motorcycle engine hanging off its nose just like most versions of the cyclecar that Morgan produced from 1911 to 1952.
Only now instead of J.A.P. or Matchless engines, the latter-day Threewheeler gets an 1800 cc Harley-Davidson Screamin’ Eagle that will churn 100 horsepower in the Morgan, the company said. The transmission is a five-speed from Mazda, and the engine gets an electric start instead of having to be pushed to fire up, as did the early Morgans.
Morgan said that Threewheeler will accelerate from zero to 60 mph in 4.5 seconds and have a top speed of 115 mph.
Styling for the simple cyclecar will follow that of the Super Sport Aeros that Morgan built from 1927 to 1939, including an exposed exhaust that runs down one side of the car. These performance three-wheelers became famous on race tracks and back roads in their day for their competitive power and handling instead of just their economy.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:39 am)No wonder the EPA figures are different. Read how it is done!
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/fuel-economy/28004-epa-fuel-economy-explained.htm
This paragraph from page 2 of the article is key: “Throughout the test, a hose is connected to the vehicle’s tailpipe and collects the engine’s exhaust. The amount of carbon present in what’s spewed from the exhaust system is measured to calculate the amount of fuel burned. The EPA claims this is more accurate than using a fuel-gauge to physically measure the amount of gasoline being burned. Still, the final fuel economy figures are adjusted downward, by 10 percent for city driving and 22 percent in highway mileage, to help reflect the differences between what happens in a lab and out on an actual road.”
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:39 am)nasaman,
Thank you for your post explaining this to people that don’t understand. I would add that these MPGe #’s do not include charging losses as they should because you pay for the losses as well. My understanding is with losses the roadster is closer to ~98 MPGe. I believe its losses are ~20% during charging!
Not including charging losses is like having a leaking gas tank that leaks out a gallon as you are filling it and acting like you didn’t pay for that gallon.
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:41 am)===========================
OK I agree with what you are saying, but not your conclusions.
If new modes of transportation require different methods of relaying information to the consumer, then maybe instead of trying to ram electric car ratings into an ICE based methodology, we should change over to a new set of terms and have the ICE world change over the new standard. So you will have a single standard, but one that is able to encompass all the car types.
Kind of like the world going metric to be a global standard. Oh wait, we all know how that one worked out…..
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:43 am)MichaelH,
Thanks, MH. Pretty cool.
CNBC said Ener1′s CEO’s going to be on soon.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:43 am)The problem is that, for most onsumers, it conveys no useful information. The MPGe is an efficiency number, meaning that it tells you how relatively efficient the car is. But it doesn’t tell you how expensive it is to drive, and that’s what the consumer cares about.
For example, if a gallon of gas contains 37.5 kWh of energy, then an MPGe of 150 would mean it takes one-third the energy to move the car as it would to move a Prius with an MPG of 50. That might be great or terrible depending on the relative price of electricity and gasoline. If electricity was $.37/kWh then the EV would cost roughly 30% more to drive per mile despite the fact the MPGe number was 3X better. But if electricity was $.06/kWh then it would be 4x less expensive to drive the EV. So while the number is meaningful for a scientist/engineer it seems misleading for the vast majority of consumers who care about costs but have no idea and don’t care about efficiency per se.
Also the MPGe number may not be accurate. For CAFE purposes there are a number of calculations but at the end, for an EV, the method assumes a gallon of gas contains something like 82 kWh of energy. That gives the EVs better MPGe numbers, hence Nissan’s claim that the Leaf would get 367 MPGe or something, but it’s not realistic at all. No idea of course what the MPGe number on the car label would be based on.
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:43 am)The EPA sticker is a guide, for comparison. But it also is for CAFE standards. Since the Volt has an engine and burns fuel, there needs to be a standardized way to measure the fuel usage. In order for it to be useful to the general consumer, it can’t be too complicated. So a fancy 3 dimensional graph showing all the possible permutations of driving characteristics to fuel economy just isn’t possible, or really very useful. The Volt gets to be the first in this family of vehicles. As more like it (plug-in hybrids) become available on the market, maybe EPA will revise the procedure and sticker.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:45 am)Until we are off of petroleum as a fuel, it will continue to be used.
Being able to compare the use of electricity vs petroleum is one advantage of using a duel rating system. By determining the ratio of the two, a person can see how we are progressing toward elimination of petroleum as a fuel. There are statistics on how many of this vehicle or that vehicle is on the road. There are statistics on how many miles we travel over a period of time. We will be able to reasonably estimate how many miles were traveled in ICE vehicles and how many miles traveled in BEV’s, etc. Then there are EREV’s like the Volt that have both fuel sources. In the end, if we find that global warming has been worsened by burning fossel fuels, or that Peak Oil has arrived, our governments can plan to speed up the transition to an electric economy.
Some day in the near future, when more people are aware of these problems, they will realize how important moving by electric power is. They will realize the large vehicles are not so desirable and how up-sizing everything has made life more expensive in so many ways. The resources of our planet are limited. The need to downsize many products to insure that there will be enough material to make what growing populations will demand is essential. We see this happening with smaller and lighter laptop computers; fewer and fewer desk top computers are sold every year. Even the laptop may become extinct with the latest hand held devices. The same holds true for motor vehicles. Instead of SUV’s and trucks, people will realize that such large vehicles are not needed just to commute. The idea of two cars and a truck parked in or next to the garage for the average family will no longer be a popular conception.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:47 am)The 30% “fudge factor” is not really a fudge factor it is a buffer. It’s a way of under promising and over delivering on the EPA’s part. In years past it was not this way and the EPA caught flack for it. Yes there are some here that believe that over promising and under delivering is the way to go, but I disagree.
-1
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:52 am)Well, now that you mention it…
Right before I get here and read that the EPA gets to do things so arbitrarily, I read my daily headlines. Troy Polamalu is now telling the press his opinion about James Harrison’s latest $20,000 fine. I watched the alleged violation against Drew Brees. Pathetic! He’s right- Goodell has too much power. I was in a bad enough mood about authority figures when I came here for my daily dose of Volt news. I find myself (perhaps because of this previous headline) in complete agreement with CorvetteGuy. Why does the EPA get to do things ‘just because’? Well, nobody promised life was fair. Can’t dwell on it…..Don’t Worry….Be Happy.
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:53 am)This isn’t quite as simple as you’re making it out to be. For CAFE purposes, there are many losses taken into account, including generation losses at the power generation plant and the transmission losses incurred in moving the power to the home. There is also a multiplier for the fact that you’re not using any gasoline.
That’s for CAFE, however. How this would work e sticker isn’t clear. The only thing we do know is that the number of kWh you need to go 100 miles, which appears on the stickers in the past and now, represents wall to wheels not tank to wheel numbers. IOW if the number says that you need to use 28 kWh to go 100 miles that means you’d use 28 kWh from the electrical outlet not from the battery pack. FWIW I think the wall to pack losses are more like 10% than 20% but that’s going to depend on a number of factors.
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:54 am)I think the EPA is using the 37.5KWh per gallon #. I disagree that this tells the consumer nothing of the cost of operation. It gives a pretty good estimate. The labels will also include what price per gallon and price per KWh they are using in there estimates for cost of operation. If someone whats to adjust for there local area it will be easy. I think you are making it more complicated than what it is.
+5
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:54 am)T 1: CNBC said Ener1’s CEO’s going to be on soon.
Well, he was just on. One thing he seemed to say was that an energy bill is something that might be discussed again–by the Dems because of the climate angle and by the Reps because of the oil independence angle. Now THAT would finally be progress.
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:55 am)Is it just me or does it feel like OUR governement agency (The EPA) is in some ways being a henderance to getting us off Oil/Gas usage …?
They can do whatever they want relative to the EV label and GM’s 25 – 50 miles effective EV range seems very resonable. If the EPA runs a bunch of Volts and gets that statistical spread then just leave it alone rather then specify a specific number. I don’t see why they have to adhere to the current practice used on the MPG side of the label. I can understand them wanting to have a single number on MPG so it’s somewhat consistant with the industry standard, but the EV side is wide open in my opinion.
25 – 50 Effective EV Range
38 MPG Highway
37 MPG City
Granted the City might be better then Highway but either way it’s still a reasonable label.
I work for the government and we have such PIN heads here at times.
And to be far this will suck for LEAF’s also. I’d hate to see Nissan have an effective range of 80 to 120 EV miles and the EPA stick them with a 92 mile number.
GO Volt and LEAF
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:56 am)I’m a typical driver (20.5 miles commute each way). In general, I get better than EPA numbers when commuting and get way better numbers when driving pure highway.
For Volt, I’m thinking I will get a greater difference if they are going to use these low numbers. There will be another lash-back from consumers when this happens.
