[ad#post_ad]The Volt is a remarkable award-winning car capable of traveling on gas or electricity that was hatched from a sketch in a mere 39 months.
All the while the car has been described as GM’s savior, or alternatively its Hail Mary pass. Designers and engineers had to get it right, the whole company’s future rode on in, and right they did.
In the beginning the Volt’s godfather, former GM vice chairman Bob Lutz told the world a bit prematurely that the Volt would sell for comfortably under $30,000. Indeed it was certainly the hope early on that such a price point could be achieved. But like all new technology, the Volt was to be costlier than hoped.
Many new and specialized components had to be built specifically for the Volt, and its heart and soul, the lithium-ion battery, topped the scales at a cost of around $8000 to $10,000, it is believed.
After years of waiting GM finally announced the price in late July; $41,000 before the tax credit. What they have never announced was how much the car actually costs them to build.
We do know from former CEO Ed Whitaker that there is a very small margin of profit for each car, but too slim to make a business case for the car in its early years.
In his new book called Overhaul, Steve Rattner who used to head the government’s auto task force, disclosed GMs cost to build the Volt. This is a closely guarded corporate secret that Rattner was privy to through his work to restructure GM though its bankruptcy.
Rattner is currently the subject of legal proceedings and despite the questionable ethics and behavior of doing so he wrote the following: “At least in the early years, each Volt would cost around $40,000 to manufacture (development costs not included).”
Rattner admitted in an interview with the New York Times that he “didn’t know the precise number,” but agreed that despite the costs, on developing the Volt GM was “right to do it,” to silence critics “who’ve said for many years that the company was behind the curve.”
GM spokesperson Rob Peterson would of course not confirm these values, though GM has a history of getting small or no margins on small cars. Even the famous high volume Chevrolet Cavalier was known to be sold at loss. “We haven’t released any numbers related to costs,” said Peterson. “The importance of the Volt is more than a single profit-and-loss statement.” Indeed.
Rattner agrees the introduction of EVs are important, but doubts any automaker is in a position to profit on them in the early years. “E.V.’s are everybody’s latest fantasy,” he said. “No doubt they are important and they are real, but they won’t have an impact on profitability and sales for the foreseeable future.”
Rattner also thinks the idea of start-ups like Tesla rising up and competing successfully with major automakers is a bit far-fetched. “E.V. markets will be dominated by the existing companies,” he said. “They have the scaled operations and the dealer networks. The idea that a bunch of E.V. companies will come along and G.M. and Ford will go out of business is kind of crazy.”
Source (New York Times)
[ad#postbottom]
This entry was posted on Friday, November 26th, 2010 at 6:44 am and is filed under Financial. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:03 am)A very interesting topic, Lyle!
+14
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:07 am)I think early estimates of Volt costs were likely $40,000, but with the constant iterations, it is likely lower.
If GM and Ford had not offered EV’s, Tesla and Fisker would have owned the EV and plug-in markets. As with the photo voltaic market, the entry of the new tech forced incumbent manufacturers to change their product offerings to compete.
The important thing to remember is that the consumer, economy and national security are the big winners with the Volt. GM, Ford and others are just trying to hold on to the market shares the already possess.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:12 am)PS to my post #1: (sorry, the edit timed out on #1)…
There’s really very little I can add to today’s topic except perhaps by relating a true somewhat personal story that is still vivid in my mind regarding the new Motor Trend Car of the Year for 1982 —the Z-28 Camaro. I bought a copy of the January 1982 Motor Trend with a copy of the exalted BMW 528 on the cover with the idea of buying a 528. Surprisingly, the same issue reported that the ’82 Camaro had been designed from the ground up by the Corvette design team, who had taken a year “off”, since there would be no Corvette 1982 model.
Bottom Line: Motor Trend raved about the Z-28 (which later became the first IROC car, I believe) and I bought one of the first ones off the line instead of a BMW. What’s interesting is that my well-informed Chevy salesman learned from a well=placed friend inside GM that “GM “had no idea what the ’82 Z-28 actually cost them to build”. Sound familiar?
/BTW, I never regretted owning that gorgeous Z-28 in Charcoal metallic —exactly the color I’ll want my Volt to sport!
+8
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:26 am)Here’s the first Chevy I ever owned and the one for which I was told by the dealer’s lead salesman, “I’ve got inside information that GM has no idea what the ‘82 Z-28 actually costs them to build”…
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:31 am)Opel Ampera will cost _42900 EUR_ in Germany. If we would have fair prices similar to the Volt / USD price for the Ampera in Germany it would be far better deal. And no, there is no rebate for electric cars in Germany when buying them. So when i read about 30K something for the Volt in the US….
http://www.opel-ampera.com/index.php/ger/news_events/press_releases/left/Opel-Ampera-revolutionaeres-Elektroauto-ab-42.900-Euro
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:35 am)I read somewhere that the Toyota Prius were sold for the first few years (three or four) with no profit. Most manufacturers will sell cars with little profit because the warrantee services will cover some of that loss and make a new profit. This reminds me that Louis Gillette stared this business of selling the main item (the safety razor) at a loss and charges for the blades.
And I also read that the dynamic RAM chips were manufactired and sold by Pacific nations to the U.S. at a loss with prices much cheaper than what Intel (the original developer) was selling them. Intel accused them of “dumping” to saturate the market. Intel eventually lost that market, and gave up.
I do hope that GM will make a profit on the Volt by 2011 because there will not be much engine servicing for the first year.
Raymond
-14
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:41 am)(click to show comment)
+4
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:46 am)In some ways nobody knows what the real cost of “early model Volts”. For one thing until very recently they were hand made. For another thing even with the current status, trying to expedite increases in major purchased components does not help to bring the cost down.
Things may be much better than Rattner is saying.
But still, there are reasons to be thankful.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:54 am)Back when the bankruptcy plans were filed, it became clear that selling Volt at a loss would be inappropriate. So, the expectation of a price with a razor-thin profit was realistic even back then… hence the push for a configuration that could be sold in high-volume.
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:57 am)Maybe they didn’t have a good handle on costs in 1982, but I bet they know the costs to the penny now. I always said that I hope GM would price the Volt at a small profit to ensure their willingness to increase production. I mean who wants to produce large numbers of cars at a loss? I suspect that Ford will be. The new Lincoln hybrid is the same price as the non-hybrid, do you believe Ford makes a profit on it? With the hybrid version being much better gas mileage and no price premium why would anyone buy the non-hybrid version? I bet Ford limits production to 10k units or less.
Anyhow, with the Volt in production and the optimistic feeling is in the air that GM will build as many as customers want next summer. I think we will hear an announcement on Tuesday about when the Volt will be available in all states and that date will be when full production is available. As production goes up, costs will come down and so will the selling price.
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:01 am)Until midway through 2002, Toyota accepted losses. Back then, gas was dirt cheap and lots of profit from other vehicles was available for reinvestment. Times are very, very different now.
Echo being introduced sharing the same frame and engine components is what enabled cost reduction. Since Volt needs to move away from the engine it currently shares with Cruze, the situation is quite the opposite.
Also note that there wasn’t a tax-credit available for Prius until 2006, long after mainstream sales volume had already been achieved. Only a deduction was offered, which is considerably less.
+14
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:04 am)Pricing the 1st gen of a product lower than cost is a common practice to capture market share. Everyone remembers the lawsuits that plagued Microsoft while they gave their operating system away on every major PC made so that everyone would accept Windows over any competing products and then buy the Office products.
I met an owner of an EV1 and he said they had cost $200K to build but they were probably hand made as well. No doubt competition in the car industry is tough but GM being able to price the Volt near cost is actually an amazing feat. Only an automotive giant could make a car like the Volt and price it for only $40.25K. Is the Volt unique and cool enough to crack a mass market and steal sales from BMW, Porsche etc.? The car is getting all the accolades now. From reading posts on this site, you would think so, but still so few people know what this car is all about. Get them on the road and get people talking about them. I don’t think GM could have hoped for a better start than they are getting right now.
selfishly awaiting my #135 white diamond (and going surfing now since I am in SD and conditions are perfect),
-Book
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:16 am)Oh yeah, nice picture of the super serious Obama in the driver’s seat. Good job Lyle. That should get the politicos going today. Maybe foreshadowing next Tuesday’s Car One ceremony?
-Book
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:24 am)I bought Rattner’s book “Overhaul” and am finding it a really interesting read. As I figured, there is a whole lot of inside stuff in there that otherwise would go unknown. I joked with my family that there’s me, and probably like 5 other people who bought the book and find this stuff fascinating—LOL! Just shows how much of an auto industry geek I am, I guess.
Hope everyone had a good Thanksgiving day!
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:31 am)FYI….
THINK City final assembly started this week in Elkhart, Indiana.
http://www.etruth.com/Know/News/Story.aspx?ID=528772
-18
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:33 am)(click to show comment)
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:37 am)The profitability will depend on the durability of the battery pack. Since two packs were put into the cost/selling price, if the pack is good long term then the profit margin will cover the R&D costs a little better.
It seems by the research in the battery lab that the pack is a good one and it will not be long before the Volt is much more profitable and will support a price decrease for the masses.
I have my optimistic cap on this morning.
Take Care,
TED
-6
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:40 am)When Ford first sold the XR4Ti in the eighties, a dealer in Miami put on the window sticker $4000 “extra dealer profit”. Maybe the $16,000 is “extra manufacturer profit”. And you know accountants can always “massage” the cost figures.
+8
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:57 am)Sorry, but in the category of “Consider the source”, this fellow doesn’t pass the sniff test – yet. Granted, he is considered innocent until proven guilty, but things aren’t looking good for Rattner. From what I’ve read, I (personally) wouldn’t trust him any farther than I could spit a dead mouse. Maybe he *does* know what it costs to build a Volt, but…..
http://www.businessinsider.com/sec-and-andrew-cuomo-sue-steve-rattner-2010-11
Just Google him and decide for yourself.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:12 am)…and just how far might that be, Tag? ROTFLMAO!
/Remember those poor “knuckle-draggin’, mouth-breathin’ escapees from collapsing bridges” depend on and devour those dead mice as their main staple, so kindly spit well & often!
+6
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:12 am)Custom pieces for hvac, power steering, brakes, etc. Once these parts get integrated into production of other vehicles, the piece price will drop dramatically.
Plus, they have no idea what the warranty costs will be for all these new items including the battery.
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:12 am)Yesterday, Loboc said that if I told someone to Google something, I was telling them to f-off.
So, be careful, or you will offend someone
+5
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:16 am)If they include a link, it’s not that effing offensive.
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:17 am)I told you the warrantied second battery pack. I already told you.
Take Care, TED
+4
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:18 am)I believe that they price of the pack will come down, and a 20-30% reduction in price is likely within the next couple years. But, since the Volt is now selling at -$7,500 per copy, thanks to the tax payer, this means the cost of the entire Volt needs to come down nearly 20% to just sell at todays rebate price.
So even if they can reduce the battery cost by 50%, assuming a current price of $10,000, they would need to find another $2,500 in price reductions, just to sell at the equivalent price of $33k.
This is going to be an issue with all EV/EREV’s.
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:26 am)Of course! it cost a lot for the development of new technology. Even though, this is not new to GM as evidenced in the former EV1 technology, Voltec was a great improvement and costly. I believe that if GM will still by it’s guns and stay close to there investment, many profits will be realized in the future.
Caution about giving away the technology for the sake of big sales as in, the recent China situation.
+4
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:27 am)Boy for an astrophysicist, you can sometimes be a little dense. Obviously the distance depends a great deal on the wind-age e.g. into the wind=shorter, with the wind=longer. Of course, if your in a *competition*, you carefully shave the mouse first – it lowers the Cd.
HTH,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:30 am)I’m still buying the book. I figure since he has low (or no) scruples, he also has no problem violating NDAs.
Could be some dirt in there, or just damn lies.
It won’t matter to GM at this point. Those numbers are from years ago. GM has played past that green and is on to something else.
Any controversy just adds to the buzz.
+9
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:31 am)I have a real problem with the “GM does not know how much it costs” thinking.
They have people in place to cost out every single bolt in their products. And people that do costing on the labor for each production cycle in the assembly process.
It gets a bit fuzzy when you add in the facility costs, as they are also used for other products, but a rough estimate can be made.
The costs are high, because it is a low volume specialty vehicle, with a lot of new parts that were custom made. If the Volt is a success, and I truly believe that GM has a HUGE winner in this car, then costs can be lowered as larger orders for parts can be placed, and some of those new assemblies can be re-engineered to make them more cost effective. And we all know the battery packs will go down in price as the manufacturing improves.
But trust me, GM knows to the penny what it costs them for each Volt off the line………
JMHO
+5
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:31 am)In fact, Toyota took a small loss on every car sold initially. In the car industry, this is somewhat typical for designs which are brand new from the ground up. All of the new parts have yet to be cost-optimized by the suppliers.