For my commute, I should be in AER over 90% of the time. I will use no gas unless I go on a trip and take Volt instead of my other full-size car. (not likely).
If Chevrolet made a BEV100, that would work for me better than an EREV40 with my drive cycles. I am on the LEAF list, but, I doubt that I will buy a car from an non-US company whether they assemble it here or not. (I never have so far.)
Nov 5th, 2010 (9:57 am)The consumer does’t pay for generation losses!! I am only talking about things relative to the consumer here.
I do agree it should be wall to wheel as this is the consumers portion.
Most accouts of charging losses for the Telsa are ~20% but I agree it will vary based on a # of things. I don’t however believe it will only be 10%.
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:00 am)Government Credo: Expect less and you won’t be disappointed or have a need to criticize us
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:01 am)flmark,
Still amazing to me how uncoordinated our government is. Cash for clunkers benefitted the small-car makers most, for example, which means the foreign-owned ones. If we were looking to support the AMERICAN economy, then do THAT. Could have supported business purchases of vehicles, instead, such as pickups and vans, which would both stimulate business growth and jobs and sales of the american vehicle co.’s.
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:02 am)Don, you’re taking the “cerebral” approach to reasoning through this. And you’re mistaken. In fact, the entire point of my post is that MPGe conveys MORE USEFUL INFORMATION THAN ANY OF THE OTHER EPA EXAMPLES I LIST! No, I didn’t specifically show how the 122MPGe was calculated or how the cost of electricity included ….because it was an ASSUMED number in my discussion. Any way you ‘slice it’, MPGe is much more easily understood than 2.0L/100 km, 135 Wh/km, 21.7 kWh/100 mi or 490 kJ/km, simply because it relates directly to MPG (therefore cost/mile) which everyone understands.
PS: My assumption of 122MPGe is somewhat optimistic, but the 30% “fudge” (reduction) factor Lyle quotes Parks as saying the EPA uses should largely take care of that.
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:03 am)OK. So why don’t you explain how you would fix the problem? Here’s the problem. The EPA is using test cycles that gives an MPG. Congress passes a law that says that by year Y cars should get X MPG. No problem so far. However, time doesn’t stand still, and as time goes on people start driving faster and pushing their cars more. So rather than using 187 wh/mile on average, they are now using 230 wh/mile. As a result, consumers start complaining that they can never get the MPG which shows up on the stickers in the car windows.
What exactly would you do? If you change the test cycles to reflect current driving, then you’re effectively increasing the MPG required by CAFE. The car companies aren’t going to like that at all. But if you use the MPG numbers from the old drive cycles consumers are going to complain that the numbers are grossly inflated and don’t reflect reality. The EPA has addressed this by using the numbers from the old drive cycle for CAFE purposes and then adjuring them for the sticker. Since you deem this “arbitrary” what’s your solution?
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:10 am)OT: Anyone going to the unplugged test drive in Paramus, NJ tomorrow? I can’t wait!
join thE REVolution
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:11 am)37 MPG City?
In CS mode the Volt accelerates to 20 mph using battery power. When the brakes are applied usable energy is restored. MPG city should be higher than MPG highway.
=D-Volt
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:19 am)I still can’t figure out the problem they have.
The Volt benefits of two energy carriers: Electricity from the battery which is filled from an outlet, and electricity from the ICE ran with gasoline from the tank. Two modes, two distinctive efficiency measures.
Treat both case separately and independently: Battery mode in MPGe (not too bad and easy for anyone to understand) and CS mode in MPG.
Don’t ever think about adding the statistical evaluation of a typical driving pattern in order to tune up the numbers. Keep objectiveness from A to Z.
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:21 am)Maybe, just maybe, they are doing this with the realization that the average driver doesn’t try to obey speed limits posted on the highway and on average few will ever get the kind of mileage that they get in tests. It’s wrong to think that they can revise the tests to give what drivers will actually experience; they have to drive at legal speed limits during the test. To lower the actual results by 30% sets a rating that people will experience. Knowing that they deliberately lowered the rating by this percentage allows people to try to better their driving habits. Other wise we see what is happening now: statements like “no one ever gets the EPA rating” and “It’s just another government boondoggle.”
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:25 am)This has been mentioned before…
Why don’t they use litres per 100 kilometers rather than miles per gallon. (Canada and Europe uses this type of mileage indicator.) Then only 2 numbers would be required:
l/100km with a full charge
l/100km with no charge
and…as an option… all electric kms
As all other vehicles are currently rated with l/100kms (Can/EU) an easy comparison can be made.
For those of us that haven’t caught up with the rest of the world…gallons per 100 miles could be used…:-)
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:27 am)ATTN EPA: This is good, level-headed advice!
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:28 am)Yes, your right, not very realistic. Tests done at legal limits. Out on the road, posted speed limit of 60 really means 65 – 70! And occasionally, 80 -90, if the troopers are looking the other way.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-10
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:31 am)(click to show comment)
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:32 am)That’s how new trends start.
+4
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:33 am)What’s the new date when Lyle gets his Volt?
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:33 am)Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:35 am)I think these two sentences are mutually exclusive.
Either you have one vehicle that does ‘everything’ or you have a fleet of specialized vehicles.
If you only have one vehicle, then an SUV or 4-door pickup could be that commuter vehicle.
If you have specialized vehicles, then an SUV would be the weekend hauler and something like Volt or LEAF would be the commuter car.
I seriously doubt that families with multiple drivers will become a single-vehicle family. I think the exact opposite. The kids will move back in because of the economy and you will have *more* vehicles in the driveway, not less. I’m working from history here, not conjecture.
-2
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:47 am)So you’re saying that a consumer would find it easier to compare two cars if the stickers read 30 MPGe and 123 MPGe rather than if they read $1200 and $366? I don’t think I’m being the cerebral one here. I’m saying that while the MPGe comparison would make sense to you, consumers would immediately get the dollar comparison but not even understand the MPGe comparison. Just guessing, I’d say that 99.99% of consumers would have no idea what MPGe represents.
Out of curiosity, when calculating MPGe, what number did you use? (I realize you didn’t actually do this calculation). Did you assume that a gallon of gas contains 37.5 kWh, which is more or less what is used for standard gasoline? Or did you assume 32.6 kWh which is the standard for California reformulated gasoline? Or did you use 82 kWh, which is what the EPA uses when calculation MPGe? Makes very large differences, my point being that using MPGe is not straightforward and hence not easily used for comparison purposes.
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:50 am)Loboc:
I think these two sentences are mutually exclusive.
Either you have one vehicle that does ‘everything’ or you have a fleet of specialized vehicles.
If you only have one vehicle, then an SUV or 4-door pickup could be that commuter vehicle.If you have specialized vehicles, then an SUV would be the weekend hauler and something like Volt or LEAF would be the commuter car.I seriously doubt that families with multiple drivers will become a single-vehicle family. I think the exact opposite. The kids will move back in because of the economy and you will have *more* vehicles in the driveway, not less. I’m working from history here, not conjecture.
Taking those two sentences out of context, one would easily agree with you. The point, I was making in my post, is in context of limited resources and the never ending trend of the following years model is up-sized. When will it end; it will end when the cost of petroleum goes up again and stays at a high level. When gas got up around $4.00 a gallon, it was amazing to see so many for sale signs on Ford F150′s and other large trucks. People were finding that a smaller affordable are was needed to commute back and forth to work. Only contractors were the ones who needed a truck and were screaming about lost profits because it cost them more to do business.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:56 am)The thing that will be interesting is:
“MPG Estimates from Drivers Like You”
Since MPG literally means Miles Per Gallon, what is someone going to post when they use 9 gallons over 2000 miles? I also don’t see Tesla on this list. What will someone post that uses zero gallons all the time?
The idea of calculating mpg for an EV is totally stupid.
Nov 5th, 2010 (10:57 am)I say run the same test that the prius ran to get it’s 50mpg…
No.. they have to change the test because that number would be too high… BS.
Fact is most people will get well over 100mpg.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:04 am)Yep, that’s exactly what I’m saying… because everyone’s already accustomed to seeing MPG numbers. A simple footnote something like the following is all that would be needed:
*Note: MPGe is the equivalent miles per gallon calculated to include the equivalent cost of both gasoline and of electricity, converted to MPGe as follows: ……………. For comparison purposes, you
may safely assume MPGe = MPG to estimate your overall cost of operation.
BTW, how I would calculate it is of no consequence —I won’t be doing it, the EPA will. But we might as well all get used to the idea of MPGe being on the label, because as Lyle quotes Doug Parks above, “In addition we do think they’re (i.e., the EPA are) going to work in an MPGe, and probably have one of those numbers in EV mode and a different number in charge sustaining mode.”