Unlike consumer electronics, car buyers aren’t accustomed to paying higher prices for the latest design, so car makers usually sell new designs at low numbers and at a slight loss initially, in order to get the ball rolling. As the parts suppliers figure out ways to reduce cost, the same design gets much cheaper to manufacture over the next couple of years.
If there’s something about the design that’s not optimal for cost or reliability, the design will get tweaked slightly in successive model years, and that is common. However, these changes from one model year to the next are generally minor, and not to be confused with the initial new design.
The Volt’s manufacturing cost is a moving target, and I doubt GM knows exactly what it will be 6 months from now. There’s nothing inherently expensive about electric drive. Once the parts suppliers ramp up their lines, they’ll figure out how to cost reduce it.
Bottom line: As sales volumes increase, manufacturing costs will come down dramatically.
+8
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:32 am)Hi–
Been a while since I’ve commented, but still an avid reader!!
Cost accounting leaves room for a wide range of numbers. The floor/min is the marginal cost–the real dollars spent to build the next car (i.e., direct materials and labor). Marginal cost could be as low as $20K or so. The ceiling/max is the fully-loaded cost (marginal cost plus overhead of all kinds, depreciation, R&D , etc, etc.). This number could get huge. Who knows, the first Volt built could be calculated to cost many millions! A more realistic fully-loaded cost probably is around $40K, given that GM is pricing at just above that number.
Regardless, I think it is great to be part of this revolution, and to be one of the first Volt early adopters.
Happy Holidays!!!
Chris
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:34 am)I’ll settle on being semi-offensive, but Rattner sure isn’t someone I’d like dating my daughter.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:39 am)This whole mouse thread is going to be difficult to explain or re-use in a conversation!
My wife is rolling on the floor about the comments. She said ‘I wonder what that guy does?’
Psychiatrist comes to mind. Eh Tag?
+6
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:41 am)When Boeing can calculate the weight of something like the 767, before the first one is built, and come within half a pound, I tend to agree.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:42 am)But how much does each bolt cost?
You have to remember that manufacturing engineers constantly change the way a given part is manufactured in order to save cost. These manufacturing engineers tend to concentrate on the parts they sell a lot of. They’re not going to spend much time cost-optimizing something they hardly sell.
As sales volumes increase, manufacturing costs will come down dramatically.
+32
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:48 am)MILESTONE ALERT: Lyle has updated his Volt Driving Log showing a full 16 days of data totaling 1005.7 miles driven and 5.87 gals of gas used, equaling 171.33 miles/gallon. It’s doubtful any mass-
produced hybrid or gasoline-powered car has ever before logged over 1,000 miles at an average
of over 171 mpg, thus I believe this represents a true milestone in automotive history!
Can anyone prove me wrong?
/Go ahead, Prius aficionados —see if you can even come close to this with a Plug-in Prius prototype!
//BTW, Lyle hasn’t yet had to stop at a gas station for a fillup —he’s still got ~1/3 tank left!
.
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:49 am)Exactly. If you buy a million of them, it’s a whole different ball game than a box of 100.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:51 am)Yes, I’m a recovering psychologist, but most folks here in fly-over country have colloquialisms that seem to communicate their thoughts pretty accurately. Granted, they may be a bit tough to work into a cocktail party conversation (g).
Remember, I’ve picked these up over a 34 year career of visiting parents to discuss their special needs kids. Probably one of the (marginally) useful benefits of a very tough job.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+18
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:56 am)All of that technology can be yours for $2,500 down and $350 per month for 36 months. Take a 3 year test drive, then check out the next gen Volt or Electric Cruze.
-13
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:02 am)(click to show comment)
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:11 am)Too bad the yearly limit isn’t calculated in gallons used instead of miles driven. A revolutionary car should have a revolutionary lease, no?
+7
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:28 am)$40,000 is obviously a round number. Rattner had no reason to delve into details. He was restructuring a 100b corporation. The precise profit margin (or lack thereof) on an extreme niche vehicle like the Volt was irrelevant to his job. Of course we hope the Volt will someday be much more than a niche vehicle, but GM’s restructure will be complete long before that happens.
The actual manufacture cost (time+materials) is typically half the MSRP. Corporate overhead, marketing, warranty, transportation, dealer profit, manufacturer gross profit and a dozen other line items make up the remainder. The gross profit must then recover the R&D costs over time (not in year one). Rattner’s $40k probably refers to both direct and indirect costs, excluding R&D, but there’s really no way to know. And without knowing the conversation becomes pointless.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:30 am)Working in manufacturing for the last couple decades, I think I have a pretty good understanding of how well they can estimate costs for new products. When they cost out the individual parts, they do not cost them at low volume, unless they know that the item is unique and will indeed be low volume for the long term. The costing of a new product is a well practiced science, and any manufacturer worth his salt, will be able to cost out based on projected sales, they do not use the cost for “proto-type” parts.
Also, regarding the Volt, GM knows the cost of every nut/bolt used already. All these common parts are costed at the volumes that GM would already have. The likelihood of GM needing to add any new parts (nuts, bolts, adhesives, etc) is going to be more of an exception. Companies are very strict on inventory and adding a new part is a big deal, even if it is just a bolt.
Since the Volt, minus the battery, generator, motors, and the gearbox, is already based upon a higher volume Cruze, these parts are already priced at and available at high volume cost. So, the only real opportunity for savings in volume will be the EV specific parts.
I still have not heard anyone give estimates on the generator used on the Volt. While the battery seems to continually draw attention to the price of the Volt, I still believe the generator adds a nice price increase to the Volt.
Yes, price can be reduced, but your probably looking at reducing the price of the EV related components, and all the “standard” car type components are already priced at the floor.
So, if the EV portion of the $40,000 cost, is 50%, then you need to reduce the $20,000 portion by at least $7,500 to match the existing discounted price. That’s a 37% reduction in price, just to be able to sell at today rebated price!
This ain’t gonna be an easy sell, sorry to say.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:37 am)So what the heck else are we going to talk about? The price and value of a 42″ LCD TV, and the value 720 vs. 1080p?
I guess I agree with you. This guy puts out a number based on old info. w/o any real definition of what exactly he was including, and we nit pick the heck out of it.
/Funny, what we all consider as entertainment.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:50 am)The Volt is the most complex electric vehicle I’ve ever heard of. With 10 million lines of computer code. And all of these connected features like being able to check the state of charge in New York while the car sits at home in LA. I know dozens of people that drive EV’s everyday with nothing more than a key.