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:13 am)The EPA uses 37.5 KWh per gallon on there sample labels, I have told you this more than once. Look them up, it says it right on the label. I think consumers understand MPGe.
+6
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:14 am)Yes, the LEAF has had job 1. The unofficial ‘word’ is that they are currently doing a RHD domestic run and LHD dealer demos, to be followed by some US orders very soon for December delivery. There would not be any sticker on them atm.
When they arrive to be sold, there will definitely have to be a signed off EPA sticker of some kind, both for the LEAF and the Volt. However, this may not include the final ‘approved’ stadard, or even any mileage figures at all if they do not get the new standard completed in time. What is required by law is still things like the NHSTA safety ratings, country of origin, foreign content, etc.
+5
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:14 am)As mentioned, it was more of an attitude about authority figures. I read Park’s comments about (basically) bending over backwards to accommodate the EPA and it struck a nerve. I have previously summarized comments on politics and wish rational attitudes were listened to (of which, you have some fine ideas). The cheeriest bit of news is listed by T 1 in #52- some progress of ANY sort would be welcome.
My attitude has been generally sour (in this realm) since I watched as MONTHS went by and the democratic party’s time in charge of government was WASTED on health care. I HAD been a life long Republican, but watched BOTH parties polarize themselves away from things that actually mattered. FDR managed to put people back to work and build infrastructure that we still enjoy today (dams, highways, etc). I actually thought 2008’s elections might yield something similar. Our power grid, energy dependency, environmental footprint, etc, ALL need URGENT attention and our legislators are stuck on things like getting gays in the military. My Gawd, where does it end?
I am disgusted with authority figures at the moment and this EPA news just continues the mayhem. I have nothing to add to some fine ideas (stated here) on resolving the blasted sticker (as if that issue is such a big deal). What I have real trouble with right now is a government that is so off center that the concept of making REAL progress on ANYTHING of RELEVANCE (like 60’s Civil Rights bill or 70’s Environmental bills) is nowhere in sight.
+4
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:14 am)Using MPG and using dollar figures makes no sense to me. You all seem much more educated then I, so call me the “typical American”. I have no clue what and MPGe is either.
I want to know on an extended range EV like the volt how far I can go on electric. So show me miles per kwh, because I won’t always have a fully charged battery and also show me the range it can go on a full charge. So something like 6miles per kwh city/ 4 miles per kwh highway then the range like this 48city / 32 highway. This would work for the Leaf as well. Then show me the MPG and range on charge sustaining mode. Of course it will vary as that will also be on the sticker.
That info above will allow the “typical american” to easily compare the volt and leaf and any other car with eachother. I can see clearly which vehicle uses less energy to travel a certain distance and I can see how far in total it can go before a recharge.
Maybe I’m oversimplifying this or maybe certain people just want the highest numbers on the sticker to better sales. The epa should just present the facts we know instead of trying to come up with elaborate ways to make a sticker.
+13
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:15 am)Wish I knew.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:17 am)nasaman,
I think DonC is the one having problems understanding MPGe, not the avg. consumer! I know it’s hard MPG=MPGe as far as avg cost to consumer. Sounds difficult to me!
+7
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:25 am)EPA should read like this..
PHV PRIUS:
EV Range: Up to 13 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 60mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
Chevy Volt:
EV Range: Up to 40 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 90mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
LEAF:
EV Range: Up to 100 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 90mph
Hybrid Mode: N/A
All depending on driver and driving conditions.
DO NOT BLEND AER WITH LIQUID FUEL CONSUMPTION!!!
DO NOT BLEND AER WITH LIQUID FUEL CONSUMPTION!!!
DO NOT BLEND AER WITH LIQUID FUEL CONSUMPTION!!!
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:26 am)I am hoping GM is smart enough to tell the EPA to hold off on the label until after the IPO.
The numbers the EPA put out will be very low because of the factor of safety and they will also be wrong. Just plain wrong for most drivers.
Why will the number be wrong? Because with this type of system everything depends on the driver’s specific situation.
That is why I recommend a well designed web application (for mobile devices as well) so that each potential customer can get a far more accurate estimation for the numbers that their Volt will deliver.
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:28 am)My initial reaction to the $40K was anger, but at the same time I knew it was the correct decision by GM management. The anger was just the personal disappointment, but I wouldn’t have been able to get the car anyway because of availability.
If GM had kept the price around $30K, the dealerships would have run the price up anyway. GM might as well keep the profits for themselves since they are the one that took more of the risk.
What I’m happy to see is that both the Volt and the LEAF are selling even without a delivery date.
+8
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:29 am)For what it is worth they were apparently validating programs for the Volt with the FARO laser tracker yesterday
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:29 am)I’m really with you today and yesterday on the topic of multi-use vs multiple vehicles. We have a 2000 Mitsubishi Diamonte (wife/trips) 25+mpg, 2000 Jeep Cherokee (me/snow) 20/22mpg, 1998 Dodge 3/4 ton 4X4 diesel (hauler/trailer puller) 18mpg, 1995 Goldwing (you know – pleasure) 40mpg.
WHEN I can get a Volt (in New Mexico), it will replace the Diamonte.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:31 am)You’re probably right. We should simply explain that, in terms of overall cost of operation to the consumer, MPGe=MPG
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:31 am)The guys at myth busters are smarter than all of the EPA folks
When they did fuel efficiency comparisons, they connected the fuel line to a large graduated cylinder. They then could read the fuel used fairly accurately.
-2
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:35 am)So charming to see the government struggle to make a label for a government owned car company but no trouble at all giving it an anti-competitive 45B tax break. Does that make repaying the 60B bailout sound a leeeetle bit reedickulouse?
Maybe they should let NASA design it – it might not take a rocket scientist.
F the label.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:36 am)It will end when the world population is held to a sustainable level, or, we import resources from off-planet. The problem is bigger than the petroleum slice.
Heck, I’m already paying $3/gallon (premium). $4/gallon isn’t going to change behavior that much if it gets there gradually. A spike in price will affect behavior temporarily, but, people are still buying Silverados faster than Malibus even after gas already hit $4/gallon in 2008.
The guy sitting next to me bought a used Expedition when gas hit $4/gallon. It was a bargain. If gas hit $5/gallon or more, he will still go deer hunting and drive the SUV. I, for one, did not sell my truck in 2008. Nobody else I know did either. As a matter of fact, most of the people I know that drive trucks right now bought them in 2008 when they were cheap!
Y’all can continue to postulate that all this will change sometime soon. It won’t. It’ll take generations to make any changes. If at all.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:36 am)CaptJackSparrow,
I like this except I want miles per kwh as it shows which vehicle driven by electric is doing it more efficiently. I guess I can use the overall range and divide by the battery size but then I’d have to know exactly how much of the pack gets used and do the math for both cars. Alot of work for typical american
.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:36 am)MPGe also ignores the difference between chemical and electrical energy. Electrical energy is a far more useful form of energy in that it can be converted into mechanical work with very high efficiency.
A small electric motor, for example a refrigerator motor, is close to 90% efficient. A similar small chemically fueled engine would be at best 20% efficient.
Big motors can exceed 95% efficiency, with the biggest besting 97%. The best fuel burning engines are combined cycle gas turbines at 59%.
The good part of electricity is it is the cleanest form of energy people use.
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:37 am)Question: How much of a purchase decision is based on these ratings system? If a person wants a certain type of vehicle – they will find a way to justify that purchase. EPA’s reputation has taken a severe beating the last few years. Their ratings system like those of Consumer Reports, reflects the agenda of the current Administration, and is discounted by those who know this.
With the recent news that California will provide it’s own $5k tax credit – the cost of a brand new Chevy Volt in California is $28,500.00 – accessible to many new car buyers. Total cost and desirability will have a much greater influence than any EPA sticker.
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:39 am)postulate
WTF does that mean?
Off to gooogle it…..
/Dang Loboc and his big words…
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:40 am)Because it makes trucks and SUVs look so bad!
15 MPG vs. 20 MPG doesn’t sound like much. When using the reciprocal, the 6.6 sounds a lot worse than 5.
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:42 am)pos·tu·lat·ed, pos·tu·lat·ing, pos·tu·lates
1. To make claim for; demand.
2. To assume or assert the truth, reality, or necessity of, especially as a basis of an argument.
3. To assume as a premise or axiom; take for granted.
lol
I learnded a new word today yall!!
+4
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:42 am)This may be a really stupid question, but doesn’t a kilowatt of energy cost a different amount if you get it from gasoline vs. getting it from the electric company? And wouldn’t that cost differential change depending on where you’re located? And who you buy your electricity from? And with smart metering, it could even change depending on what time of day you charge your car?