Both GM an Nissan went a little overboard on the connectivity of their cars. You will have to set up a monthly payment to on-star or a cell phone company in order to keep this connectivity working. In the end you will find it uninformative being able to find out everything about your car every time you stop with just a couple of taps on the iPhone.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:04 am)A thoughtful and excellent comment.
While GM undoubtedly knows to the penny the dollars for parts and labor required to build the next car, as noted by Jim I, that is only the first $20-25K of the car’s “cost”. The allocation of other overhead costs, the second $15-20K of the total cost being quoted by Rattner, can be higher or lower depending on various accounting rules and management judgments. For his book, Rattner’s narrative likely is better served by a number on the high side.
Of course, the corporation is ultimately profitable (or not) as a whole, not by car line, so saying any one line is (or is not) profitable is something of value mostly for internal purposes. It also can be used outside “as needed.”
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:04 am)Even though this price knocks out most potential buyers (myself included ATM), its important to remember is that the volt’s technology is really supposed to be the focus. The initial cars, especially the first iterations, are not going to be affordable. I would also say its not likely for a car that can go 35+ miles on electric power alone to get a significant decrease in cost (due to the rising demand for lithium).
What I can see happening is GM and Ford eventually releasing cars with smaller batteries that can go maybe 10 or 15 miles on electric alone. With a government tax credit, the cost of these cars should be relatively affordable.
To make these types of hybrid cars truly viable, we need electric car charging stations. GE’s Watt Station is a great start. That 10 to 15 mile electric only rage doesn’t sound to bad when you can charge the car at your job. This way, gasoline probably wouldn’t be needed for maybe 80% of American work commutes. You’d only use gas on long trips. If a good number of the cars sold in the next 25 years had Volt technology (albeit with smaller batteries), the reduction in oil consumption would likely be pretty large.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:08 am)We will get an idea once the dealerships parts dept start releasing cost on replacement parts for Volts.. I would assume they will only offer complete electric transaxles with both motors and clutches etc, new and refurbished.. from that we can get and idea of the cost if they follow previous pricing methods.
Volt has a lot of subsystems, the four cooling loops alone must cost a bundle and weigh a ton..
Read this 60 page PDF to get get an idea of the complexity, very nice read BTW:
http://pages.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/sae/10EVSD1104/offline/sae_10EVSD1104_pdf.zip
+8
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:09 am)Photo op: Is the Volt profitability upsetting the President? Or is he upset he couldn’t drive a Volt home that day?
I would prefer to get cost data from a firm that specializes in purchasing the final product and analyzing the parts in total. If a book was written by the engineers who worked on the project, then I might find the 40K figure more believable.
Three major car of the year awards and a top ten list. No matter what the exact cost is, the results are priceless.
+4
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:10 am)Last I heard, GM is giving OnStar free for the first 5 years of ownership. That should be plenty of time to decide if it has become uninformative.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:14 am)I am assuming this is why GM was never able to make profits on the smaller cars like the Cavalier. The manufacturing costs for raw materials of the Cavalier were perhaps slightly less than a larger car like an Impala, but it still had similar fixed costs like engineering R&D, transportation, UAW wages, dealer mark up etc that made it very difficult to sell them at a profit. GM tried to cut raw material costs any way they could to ameliorate the losses, like plastic intake manifolds or whatever.
The nice thing about the Volt is that it doesn’t suffer from that bargain basement dilemma as there has got to be some room for price reduction in a $40,000 car. That being said, I think if I were in the market for a Volt (and not a poor college student) I would just buy it instead of leasing it because I don’t think the price of the Volt is going to come down very much in the not too distant future as the tax credits wearing off counter act any manufacturing price reductions. The price will likely be around $33,000 for the next 10 years or so I’m guessing and probably by 2020 they’ll have cheap enough batteries (and maybe generators will have come down slightly by then too) to break the $30k barrier.
I think the reason people don’t talk about the cost of the generator as much as the battery is that battery prices are surely to fall – as sure as the sun will come up, but generator prices falling…not appreciably, although it doest help that GM is planning on building electric motors in house.
+5
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:20 am)And during that same time, in my 10 year old car, I have driven about 400 miles and had to stop at a gas station TWICE to fill up!! I NEED a Volt NOW!!!!!!!
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:31 am)I was going to put this up today after noticing the 1000 miles.
My current car, at 28 mpg highway has done, at best, 500 miles on a tank of 17.5 gallons. 1000 miles for me is 35 gallons of gas versus Lyle’s < 6 gallons. Based on how a power company creates electricity his one car didn't cause excess fuel at the power plant to re-charge (but he has to pay the kWh of about ~200 kWh or $30). I would have spent well over $100 for the two re-fills of closer to 40 gallons since I tend to get about 420 miles for 17 gallons.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:37 am)I don’t own a smart phone but I think you can follow you car on myvolt.com
http://www.carsdirect.com/automotive-news/myvoltcom-to-let-volt-owners-set-charging-times-and-monitor-stats
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:38 am)And even then, most people won’t buy a pure BEV until there are fast charging stations everywhere.
But EREVs are a whole different story. Current Li/Ion tech is already fine for EREVs, and 10 years from now prices will be 1/4 of what they are now.
And by the way, theat price prediction comes from the comapny that made the prototype Volt battery packs:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/02/profile-li-ion.html#more
“From a historical perspective over the past 17-18 years the cost has come down by a factor of 15x. In the next 5-10 years we should be able to come down by an incremental 2-4x and we will have to do that to accelerate the penetration of the technology.”
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:46 am)I’m not complaining. With $2,500 down and $350 per month on a PURCHASE, that would get you a $17,000 car. My wife is leasing her $24,000 Altima for $279 per month. Her lease is up in May. She has driven the Cruze and likes it, but she also took a look at the Equinox while she was here… Now she’s liking that size better. She may end up going Equinox and hold out for 36 months and then look at Volt MPV5. Bummer.
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:49 am)Will it be similar to checking in here every day to see if Lyle is still getting triple digit mileage?
-5
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:58 am)How about an aftermarket gen-2 upgrade? Here’s 2 years of real-world data:
Total miles: 18,685.6
Total gas used: 131.39 gallons
Total gas cost: $334.24
Total kWh used: 2,737.8
Total kWh cost: $219.02
Total fuel cost: $553.26
Average MPG: 142.2
Average MPGe: 86.9
Average cost per mile: 3.0 cents per mile
Best Tank
3,536 Miles
314 MPG
115.43 MPGe
Approximately 550-600 charge/discharge cycles total.
.
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:00 pm)Thanks Herm,
I did read that article a couple weeks back. It was in one of the dozen or so engineering pubs that I receive, but I forget which one.
I agree, this is an EXCELLENT article, and anyone with interest in the nuts/bolts of Volt should read this.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:02 pm)So you’re thinking that the MPV5 will be out in 36 months? I was kinda hoping that the Volt Gen II might show up by then. Or are you saying that the Volt’s Gen II will *be* the MPV5? Sheesh, now *I’m* confused…
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:05 pm)and former drill sergeant?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhlWddAXSRA
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:07 pm)The Chevy Cruise sticker price is $16K. The Volt is based on the same platform as the Cruise, and shares many of the same parts. Volt sticker is $41K. Difference is $25K.
The Volt’s battery costs $8K-$11K, depending on who you believe.
That means the the other EREV stuff in the Volt costs $14-$17K – significantly more than the battery pack. Most people seem to miss this point.
So it seems to me there are 4 possibilities:
1) The other electric drive components besides the battery are inherently expensive.
2) GM is making a little more profit on the Volt than they’re letting on.
3) GM rushed the 2011 model Volt, so there wasn’t enough time to cost optimize the design.
4) The other electric parts are very expensive because the suppliers haven’t cost-optimized them yet.
Of these, I believe 1) is the least likely. I suspect the main reason is 4), with a little of 2) and 3) mixed in.
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:08 pm)I suspect that Lyle’s mileage will become *slightly* less interesting, after I start keeping track of my own Volt’s stats. It’s just that that will be quite a while from now.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:10 pm)LOL, without even *looking* I know where the link leads. You Jackwagon!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:13 pm)One idea to make profit is putting the same drive system to a Malibu with out big battery and use a small ultracapacitior/battery – which will reduce a lot costs which may result in a 45 mpg malibu or a 40 mpg equinox . May be small battery may have less BMS so will have reduction of those costs also.
if the above is able to make profit then by volume , GM will be able to recover costs very better ( even this may be a better idea than eassist – just wild guess ) .
more voltec products ( sharing same components ) may give to more profit.
Another stream is Full EV (remove the range extender fully and increase the range to 100 miles – i am sure there will be buyers. – a leaf competitor )
I even think they should make a sports roadster ( a mini CAMARO version – Pontiac Solstice or sky voltec ) with use the EV1 frame and volt components and make 2 seater with EV1 kind of aerodrag so with the same 16 kwh battery they will be able to hit 90+miles and 70 miles extended range ( may calibrate software so that it can be a Rear engine model ) –
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:14 pm)#58 John,
Put that modified spring rate accelerator pedal under the average persons foot and see if those figures stay the same.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:16 pm)On his drive log, I noticed that Lyle drove his volt CAB car on Thanksgiving day about the same distance as any other typical day. Hopefully, he didn’t go to work that day or follow his usual routine yet it appears that he must have charged at 120v during the day, as per usual, to be able to pull off his normal mileage in full EV mode. So I think it’s about time we get a blog to read about his Volt adventures on the holiday. It’s been a while since we’ve had a story about his experiences. Is it possible that this might be an interesting story. Well how ’bout it Doc?
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:17 pm)STILL the best commercial.
Be well, you jackwagon. Tough love. Can I have a tissue?
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:25 pm)From very early on, I’ve thought that GM was being extremely cautious with the Volt and was taking a “belt *and* suspenders” approach. I think that they over-sized the battery (just in case it didn’t hold up for 8-10 years), THEN they coddled the battery with the fancy liquid cooling system (for the same reason). So by my reasoning, they can gather a few more million miles of data via OnStar, determine if it’s been over-engineered, and if so, they can down-size the battery and keep the AER at 40, or they could keep the same size battery and open it up for an AER of 60. The latter could probably be done with just a software change. Although down-sizing the battery would be more involved, I hope that they go that route so that the cost comes down. In a perfect world, they’d do *both*.
We’ll I need to go feed my unicorn…(g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:25 pm)As an electrician I thought I might as well add some info on the cost of the generator and traction motor.
AC 3 phase synchronous induction motors/alternators are fairly cheap to manufacture. There are few parts, they are tried and tested, and simple to design. The variable frequency drive control units that will interface with them are costly however. GM would be wise to bring all of these components in house as they have a lot riding on each of these. Even if they were to purchase them from a reputable source, they are always at the mercy of that source saying “hey, lets buy this or that part from a cheaper supplier!”.
Traction motor and generator (same type of motor/alternator) would cost something like $500 to manufacture. The power electronics however would cost 3-4 time that (could be even higher). Keep in mind that these all have to be road worthy (heavy heavy duty) and liquid cooled. Vibration alone will cut the life span of these electronics in half.
Prices wont come down much in these areas any time soon.
The battery and specialty components (electric A/C, heaters, power steering, wiper motors, ect…) which are the truly expensive parts are really where the cost reductions will occur over the next 10 years.
P.S. I’m buying the Volt so I can do service on it myself!! hehehe Maybe even get the 149 HP traction motor and the 55 HP generator pushing the wheels at the same time all the time in CD mode
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:30 pm)DaveG,
The Cruze sticker STARTS at $16k, If you compare the Volt platform to the Cruze, your looking at least at a $20k Cruze. The Volt comes with many amenities that are not EREV specific, so you need to at least select the upper tier Cruze to come close to comparison.
So, now were back to $20k for the EREV specifics.
I agree that the cost of the EREV components will come down with both volume and optimization, but I think GM will be hard pressed to bring them down 37%, to just meet todays rebated price.
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:33 pm)Isn’t that what SPORT Mode does?
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:33 pm)Tend to agree.
But I think most people won’t buy the Volt for simple cost savings. There is more to it than that.
Just as small cars or big SUVs will never be the ONLY cars on the planet. Everyone has different needs and wants.
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:35 pm)Nope. Sports mode only changes the throttle curve.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:37 pm)OK, stand corrected, try again; isn’t that what SPORT Mode should do? 😎
+6
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:37 pm)Hot Diggty Dog!
Love it that GM is making a profit. Because of that simple fact, the Volt line will continue.
Cheers
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:40 pm)If GM would lease out the pre-production and CAB Volts with unlimited mileage they could collect a lot more data over the next three years.