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:43 am)Most people don’t have a need for a car they can drive to orbit.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:48 am)And it doesn’t tell me how far I can go on a full charge, or 3/4 charge or 1/2 charge or 1/4 charge.
And doesn’t take in the fact that I might accidentally plug into my neighbors outlet to get a full charge.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:49 am)/que the theme song….
“Meet George Jetson…….”
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:52 am)Thankfully still off-topic:
“The United States, once GM’s primary market, is featured in the video and slide show, but the automaker heavily emphasizes its strategy for increasing sales in fast-growing foreign markets.
About two-thirds of GM’s sales are outside North America, Liddell said, and the automaker has it sights on expanding further in the emerging markets of Brazil, China, India and Russia.
GM already has boosted its market share in China over the past 10 years from 3.4 percent to 13.3 percent, said Tim Lee, president of GM’s international operations. GM’s sales in China have grown from 75,000 vehicles in 2000 to 1.8 million last year.
GM logged record sales in China last month — almost 200,000 vehicles — bringing its sales for the year to 1.98 million, a 36 percent gain. GM is on pace this year, for the first time, to sell more vehicles in China than in the U.S.
In the next four years, the automaker plans to introduce more than 25 new vehicles in China.
GM said it is the top-seller in Brazil, Russia, India and China, with 12.7 percent of the combined market. It’s the third-largest seller in Brazil, with a share of 19 percent.”
http://www.detnews.com/article/20101105/AUTO01/11050394/1148/auto01/GM-says-it-can-make-$13B-a-year
Another BRIC in the wall, I say again. 25 new vehicles in China w/in 4 years. Wow.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:56 am)I always thought postulate was a medical procedure. Glad you cleared this up.
=D-Volt
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:57 am)All valid questions, Laura. The answer is that EPA testing protocol should normalize these variables to the extent practical —as I know they plan to do. Beyond that, remember that the ratings are “for comparison purposes”. IOW, to allow consumers to compare one car to another, not to determine exactly what their own actual operating costs will be. BTW, this is not a new limitation —right now gasoline costs roughly $1.00/gal (about 37%) more in California than where I live.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (11:59 am)The Brammo electric motorcycle website has a very cool calculator and this is a tiny start-up company. GM SHOULD HAVE HAD SOMETHING LIKE THIS UP AND RUNNING A YEAR AGO. The Brammo calculator asks a few questions about your driving patterns, and does some calculations for you to show you the cost savings of driving their bike compared to what you’re currently driving. It also shows emissions reductions achieved for the greenies.
http://www.brammo.com/green/#
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:01 pm)The fuel efficiency label can evolve over time. How many EV cars are for sale right now? (Don’t answer that) Any EPA label will be fine for now to inform the car buyer who in the first year or so is going to be an EV enthusiast. Today EV cars are not mainstream transportation choices (don’t tell me about the RE Volt) but in a few years they could be and the label can change to meet those needs. My friend is an example of an informed consumer but still had the misconception for years that the Prius had to be plugged in.
On a side note I can find problems with the energy label on appliances. What crosses the mind of a person reading the label who has solar, wind or hydro supplement at their home? Why is there a cost figure on the label? They are only interested in amperage/watts.
+6
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:04 pm)HELPFUL INFO DEPT.
MOTORWEEK , the PBS affiliated program, has released it’s show entiltled “Chevrolet Volt” ( episode #3008 ) October 29th. It should air on your local PBS affiliate TV network between now and Nov 13th.
If you have Discovery Network HD Theater channel – it airs twice, 5pm and 8pm* on Tue Nov. 9th, and twice, 12am and 1pm* on Wed Nov. 10th.
http://dhd.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=66.16725.131062.40446.7
If not, check your local PBS station online and enter “Motorweek” in the Search. Sometimes it doesn’t get you enough info – so if you have DirecTV just hit your MENU button/ Smart Search/ type in “Volt” and the program shows up as – “Chevrolet Volt“.
Here in Seattle our PBS station, KCTS has opted not to show Motorweek – except on it’s Spanish station? So if you live in the Seattle area your best bet is Tacoma PBS station KBTC ch. 28 where it’s airing once Saturday 11/6 at 1:00pm
Enjoy!
Hope this is helpful
PUMP OUT THE VOLTS! ( in all 50 states ),
James
*Note all times listed are PDT
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:10 pm)Are the losses during charging going to make the 10.4 kWh fill-up use 12 kWh at the elec. meter? (just wondering, not bashing)
Oil prices going up now with this QE2 Quantitative Easing which cannot be ‘recouped’ through a pay-back like the bailouts. So, we have to factor in $3.25/gallon nationwide going into 2011. We should also factor in cost of living increases coming up too. Get your vehicles purchased now before prices start easing upward. Good time to buy an EV.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:11 pm)OT – Meijer to install EV Charging Stations at Stores
This is a MI-based chain, but they have stores throughout the mid-West.
“The first charging station was unveiled today at the Meijer store in Warren, Michigan, and will be followed by stores in Allen Park and Holland, Michigan. Each store will receive two charging stations which can be used by Meijer customers at no cost.”
This sets a great precedent, since they’re doing it at no cost to the customer. Hopefully other large-scale chains will follow and offer to charge charging to customers.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/meijer-to-install-electric-vehicle-charging-stations-at-area-stores-106684918.html
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:14 pm)If there’s a way to learn exactly the tests applied for fuel economy and ultimately sticker numbers – I can’t find it. This is as close as I’ve come.
“…The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) is part of the Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) which is responsible for carrying out laws to control air pollution from motor vehicles, engines, and their fuels. …” From EPA’s website. (NVFE, Ann Arbor, Mich.)
Now EPA asks for our sticker suggestions: http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/label.htm
My aim is to learn why EPA publishes only 70% of the results, which is absolutely absurd, instead of actual test numbers. If someone here has a clue – we’d appreciate your enlightment.
You mean all these rules – rule after rule after rule – tons of bureaucracy – then someone makes an arbitrary adjustment of the actual numbers…its EPA that needs to be cleaned up.
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:18 pm)LOL. I think the MPGe is supposed to be supplemental to the EV range. Not a substitute for it.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:21 pm)This is fantastic news. Not only does it set a precedent, it attracts people to their stores – meaning, it lets a consumer who is buying their $100-300 shopping basket full of stuff charge a few kWh which is worth about 0.08/kWh to businesses, for free. A consumer may get 4-5 kWh during their shopping trip leading to 15-20miles of “free” driving.
Grid-supplied kWh’s are cheaper to these stores than residences. Awesome. Just get Walmart to do it along with throwing some Solar arrays on the roofs of Walmart and we have a really good EV support network using renewable energy.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:22 pm)In a utopian world I hope to see us stop measuring Energy by the gallon, a unit of volume. I can’t go and buy a gallon of Amps or Watts. The EPA should gab the bull by the horns now and change all effeciency rates to kWh/mile.
When Joe pulls up to the gas pump he pays for 36.6kWh for $2.85.
So Joe buys 366kWh and drives 300 miles he ends up with an effciency of .82m/kWh
When his smarter brother Lyle plugs in at home and the drives 40 miles using 10.5kWh, his effeciency is 3.8m/kWh.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:23 pm)Running up to the Seattle International Auto Show this month – still wondering why GM isn’t including Washington state as an introductory market. Gas prices in Seattle as of this morning averaged $3.07/gal and $3.18 in other parts of the state. The national average as of this morning was $2.82/gal.
Hybrids around here are about as common as….trees!
PUMP OUT THE VOLTS! ( in all 50 states ),
James
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:24 pm)From yesterday:
http://www.cnn.com/video/?iref=allsearch#/video/living/2010/10/27/am.bolduan.flying.car.cnn
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:33 pm)Bingo.
A Ge is 37.5kWh.
At 7c/kWh => $2.63 / Ge
At 10c/kWh => $3.75 / Ge
At 12.5c/kWh => $4.69 / Ge
At 15c/kWh => $5.63 / Ge
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:33 pm)But I’m not sure it could be standardized. That’s the problem. And with MPG you can plug in your own price per gallon. If you include the price in the MPGe, then people have to know what the default is, and adjust it. And if you don’t, then people will assume it is the same as for gasoline.
I like miles per kilowatt. That way, the dealer can find out the price of kilowatts around the area and tell people when they’re deciding.And if the dealer doesn’t know, you can always look at your electric bill….
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:35 pm)It is a LEAF introductory market though.
There will be level 3 charging stations available all along I-5 from Bellingham to Ashland within 6 months. That’s 600 miles you can run, all electric.
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:37 pm)They can also do the calculation I just did in my post and tell people what the price in the area is.