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:44 pm)I like that train of thought. 😎
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:46 pm)Future Volt Generations Will Offer Cheaper, Smaller Batteries, Not Longer Ranges:
http://gm-volt.com/2008/12/24/future-volt-generations-will-offer-cheaper-smaller-batteries-not-longer-ranges/
I agree. 40 miles AER is the right number. Perfect 80/20 marketing.
And for those that drive more than 40 miles a day regularly, plugging in at work wouldn’t stress the grid too much, since this accounts for only 20% of the population.
It might be good to insure the Volt will get 40 miles in cold weather with the heater on, but aiming significantly higher than 40 miles AER would be a waste, especially with bio-fuels ramping up.
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:47 pm)It was quite noticeable as well. When I did a test drive I put it in sports mode and then when I tapped the throttle up and down slightly you could feel the car surge, backoff, surge, backoff, in exact correlation (ie. no delay).
but that’d kick on the ICE unless I’m misunderstanding.
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:48 pm)Maybe VOLT cost $40 k to make and then again maybe it doesn’t. The complexity of manufacturing cost accounting itself spawns an entire accounting field. It isn’t as simple as adding a bill of material and arriving at an emotionally satisfying number for labor. Factoring in write-offs and capitalization against multi-state and multi-national compliance, the bankruptcy with income running $12 billion/mo. And here GM repays 12-15 billion TARP loans. In this environment, VOLT’s costs are minuscule. A very good reason why Fritz Henderson earned $60,000/mo after being forced out. Furthermore, I’d believe CEO Whitacre before Rattner, who has made on-the-record statements VOLT could sell for the low 30’s and still make a profit.
On the EPA sticker. It looks as if we put the fear of Zeus into EPA. They actually came up with a reasonable facsimile of VOLT’s performance. Much more meaningful than EPA’s LEAF sticker. Getting a 37 MPG rating in ER is quite respectable considering. The range came out decent at 375 miles.
I caught that Thanksgiving GM ad ‘Thank you for helping us get back up.’ — a 10 on a 10.
Nov 26th, 2010 (12:57 pm)Only on the Z-Spec, at higher speed. /I love clutches!
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:04 pm)I think the MPV5 will be out in 2012, and she likes the benefits of leasing, but it is NOT cost effective to turn in a lease early! So if she goes Equinox, we’ll have to wait till that lease is done. Maybe we can set her up on a 24 month program.
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:09 pm)john1701a,
WGARA.
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:10 pm)Statik over at his blog found a very interesting chart, it turn out that the average working age male drives about 60 miles a day, females drive much less.
http://nissan-leaf.net/2010/11/25/epa-rates-the-2011-chevrolet-volt-at-60-mpge-cobimed-93-mpge37mpg-with-35-miles-of-electric-range/
-12
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:12 pm)(click to show comment)
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:13 pm)Leased or retained as a captive fleet ( I see a lot of smiling executives), they will be, er, generating data.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:15 pm)I agree. When I took the Volt out February for a test drive in here in Vancouver Canada (during the Olympics) the sports mode was amazing. I wouldn’t drive it any other way. Back then they were talking about a mountain mode, a power split between the IC and e-motor and all kinds of goodies that have made it out into the production model!
If the generator was ALWAYS used as a motor (from the factory) it would reduce the EV range and people would complain of a noticeable drop in power once the Volt was in CS mode (the generator would have to switch into providing power to the battery’s).
For me, hey I just wanna see if I can do it! Both motors combined… say 375+ lb.ft of torque and 200 HP?! Maybe have a switch on the dash that says “turbo”. Or better yet, get a buddy to hack into the controls so when I punch the throttle both motors kick in
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:21 pm)You have awakened some GREAT memories for me, nasaman….:^) My first NEW car was a 92 RS 25th anniversary–should have NEVER sold that car.
/BTW, I purchased the Camaro at the VERY SAME dealer where I’m getting my Volt–almost exactly 18+ years later!!!
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:21 pm)What if the link is this one?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=steve+rattner
😉
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:23 pm)All of those items have definite advantages if electrified. For example, many new cars have electric assist for steering and brakes.
They will become common faster than the adoption of EVs/EREVs. That will only help the price on the EVs.
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:25 pm)Absolutely!
What they don’t know and won’t know for several years is what the warranty cost will be.
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:28 pm)No *wonder* women live longer than men. We’re doing all the driving! We could reverse that aging effect if we all had Volts to drive!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:28 pm)I went 10 years as an engineer before I worked in the first truly high volume environment. I was shocked at just how much cost can come out once the volumes went high enough.
I had always thought much of the component cost was fairly flat above a few thousand. Of course the engineering cost is spread out over more and more units. But once you build millions, the cost savings in the components themselves was surprising to me.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:33 pm)WOW!!!!! That’s all I can say, WOW!!!!
I commute through the state capital daily – Salem, OR. Most of the state offices are located 30 miles away in the largest city – Portland, OR. There is significant traffic between the two of state motor pool vehicles. I’ve been seeing A123 conversions for a year now. Recently I’ve seen a few Toyota produced PIPs.
They are probably seeing something close to 100 as they are able to plug in at both ends. When they get their Volts, they are going to blow away the PIPs.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (1:36 pm)That is what I am talking about, Let the hacks begin even if the one you mentioned sounds tough.
Just think if one of us did not hack the first wheel, the Volt would be rolling along with stone wheels. Probably good for regenerative braking
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (2:09 pm)I can make up numbers too. It cost 39,000 to make the Volt. Gen 2 will cost $32,000, Gen 3 will cost $26,000. GM will increase their profit margin on each iteration.
(Anyone else find it humorous Rattner’s name has “rat” in it?)
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (2:10 pm)I think the Volt will become more of a mainstream car once the price is more affordable. Its too expensive at $41k for the majority of consumers.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (2:15 pm)Another impressive track on energy storage is Graphene-based super/ultra capacitors
Graphene-based supercapacitor offers energy density comparable to NiMH battery, but with rapid charge and discharge
With the total electrode weight of a supercapacitor system being typically one-fourth to one-half of the total system weight, the system-level specific energy of graphene-based supercapacitors can exceed 21.4-42.8 Wh/kg, which is comparable to that of a modern nickel metal hydride battery used in a hybrid vehicle. This breakthrough energy storage device is made possible by the high intrinsic capacitance and the exceptionally high specific surface area that can be readily accessed and wetted by an ionic liquid electrolyte capable of operating at a high voltage.
Link : http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/11/liu-20101126.html
Nov 26th, 2010 (2:16 pm)Different issues Tag. One doesn’t follow from the other. Does Rattner know numbers? Yup. Is he sleazy? Yup. I don’t think he’s any worse in this regard than a good percentage of people on Wall Street. When all that matters are dollars ethics tend to go the way of the white whale. But numbers are ethics free.