Since most electric supply is regulated, it is generally free of volatility. That alone is a good selling point.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:44 pm)Oh. That answers my question then. So price isn’t included in MPGe? But why use Ge instead of KWh? KWh is on my electric bill. Ge is not. Although maybe I need to take another look at my electric bill?
Also, Miles per KWh just looks more different from MPG. Which I think would be an advantage?
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:51 pm)I have discussed, ad nauseum, electrical costs (esp via demand charges) for businesses. You are WAY wrong in your understanding of business electrical costs. I am all for businesses doing this, but do NOT assume it is cheaper when it will be far MORE expensive for a business to accommodate your kilowatt DEMAND for this charger during normal business hours.
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:51 pm)And how soon do you think that will happen? Not within many many generations. It will take population control to attain that sustainable level. Do you think that population control will be acceptable to the populous? To think that we will import resources from off-planet is a solution isn’t realistic either. From where? The Moon? How big is the Moon and how much resource does it give us if we mine it? Yes, the problem is bigger than the petroleum slice.
As for trucks,you may not know many people who felt the crunch and desided to sell their truck but I do. During the height of the gas surge many people who did go out and buy that truck at cheap told me they wished they had bought a car rather than a truck. A farmer down the road, went out and bought new vehicles to replace the trucks that he and his wife were driving. Not everyone is as rich as you are and can afford to pay the higher gas prices. That farmer has been doing well and isn’t poor. He and his wife are very smart.
With the cooler temperatures at night lately, we had our air conditioning turned off and opened our windows. This morning when I woke up, I could hear the din of traffic on the expressway. It reminded me of the huge consumption of petroleum we use each day. No wonder younger people are moving away from the suburbs into the cities. Traveling many miles to just go from one city to another to your place of work isn’t smart. Live closer to work and cut down on your travel expenses.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Nov 5th, 2010 (12:59 pm)How about a system where they estimate how much it costs to move the car 100 miles.
Then in the footnote they can list the assumptions they used for gas price/electric rates/CNG price/cooking oil/whatever.
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:03 pm)Only the Federal bureaucrats can be so confused for so long about an issue as simple as this.
Trying to produce an overall “MPG” figure is a fool’s mission and impossible and useless in any event. What the Volt has is a miles per gallon when operating in charge sustaining mode and a miles per kilowatthour when operating in charge depleting mode. And it has a mileage range when starting out with a fully charged battery. THOSE are the facts that should be on the sticker, for city, highway and combined. End of story. Everyone gets a bill every month that shows them what they are paying for each kilowatthour they draw from the grid. Apparently the Feds think that our citizens are incapable of understanding the concept of a kilowatthour. If we were back in the days when cars replaced horse drawn carriages, I’m quite certain the EPA would have listed on the car sticker the number of miles expected per bale of hay or pound of oats.
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:04 pm)I really hate it when people with Cherokees ( heavy vehicle, truck frame… ) quote EPA numbers, or the guy we all know who loves to say his SRT8 472hp 300C Chrysler gets 20mpg! To quote John Stossel: ” Give Me A Break! “. I know what the EPA sticker said when I bought my 1995 V-6 T100 pickup – But it was only after 2007, when I bought a Prius and learned how to “pulse and glide”, and other momentum-utilizing techniques that I actually saw numbers close or above the 19mpg hwy numbers posted for my truck. Most people have zero clue really what they’re getting, mileage-wise. To whip out a calculator and really determine an approx. mileage you’re seeing in mixed city/hwy driving is near impossible. Each trip is different, as is the mood of the driver that particular day. These folks I know with the Hemis who say they “average 20mpg” are often seen burning rubber or just shooting ahead of traffic since that’s what they bought the big V-8 for in the first place. Even V-6 drivers of heavy Cherokees and such who do the daily grind of stop-and-go of the typical suburban area are nuts if they think they’re even approaching 12-13 mpg in reality. My view is – just take your average person who feels they are pulling in 20-26 mpg and reduce their claims by about 40% and you’ll come up with a more accurate read. The variables are so many – temperature, traffic, topography, human mood….
I’ve said it before and I’ll state it again. Current hybrid drivers will be the first to see 60 miles AER in Volt, and 40mpg in CS mode. We’ve already trained ourselves to drive efficiently, and it takes time, I can tell you – to change old habits of driving. The graphical aids on my hybrid help me a great deal when driving for mileage. It’s a constant visual reminder of what’s going on in your tank. Today I pick flatter routes ( I live in hilly territory ), and even drive less frequently, or mix trips together – all based upon those displays reminding me of my gas usage ( kwhs produced in regen, consumption averages accumulated mileage, etc ).
So if we can use the efficiency monitors OEMs provide on our plug-in hybrids and BEVs – and cross reference them with gauges we can buy on the aftermarket – I’m sure we’ll be saving gas and emissions with a big smile on our faces.
Gas savings is fun – and Volt drivers will play the game of savings nearly every time they go for a spin. It’s why you bought it. All you guys with ICEs in your driveways will be astonished how much gas you’ve been wasting on hills, or leading up to stops on the flats – or just edging along in heavy traffic. With a hybrid you’ve got regen to play with too – and you don’t have to be some hypermiler pissing off people behind you either ( although you’ll have those nights or early Sunday mornings where there’s no traffic and you can hypermile to your heart’s content using all sorts of tricks to roll further ). My point is, cars like Volt, LEAF, or hybrids egg you on to do better with each gallon or kwh you have.
EPA figures will never translate this – so the err of accuracy will be just as true of EFFICIENCY as it is of INEFFICIENCY of the common driver today. Just turn the numbers upside down.
PUMP OUT THE VOLTS! ,
James
-1
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:06 pm)LRGVProVolt, No wonder younger people are moving away from the suburbs into the cities. Traveling many miles to just go from one city to another to your place of work isn’t smart. Live closer to work and cut down on your travel expenses.
But….
Very smart until you have kids and find out that little Johnny is being beat up for being a good student and you hear gunshots each night. Then, you will realize that living in the city is not really “Smart” and many choose to get out of town ASAP. Who could blame them. Parents would rather drive 1 hour each day than have their kids in danger of ignorance and/or harm in any of our cities failing school systems.
Lets see, I can save gas or provide a better future for my kids. I choose the kids.
Perhaps telecommuting is the answer. It surely is not moving back to the city.
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:13 pm)I went to public school in New York city, and I never even heard of anyone being beaten up for being a good student.
And gunshots every night? Have you gone to a city, any city, since the 70s?
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:20 pm)And power too, it doesn’t have comparable stats there either. And no, the weight doesn’t make too much of a difference, it’s the power that makes the difference. And the disparity really isn’t all that large, all things considered. Not sad at all for me. It would have been sad if there existed another car that drives like a Volt but with much higher MPG. Does any such car exist? Anyone?
I think the MPG is high enough for what you get. Have your cake and eat it too.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:22 pm)THIS is a substantial point that I have repeatedly made. I wish I could find the link, but a study was done that showed substantial gas savings EVEN USING THE SAME VEHICLE if folks could monitor their gas usage. Meters of this sort should become standard equipment. Society at large would benefit (much like with catalytic converters). Auto manufacturers under government mandate to improve fleet performance would do themselves a favor by installing energy efficiency displays.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:31 pm)Thanks for the info! Got it (and the LEAF times) DVR’d.
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:33 pm)I’ve been into the “City”. The most noticeable are the bums begging for money and ghetto punks running their foul mouths calling each other names I would get my azz beat for using the same words they use.
So that’s not a place I would bring my son, unless it’s a school field trip somewhere and we ALWAYS chaperon.
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:35 pm)I know….I’m test driving a LEAF in about a week at the big LEAF event here in the Seattle area. BUT I WANT A VOLT ( can you blame me? ) – and I don’t want to drive to California to get it – and I won’t recieve any state sponsored rebates or have a reliable source for servicing. I’ve contemplated a LEAF, Statik has got me thinking, and if my wife ( who now drives/commutes with our Prius 80% of the time ) keeps the Toyota – I’ll sell my V-6 pickup and drive the Volt, ” MINE, ALL MINE!!!”
– Then I’ll buy a beater $800 pickup to park and insure minimally for the utility needs of the home/family/friends. I’ve really thought this whole deal out – eventually the Nissan lease or a LEAF with a thermally managed battery pack can take over the Prius’ role as she never drives over 50 miles per day.
I thought about it a lot, and I said to myself, “Why should I dish out $37,000 so my wife can drive the Volt to work everyday and I’ll only drive it on Sundays?!!”