IOW Werner von Braun may have willingly worked for the Nazis and willingly used slave labor but that didn’t mean he didn’t know anything about rockets.
Nov 26th, 2010 (2:27 pm)GREAT comparison using von Braun….;^) That was ACTUALLY a topic of duscussion after turkey yesterday–Just how EASILY we could be in a VERY different situation in the world today, had he ended up going with the RUSSIANS.
/perhaps nasaman could shed some more light, eh??
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (2:28 pm)They’ve been saying this is the reason for the high production costs for the last two-three years. In some cases they’ve gotten quite specific. I think at one point Andrew Farah said they even needed custom bushings because the standard bushings were too noisy!
Low order numbers and a limited number of suppliers make for expensive parts. Ask Tesla or any of the other start ups which haven’t been able to come up with cost competitive electric vehicles. Nissan has said you need a minimum of 500,000 units per year to bring the parts down to a level you see for ICE vehicles.
FWIW the Volt battery pack including electronics costs about $11.2K
Nov 26th, 2010 (2:33 pm)Has Lyle posted his OnStar data yet?
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (2:45 pm)Wow, you must be one of those Left-Coasters too (lol). Around here all the chatter was about the record black bear that a guy killed with his cross-bow. CRUSHED the state record, and is the second only to the world record. Now that’s a “BAR”.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:05 pm)Do you really need to stimulate the trolls ? Please….
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:12 pm)I like that approach. Nothing wrong in having a battery that will last 20 years instead of 10 and if the software is done right, they might be able to dig more of the capacity and keep the 40 miles per charge for most of that 20 years.
I much prefer a car that exceeds the expectations than the other way around.
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:14 pm)Eco_Turbo:
If GM would lease out the pre-production and CAB Volts with unlimited mileage they could collect a lot more data over the next three years.
With 10-25,000 (?) Volts on the road by this time next year there will be lots of data collected !!
Holding my breath for delivery date of VIN 233.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:22 pm)Sorry to disappoint, Tag–good ol’ TEXAS…;^)
BTW, where is ‘around here’? I do a lot of hunting & fishing both here, and in Virginia. Saw some black bears off the Blue Ridge Parkway in September. I’ll try to scrounge up a picture to post as I just got my 64″ RATTLESNAKE back from the taxidermist, which I shot at my ten acre ranch back in June.
//Hope I NEVER have to kill one that big again………
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:30 pm)14 buttons on the rattle, btw
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:33 pm)I just received another mail-in order for a Volt! This time from Scottsdale, AZ…! I am a bit surprised that AZ was not one of the original launch areas. We get a lot of customers from there.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:35 pm)Don’t worry too much, Pete. So far, only John1701a responded …with a flurry of numbers NOT from the PIP prototype he’s tested, but from an after-market Prius 2 hand-retrofitted with a very large A123 battery pack. Only those willing to take a figurative “slap in the face” for their unwelcome and unjustified criticisms of the Volt would dare directly confront this reality. ‘course there’s always the reckless, irresponsible, devil-may-care ELG. Is that taunting enough to make you make a fool of yourself again today, ELG? ;o)
.
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:36 pm)Plenty of time for the wife to lock the keys in the car too, or to need to precondition the cabin, or to be reminded that the plug isn’t inserted correctly (sorry, Lyle, I couldn’t resist),or…
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:40 pm)Did I see a comment of yours the other day that dealers in the launch area can take orders now that could be transfered to another dealer later on for final purchase? Can you expound on this? Is this something that, realistically both dealers can be happy with at MSRP?
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:43 pm)I didn’t say that they did anything wrong. Given their circumstances, I think it was almost the *only* way that they could go. At that point, there were just too many question marks about crucial issues. How many times have we said that the Volt HAS to be “spot on”? The way the Volt has been engineered put enough (as nasaman would say) redundancy into the system(s), to almost insure success. They certainly couldn’t afford a failure!
I was just commenting that given the redundancies in the Gen I Volt, the options available for Gen II and III are wide open.
Now if they’d just *produce* the darn things….!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:48 pm)SNL used to run a great skit for you…hmmm…(brow scrunched) I’m thinking very hard to remember the name of it
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:52 pm)I’m in central Penna, right next to absolutely nowhere (I know, not compared to Tx). Did you eat the rattlesnake? Around here we eat what we kill. Even when we whack a deer with the car, it’s ok to throw it in the trunk and take it home.
I’ll upload some of those bear pics. I think that they used a front-end loader to get it back to the guy’s pickup truck.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:54 pm)…and in better style
-8
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:56 pm)Since that configuration was the same price as what Volt will be selling for, it’s an apple-to-apple comparison.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (3:59 pm)Tagamet,
Although I have eaten rattlesnake several times in the past, I actually sold the meat from this one.
Yes indeed, TX has wide open spaces–that’s why I kinda chuckle here when we talk about fuel saved/miles per year, etc… Heck, I know people that drive WAY more than I do, but when your monthly fuel bill is approaching a Volt’s lease payment, it’s kind of a NO BRAINER!!!
/I actually know SEVERAL people that commute big-time, and spend $700+ on fuel, monthly…..
+5
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:02 pm)John, did you forget my “mass-produced” proviso? Data on the PIP prototype you’ve tested and that’s presumably planned for mass production by Toyota would come closer, and certainly be welcome.
.
+8
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:12 pm)john1701a,
Not really since it isn’t a production car and it is not a direct comparison in price. I’m not going to post the pricing data for the Prius again as it’s a waste of space, but a Prius comparably equipped with an aftermarket battery is far more expensive than a Volt. Not only that, the car you listed is still getting lower gas mileage than a production Volt.
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:17 pm)Tagamet,
Anywhere near State College? I have an old buddy that transplanted up there…..
/curiosity killed EL GATO!!!
-9
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:23 pm)Since Toyota has 50,000 planned for their first year and GM 45,000 for their second, it’s hard to know what’s welcome anymore. Volt enthusiats still don’t appear interested in an ally, other vehicles helping to rapidly transform the mainstream to greater use of electricity.
As for my data, I observed an 84 MPG average overall and 50 MPG after depleted.