PUMP OUT THE VOLTS! ,
James
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:36 pm)I just wanted to add–There are places in the cities that aren’t safe. Where the schools are failing. But there are also places where there are great schools, and it’s extremely safe. And it’s not like you’d just stumble on the not-so-safe areas. You actually have to try to get there. There are areas of the Bronx and Brooklyn I still wouldn’t go. But I’d have to ride on the subway for over an hour to get there! And even those places are a lot safer than they used to be.
I know that Harlem public schools get a lot of national media attention. (Although even there you might want to bear in mind that some of the charter schools are amazing.). But in middle class areas, the schools are much much better. And there are a lot of world class private schools with high quality of education. There are also amazing public schools that you can take a placement test to get into.
I went to a college that attracted students from all over the country. And, I really don’t think my education suffered for having grown up in the city.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:40 pm)An enlarged postulate?
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:45 pm)I’ll be there tomorrow morning at 11, look for the really tall guy with the black death metal band hoodie, haha.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:47 pm)Reason I live 38 miles from my job isn’t guns or beatings. It’s because I could not afford what I wanted around my job. My job is in a richer part of the state. I could have bought a 1 bedroom condo and got a second job to pay for it or I could move further out and give my daughter a huge private backyard, almost 2k square feet of living space on a nice cul de sac. Sure some might say I spend alot of money in gas but that is why I sold the old car and grabbed a 1.6 Versa. When money is tight I go light on the pedal and get up to 46mpg. When I’m not thinking of it I drive normal and get high 30′s.
I will eventually move closer to work but the house way out there is a stepping stone. Wish the market was better as I would have stepped off that stone already but for now I’m content with my Versa and my commute. Imagine if I had a Volt or Leaf though
. I drive 32k miles a year and the leaf can do every single one with zero oil or gas. The volt with some smart driving and of course plugging in at work should be able too as well, at least the no gas part.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:49 pm)Which city is that? LA? I haven’t been to downtown LA (from what I understand, nobody goes there.) But there are a lot of cities that aren’t like that. New York, Chicago, Boston, Pittsburgh. I’ve heard that San Francisco is great, but I haven’t been there since I was eight years old, so I don’t know for sure.
We are the billionaire capital of the world. Rich people from all over the world buy places to live in Manhattan. Do you really think that would be case if it wasn’t safe to live here?
http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/10/worlds-richest-cities-billionaires-2009-billionaires-cities.html
Nov 5th, 2010 (1:53 pm)This proves my point. Real estate is more expensive in the city. People wouldn’t spend more money to live in a place they thought wasn’t safe. Or had failing schools. People spend more money because a lot of people actually like living in the city. They pay a premium to consume less.
In New York City, a two bedroom apartment of around 1100 square feet will cost you somewhere between $800,000 to 1.5 million dollars. Depending on the area and the building’s amenities. And this is after the real estate crash. That’s not because no one wants to live in the city.
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:03 pm)It doesn’t prove your point because my job isn’t in the city. It’s in a quiet town in which real estate prices are way too high. Everyone’s reasons for moving far from their job is different, and that was my point. I for one do NOT want to live in a busy city. It’s a lifestyle I do not want to raise my kid in. I want to go out and get the paper by the mailbox with my slippers on and wave to my neighbor all while my 5 year old runs out the house yelling see you later dad I’m going over Rory’s house to play. Rory is my daughters friend that lives right next door
.
And to bring this back almost on topic by talking about a Volt, I want to be able to pull my electric car into my driveway and plug it in. Something a little more difficult in the city. This will get worked around in the future I hope.
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:17 pm)Here we go again! I guess we need one of those multimillion dollar engineers to determine the Volt’s fuel (i.e., gasoline) usage/efficiency.
What in the hell is so difficult in figuring out the MPG of the internal combustion engine when the internal combustion engine is used for a specific/long distance? We already know that when the vehicle is on battery power that is, i.e., NOT using any gasoline type energy.
If dummys like me can fiqure out that the 40 miles stated that the Volt will run on batterys from a full charge doesn’t take any energy then, I am only concerned about~~~ What is the MPG, City/Hyway of the Volt when the internal combustion engine is required to drive the generation power to drive the traction motors.
I guess my deduction doesn’t take in obvious calculations that will require another big GM Bonus. Come on guys, get off the pot! Here it is Novemebr 2010 and your working on stupid stuff live “Fuel Efficiency”. That should have been worked out a long time ago.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:21 pm)It’s fine if you don’t want to live in the city. People have different preferences. And this country is diverse enough to provide something for everyone.
What’s not OK is assuming that all cities are only populated with thugs and gunfights. Or that our educational standards are lousy, and any child who tries to learn will get beaten up. Because that’s not even remotely true.
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:24 pm)LauraM,
I totally agree. I live in CT and New Haven is the biggest ghetto I have ever seen. I think there is a pretty good school there though. Start’s with a Y I think
. Though I think the statements were more geared to public schools and not colleges.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:30 pm)Have you looked at where the population growth is occurring?
Europe has far less than replacement rate, and is still slightly declining in spite of immigration.
Canada is the same.
The US is slightly under replacement rate due to native birth but is growing significantly because of immigration.
The population in Russia, Japan and China is falling.
Africa has a high birth rate but disease and war is keeping it in check.
Population growth is occurring the in Middle East, India, Southeast Asia, and South America. They don’t share our views and concerns about population control, and the only way it will happen is for us to impose our views on them. I see that as being highly problematic…
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:34 pm)NYC isn’t representative of the rest of the country.
Most cities are either too expensive for most people or are more like nuclearboy’s description.
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:42 pm)I think I’m doing fairly well, and that’s out of my price range.
What I can afford in a big city is the places that suck. Hence I live in the middle of nowhere.
+3
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:50 pm)I know that. Believe me, I know that. But it is a place where a lot of people want to live.
Well, New York is definitely too expensive for most people. Part of that is because of Wall Street. And because Manhattan has a truly unique appeal based on historical factors. But it’s also because it’s the only place in the United States where you really don’t need to drive. There aren’t enough places in the United State with really good public transportation. And all the amenities that flow from that. (Great restaurants, museums, artsy movie theaters, etc.) So demand exceeds supply.
The solution is that we need more places with good public transportation. So people have the option.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:53 pm)I’ve been saying this all along. It takes at least three tanks of gas, and the will to keep records, to calculate actual mileage. Even then, people don’t realize that you need to use the exact same pump at the same time of day to get an accurate reading. (Pumps are off more than you think and they all ‘click off’ at different pressures.) AND, most importantly, ya need to write down the gas pumped and the odo reading!
People that use instant mpg car computers to guesstimate their actual mileage are just fooling themselves. If anybody claims good mileage, ask for the aforementioned written records.
Same thing with 0-60 and 1/4 mile run. Ask for the track slip. No track slip? Lol. Ur lyin’.
/btw, MY Hemi R/T gets between 15 and 18mpg for normal travel (usually 15. EPA is 15/18/23). 19-20mpg on a long highway trip. I have gotten 25mpg (24.8) on a single trip when I kept it under 70mph. So do I tell everyone I get 25mpg all the time? Nope. Do I lie and say it was 27mpg. Nope. Does she get 20% better mileage than the Hemi truck? Yep. Probably because the truck’s CD is .42!
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:55 pm)Using any portion of distance traveled in the pure EV mode (energy that came through the plug) in computing a value used for comparison to petroleum powered vehicles is totally illogical if that value is expressed in Miles Per G A L L O N. If you were comparing the amount of vitamin C in 8 ounces of orange juice to that in a vitamin pill, would the amount in the pill be expressed in milligrams per ounce (or gallon)? Crude example, but I trust you see my point. Please push for distance traveled per unit of energy (Therm, Kilowatt, Megajoules).
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (2:57 pm)This is not a technical problem BUT a commercial and marketing problem GM is trying to influence.
A) Stay with the current rating method and the Volt will not appear competitive with current hybrids (Prius)
B) Stay with the current rating method and BEVs with greater range will make the Volt not appear competitive
C) Stay with the current rating method and those who see the $40K plus sticker may not hang around long enough to hear the Volt story and the 40 miles of AER
Having an EPA economy rating that blends electric and gasoline usage helps support the GM Volt usage models that favor the Volt and where the Volt is unique (EREV)
GM has every right to exert influence however, an economy rating that assumes a driver will charge his vehicle OVERNIGHT, AT THE LOWEST ELECTRICAL RATES (ie no day time charging), AND drives less than 40 miles a day on battery electric is FAR TOO COMPLEX A SERIES OF VARIABLES TO PUT INTO A EPA RATING DESIGNED TO SUPPORT COMPARISONS.
While the automobile market is and will continue to be a fossil fuel driven market, the Volt should be rated using a methodology that lends itself to comparisons (ie: for the over 10K price differential to the Cruze can I recoup that cost in fuel savings based on my personal driving style?).
GM should use their marketing efforts to make the value case and not use/expect the EPA to do it for them.
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:08 pm)It’s way out of my price range too. Hence my plan to move to the suburbs. But if the price came down, that would change.
Well, salaries tend to be higher in the cities. But it doesn’t fully compensate for the difference in cost of living. You wind up living in a much smaller place. (Which doesn’t bother me. I don’t even want to think about what it would take to clean a 3000 square foot house.)
I have been to other cities that are cheaper than are cheaper than New York, and are also really great if you like the city lifestyle. Chicago. Philadelphia. Boston. There are also great areas in DC. Most of those aren’t that much cheaper than New York though.
But there are cheaper vibrant cities. I recently went to Pittsburgh for a long weekend, and it was great. Great museums. Good restaurants. Interesting areas to walk around. Nothing like Nuclearboy described.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:09 pm)Your a fear monger! But that’s ok; believe what you want. I live in the city and my children haven’t been beaten up. If your such a macho man teach your children to defend themselves.
You make it sound that the suburbs don’t have the same or similar problems. As I recall it, drug problems in the suburbs are just as bad as the city. Stop having such knee jerk reactions.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:11 pm)yawn.
Anybody dress as a Volt for Halloween?
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:17 pm)Sounds like a realy good plan. +1.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:20 pm)This has been the most honest assessment by GM when it comes to electric range and charge sustaining fuel economy.
But if you rewind to a couple of months ago, some of us were nearly neg’d off the board for suggesting a CS mph in the mid to low 30s. Yet it appears that’s what the EPA will come up with.
I still think the Volt is a great value to those that fit it’s strong points. But I have always been of the opinion I need to know exactly how strong those points are to determine if the Volt is right for me. For people like me that do a lot of high speed driving the Volt is probably not the best choice.
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:28 pm)Thanks, LauraM, for clearing the air.
Too many people listen to what they hear on the media and immediately stereotype. Every city I’ve lived in has its good and bad sections as you state. And your point about private schools is an option that he should have thought about. New York has one of the finest Art Schools and other fine educational institutions. There’s a lot more I could say but I’m likely to refer to that someone with words not as tactful as uninformed.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:32 pm)I wonder, will you remember you said this next year on Halloween?
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:37 pm)This true. DC is another rare American city where you can live without an automobile, (which is why it’s an ironic Volt launch market.) But the height restrictions coupled with all the historic buildings downtown make it ridiculously expensive. Good luck on renting a 500 ft2 studio apartment for less than $2,000 a month.
But I agree the crime in cities is vaslty overrated. It is almost always limited to a very small section of any city and it’s usually a drug deal gone bad, and not a random incident. I walked around Times Square at Midnight and I just as easily could have been at Disney World there was no danger whatsoever.
Nov 5th, 2010 (3:38 pm)Well, the 2000 Cherokee (not Grand Cherokee), while classified as a truck, had a base weight of less than 3200 lbs. Hardly a “heavy vehicle,” and the mpg numbers I quoted are measured, not the 2000 EPA numbers(20/23). They just happen to almost match. For its day, the Jeep I6 engine was reasonably efficient, but I didn’t buy it last year for its efficiency. I bought it to get to my 7000 elevation home in New Mexico winters. WHEN I get my Volt, it will often be parked in winter as I drive my Jeep until the roads are clear. Just saying.
Nov 5th, 2010 (4:09 pm)Yes, Pittsburgh has come a long way in the last thirty years or so. You wouldn’t have wanted to live there in the 70′s. Think dirty old steel town after steel mills closed down. Yessiree, they’ve come a long way, baby.
Nov 5th, 2010 (4:11 pm)# 117 LauraM said:
I like miles per kilowatt. That way, the dealer can find out the price of kilowatts around the area and tell people when they’re deciding.And if the dealer doesn’t know, you can always look at your electric bill….
Not to knock your statement, I’m sure it applies to a lot of people. It’s just really sad to think that for the sake of a few cents here and there, someone might give up the excitement of owning and driving a Volt. I personally have never considered the EPA ratings a factor in the decision to buy any of my cars.
Nov 5th, 2010 (4:20 pm)Hi LauraM,
Just curious, when you went to Pittsburgh, did you ride in, or drive a car? If you did maybe you could go to the Volt test drive in NY and compare to that experience.
Nov 5th, 2010 (4:33 pm)Only if I’m in memory-sustaining mode. 8^)
After a Capt. Morgan rep showed up at the bar w/ his girls and a treasure chest filled w/ hats, capes and, well, rum, I became a Capt. Morgan myself. Hope those pics don’t end up on facebook. At least not with MY name. Maybe w/ Sparrow’s instead.
Here’s one of my favorite songs of 2010. Have fun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMonw5hUvWc&feature=related
Your danish will be served about 1:30 in. You supply the rum, rum, rum, rum, rum.
Nov 5th, 2010 (4:55 pm)19 million… a heck of a lot of people. That only leaves 289 million who chose not to
SFO definitely fits that description. Including the too expensive part too…
Portland Oregon is another. I know multiple residents that never drive.
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:02 pm)Well, now the Pirates are perennial losers, but in the 70s, they won two World Series. And the Steelers won the Super Bowl four times. So Three Rivers Stadium yielded SIX world champs in one decade. Pittsburgh had something going for it in those days. [And no, I have never lived IN any big city, just thought I’d chime in with this].
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:08 pm)Good observation. People who care about electrification of transport will pay little or no attention to EPA stickers. Especially with the complexity of hybrid drives. Purchase choices will be made on emotional and affordability terms. Exactly the formula that has driven Prius to 2M sales worldwide.
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:10 pm)But you wouldn’t have wanted to walk between Three Rivers Stadium and downtown in those days. Now, as LauraM says, there are interesting places to walk. I commuted to the University of Pittsburgh from 1975 to 1977.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:11 pm)Don’t both electric and gas water heaters have the same label on them, displaying their approximate annual use of either therms or kwh and then displaying the approximate annual cost. Obviously, the annual cost is based on a national average amount of use and cost for gas or electricity. However, the point is not the complete accuracy of the number, but the comparability of one model estimated at $240 vs. one at $300 annually.
I really think an estimated annual cost to operate given a typical driving pattern and national average kwh and gas prices would be best. If I saw a volt could cost $400/year to operate vs $2000/year for a Cruze (Totally made up numbers), that is meaningful.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:27 pm)nasaman,
Utilities shall introduce new electricity charging principal. Instead of kWh they should ask to pay for gallons electrical (Ge). And consumers will be asking -please, give me bucket of electricity!
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:41 pm)I’m still looking for a gallon of prop-wash.
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:48 pm)However, if a similarly equipped Volt or Cruze had a 10-15K difference, (1000 – 1500 dollars per year over 10 years) in addition to lower financing costs, insurance, etc, the Volt may not make sense on purely economical reasons. The same case could be made of the Leaf and possibly the Prius.
<blockquote cite="comment-244186"
Kyle: Don’t both electric and gas water heaters have the same label on them, displaying their approximate annual use of either therms or kwh and then displaying the approximate annual cost. Obviously, the annual cost is based on a national average amount of use and cost for gas or electricity. However, the point is not the complete accuracy of the number, but the comparability of one model estimated at $240 vs. one at $300 annually.
I really think an estimated annual cost to operate given a typical driving pattern and national average kwh and gas prices would be best. If I saw a volt could cost $400/year to operate vs $2000/year for a Cruze (Totally made up numbers), that is meaningful.
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:51 pm)I’m looking for a formulation of prop-wash that will take off propeller pitch.
Nov 5th, 2010 (5:57 pm)OT: For those who live in Washington/Oregon the Volt will be at the Seattle Car Show Nov 10-14!
http://www.seattleautoshow.com/32-alternative-fuel-2011-chevrolet-volt
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:38 pm)[u]Re: If you have specialized vehicles, then an SUV would be the weekend hauler and something like Volt or LEAF would be the commuter car.[/u]
That will be me. I have a Ford Expedition which I use to pull the camper and for our long travels with the kids. The Volt will move to the garage and the SUV will need to tough it outside. Or I could ask my wife to put her car outside … wait that will get me in trouble
Nov 5th, 2010 (6:54 pm)LauraM,
Go get em LauraM…
A lot of people need a good dose of common sense… seems you have a good bit.
My daughter who grew up in PGH and now lives in NY … loves the city.
When we go to NYC the food is fantastic… transportation is impressive.
She goes 70 miles into the city in 58 minutes … on the train that brings her into Grand Central Station .. in the center of the city.. from there you can go anywhere in the city in 10 min by walking or catching the subway. Or you can walk to central park… which is huge… lakes ponds very wide walkways… benches … food…
NYC is a fantastic city.
The VOLT is fantastic technology…. GM … you hang on to that technology don’t be swindled out of it.
-1
Nov 5th, 2010 (7:36 pm)The question is, how many of the 289 million Americans don’t live in New York because they don’t want to. And how many don’t live there because they can’t afford to. Presumably, most of them but. But I would imagine that there are quite a few people who would move to New York city (or some other walkable city) if it were more affordable. And, if they could, it would not only make them better off (since they would be living the life they want to lead), it would also reduce the United State’s oil consumption.
Nov 5th, 2010 (7:53 pm)This 30% number is simple BS. Why do testing? Why have government standards? Coming up with some arbitrary ‘fudge factor’ is the latest definition of insanity. Do the congressman who are coming up with mandated ‘corporate average fuel economy’ numbers calculate that the EPA is reducing the window label estimates by 30% from what they tested at? What numbers do the manufacturers get credit for? The tested number or the number reduced by the arbitrary factor of 30%?
If EVERY car is tested under the same criteria, and EVERY car is reduced by this 30% factor, then that’s what we live with. But if this arbitrary 30% number has fluctuated over time, or is subject to change in the future, it really undermines the effort to raise consumer awareness of trying to drive more efficiently. Math is math. Let the numbers speak for themsleves. If it gets 52 miles of range in testing, put 52 miles of range on the window. Keep it Simple.
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:05 pm)I rented a car. But I don’t remember much about the driving experience other than that there was a lot of traffic. It was almost as bad as New York. If Lyle reports on how the Volt behaves in city traffic (and I’m hoping he will), that’s probably applicable to Pittsburgh as well.
I do plan to get a test drive when they become readily available here. And I’ll be more than happy to tell people here about it. But I really doubt it will tell me anything. Or that I’ll have any special insights. I know a lot less about cars than the general population, and even less compared to most of the posters on this board.
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:15 pm)Thank you. I certainly enjoy it here. And while it takes me a lot longer than 10 minutes to get certain places, I absolutely agree that we have amazing public transportation. And great food. Lots of different cuisines since we draw immigrants from all over the world. And amazing museums. For pretty much every interest. Theater, movies, etc….
+2
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:25 pm)Laura, your modesty becomes you! But hey, the Volts are right under your nose this weekend in NYC’s Courtyard by Marriott on 5th Avenue. They don’t promote it, but they happily accept walk-ins. So no excuse not to go for a test drive! I’m usually not “bossy”, but YOU GO FOR IT GIRL! More info at: http://chevrolet.posterous.com/the-volt-unplugged-tour-moves-into-a-new-york
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:28 pm)Thank you for the comments of my birthplace and where I enjoyed the first eleven years of my life. I lived in Manhattan’s Lower East Side (near the Williamsburg Bridge), I studied at the Our Lady of Sorrows at Pitt and Stanton, and I traveled all around the city with my parents. I have returned several times with my wife and we have enjoyed every day of our visits. If I can increase my income (or win the Lottery) I plan to return there.
Greetings to all fellow New Yorkers!
Raymond
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:39 pm)I lost 6 mpg in my BMW and 2-3 in my Suburban due to that Canadian diatomous earth crap.
I hope Volt does fuel up on it in testing!
+1
Nov 5th, 2010 (8:42 pm)“amazing public transportation” ??
I just got done watching the Oscar Grant killing videos. Amazed = what i am
+1
Nov 6th, 2010 (1:13 am)Just put butterflies and green hippy leaves on the window sticker. Anybody who actually sits down and calculates what the total cost of owning this car is vs. a civic, corolla or even the cruze is going to get a regular 4 banger economybox. Anybody who buys a Volt thinking that they will save money over another car that doesn’t have a big Li-ion battery and extra motor is high on crack. Only you cheerleaders here believe the Volt makes economic sense, the rest of the world isn’t paying $41,000 for subcompact 4 seaters that get 35mpg. So, I say, put pictures of fluffy bunnies and polar bears dancing around on the sticker, the actual numbers don’t mean anything to anyone who’s buying this car at 41k.
Nov 6th, 2010 (1:28 am)I am sure Lyle with his clear and concise writing could easily explain the energy usage of the Volt!
No if only GM would lend him one. Whats up Doc?
/pulls out carrot to munch
+1
Nov 6th, 2010 (3:28 am)I’ll probably get modded down for stating this fact, but Chevy volt will not qualify for the HOV stickers in California. California Air Resource Board (CARB) categorized the volt only as a ULEV (ultra low emission vehicles), meaning they missed the mark for the more stringent California designations PZEV (partial zero emission vehicle) and SULEV (super ultra low emission vehicle). This will be the case for the 2011 and 2012 model.
unfortunately, Chevy volt was determined by CARB to be producing more emission than Jetta TDI, Honda Civix GX, and Toyota Prius. This is a huge oversight by GM to not work harder to meet this emission standard.
hopefully starting 2013 the Volt will qualify for HOV sticker, but by that time the $5000 rebate would have been fully dispersed.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mr-roadshow/ci_16524869
+5
Nov 6th, 2010 (5:14 am)Great Volt review!
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/2011-chevrolet-volt-gas-electric-marriage-2010-11-06
Nov 6th, 2010 (6:29 am)In response to the discussion, yet again, about EPA stickers & stanards:
The should have an EPA sticker ready to go or at least there is an existing standard that has been used, although it is sorely in need of revision IMO. Tesla has a EPA rated mileage data. So, the Leaf should have an EPA mileage on its sticker one way or another.
The Volt is another animal altogether but I think the EPA is overcomplicating things. It has a CD mode that performs just like a BEV, so this mode should be tested and reported on just like a BEV. It also has CS mode that performs just like a HEV, so this mode should be tested and reported on just like a HEV. It seems so simple and so obvious to me. All this nonsense about a single mpge or single annual consumotion or cost seems…well…nonsensical to me.
The complicated scenario may be the PHEV with a restricted blended mode like the Prius. For many of these vehicles they probably won’t be able to run the BEV tests and stay in EV only mode, but they can devise the miles/kwh usage for these tests. Just apply this to the CD rated capacity for the sticker CD #. Any restrictions on maintaining EV only operation while in CD mode should be enumerated; i.e. 60mph max, -10 degrees F min, 60 kw max, no AC, etc.
I also think every plug-in should list beginning of life charge window in kwh and end of design life (aka warranty event) charge window in kwh, e.g. 10.4kwh BOL, 8.3kwh EOL, -20%. The battery warranty should be required to be on the sticker as well as EOL CD mode mileage in this section. Additionally, I think EV battery warrantees should be required to have an energy storage capacity content and no state should be allowed to require a warranty beyond 3 years for vehicles with a CD capacity beyond 4kwh or so. Longer warranty requirements restrict battery development and could discourage potentially more cost effective solutions.
Nov 6th, 2010 (7:34 am)What was “oversighted” was the 8nadequacies in CARB’s guidelines. They do not consider EV only range in their emissions guidelines. THAT is the problem. They’ve had 15 years or so to get it right or closer to right. They’ve had almost 4 years since the Volt was announced to account for EREV type vehicles, if fot some rediculous reason they couldn’t envision the possibilities of range extended vehicles before. GM should have lobbied harder to get more sensible guidelines in place for the Volt release. Thisshould not have been that hard to do, given the innate logic of it and the alaignment with CARB’s mission.
The insanity of this program, which has pursued removing emmissions from the tailpipe as one of its primary objectives and yet has no mechanism in place to reward zero tailpipe emmission operation for a vehicle like the Volt, is mindboggling.
+1
Nov 6th, 2010 (11:26 am)what you said is just part of it. However, this doesn’t explain why CARB rated the Volt to have a worse smog score, than cars like Buick Regal, Chevy Escalade, and the Suburban. The Volt team should have address the Volt’s EREV mode’s emission.
Nov 6th, 2010 (12:02 pm)What is wrong with fudge? I like fudge. Some time back the EPA numbers for hybrids were found by CR to be about 25% high. Many individuals came to similar conclusions. So what is being “fudged” in the mind of the naysayer is being “corrected” to present closer to real world performance. Did GM fudge when it changed the utilization capacity from 8 Kwh to 10.4 Kwh? Nope. They “corrected” the software to provide closer to real world performance of “about 40 miles.”
Nov 8th, 2010 (7:01 pm)Numbers shmumbers just sell the damn thing already!
Nov 8th, 2010 (7:13 pm)PS this is NOT an average consumer car in the first two years of production or sales. By Gen.3 Volt Im sure the label will change (along with the battery and technology) and no one will care about the label just how we dont care now. This is a niche market car at the moment, treat it as such and keep it moving along the hordes of masses will succumb sooner or later.