-11
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:30 pm)(click to show comment)
+6
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:35 pm)Actually John, I think most EV/EREV/PHEV supporters, as well as the manufacturers ARE interested in allied makes —because they all tend to “validate” one another, just as countless studies have shown the best place for a MacDonald’s is very close to a Burger King or Wendy’s. And thanks for your candor —your prototype Plug-in Toyota with an upsized battery that Toyota may mass produce has achieved an actual overall 84 mpg. Since Dr Dennis’ Volt has achieved an actual overall 171 mpg (a bit more than twice the PIP mpg), as well as being selected as Motor Trend’s COTY, Automobile’s Automobile of the Year and Car & Driver’s Top Ten, let’s put this whole argument to rest, OK???
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:37 pm)A fascinating number to me (Derived from Dr. Dennis’ REAL WORLD numbers, BTW), which I think will start to jump out at the GENERAL public is 78%. In ONLY just over two weeks time, Lyle has driven 78% GASOLINE-FREE!!! How ABSOLUTELY cool is that??
As we all know, individual experiences WILL vary, but I believe that a stat like that, will go a LONG way to educating the general public about the E-REV technology, therefore “paving the way” for MASS ADOPTION……;^)
+4
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:40 pm)I just received a Cruze marketing ad from my local Chevy dealer. The Cruze bare-bones is $16K, but the model that most compares to the VOLT is in the $22,500 area…. So there is a difference, 22.5K + 10K battery = $33.5K, then add the interface and electric motor, reconfiguration of mounting engine, fuel tank, etc. and that can easily add up to $40K not including R&D.
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:44 pm)Yep, 30 miles straight north of State College, and 30 miles west of Williamsport – home of the Little League World Series. So your buddy got replanted in State College? Or was he *from* State College and got replanted in Tx?
At first blush, Tx wouldn’t seem like a great “fit” for a 40 mile AER vehicle. At least the parts of Tx that have big ol rattlesnakes. Unless of course you are in one of the citified spots.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
-9
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:47 pm)Which argument?
I couldn’t care less if Volt delivers higher efficiency, since that has no relation to sales.
It’s like arguing that faster 0-60 acceleration is better for sales. That’s a genuine measure of performance, clearly pointing out a strength… but doesn’t necessarily result in more purchases.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:52 pm)Some things in life you will never forget. Wife and I took a nice drive to Adirondack Mtns a few weeks back. Stopped at a small tavern in Old Forge, NY. Only a few folks in there so their conversation was easily heard. The line I heard from that bar that I will never forget-
“Road kill’s okay if you get to it fast enough”
Heard this comment while I was awaiting an open faced prime rib sandwich, yum…
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:52 pm)ROTFLMAO!!!
Anon
+12
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:53 pm)John, have you ever thought of going into politics? It seems to be a great occupation for those who ignor a question only to address an entirely different and unrelated one! I won’t dignify any more of your mis-directed answers/comments by responding. As the “Governator” might say, hasta-la-bye-bye!
PS: IMO, Prius had as much to do with inspiring GM to develop the Volt as Tesla did, if not more! Thanks for that, Toyota!!!
.
Nov 26th, 2010 (4:57 pm)What’s your point? (lol). And you didn’t specify – prime rib of….. what? (g). July and August are tough months for eatin quality roadkill.
Sorry, I’m still laughing at johnboy’s response. Hysterical.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:06 pm)Tagamet,
Nice!! Yes sir, Phil loved State College so much, he refuses to come back to Texas–
Yeah, at the least, I guess you could say my driving situation is rather unique. Door to door, home to work is EXACTLY 33.3 miles, and I WILL have the luxury of charging @ work, as well–Our dealership has planned it this way!!! A top 25 FORD dealer in the nation, BTW….;^)
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:13 pm)My wife and I put it in proper perspective (I had just bagged a deer a week or so before that- with a rifle, not a fender). It is just one of those things that struck me as funny the way it was said. I am all for PETA (that would be People Eating Tasty Animals)- and I agree with your mid-summer assessment- better to let the vultures have it at that time of year.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:16 pm)I’m just guessing, but I’ll bet you went with the “Stealth” upgrade on your Volt. Wouldn’t want to spook prospective FORD buyers! Any word on what and/or when Ford will field an EV or EREV? I hear that GM is coming out with one real soon.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:18 pm)The last word that I had was NO ‘Courtesy Deliveries’ by an Out-Of-Area Dealer on the Volt. If that changes, then they might as well let those dealers sell the car themselves… Sorry. But ya’know… I still think they might ‘open up’ more states next spring or summer. Just my gut feeling.
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:22 pm)Its the same concept of software in the video game business. Sell the hardware at a loss to make money on the software. Nothing new here. Once the concept catches on with the public and the building process goes mainstream the profit will come. I’m surprised they make a profit at all. Maybe GM is “keeping” these at a limited quantity for a reason.
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:24 pm)Tagamet,
Yeah, we managed to morph a blue oval into the preverbial ‘bow tie’!! LOL
//I will update Ford’s electric fleet in a minute–let me grab my magazine
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:27 pm)Don’t know if anyone else saw this article http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2010/11/01/101101crbo_books_gladwell
Pretty interesting Gladwell review of Rattner’s book. Gladwell’s known for his creative take on things. In this case that is concluding that old-GM of recent was pretty good and thus “saving” GM was only doable because of what was put in place by the old regime.
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:34 pm)Tagamet said: Any word on what and/or when Ford will field an EV or EREV?
Ford will deliver 5 new electrified vehicles by 2012. Specifically, in 2011, Ford will launch 2 EV’s in NA–the Transit Connect Electric and the Focus Electric.
These vehicles will be followed by a new PHEV, AND 2 next-gen lithium-ion battery-powered HEV’s.
Source: FRONTLINE Oct/Nov
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:41 pm)I will agree with you that 1 and 4 are the most likely factors. However, they are both factors responsible for the initial price of $41,000.
Not so much that they are expensive but the initial produce plans of only 10,000 the first year causes the cost of these components to be greater. The same thing holds true for the components of the vehicle since the supplier hasn’t ramped up to levels where their factories can operate most efficiently. There are parts of the Volt that are used on other vehicles like the Cruze where greatly economy of scale will be realized. Everyone at present, GM assembly plants, both vehicle and battery pack, and their suppliers of parts, are not realizing efficient operation of their factories; general and administrative costs of operating those plants are generally constant irrespective of the production volume. Other costs such as labor and utility costs for operation of machinery will vary depending on total numbers produced. Since GM’s assembly plant makes several models, the general expenses referred to above are spread over the total numbers of vehicles made which helps reduce the resulting cost on each vehicle. But until GM really begins increasing production because of real demand in terms of actual orders, the amortization of general expenses will remain higher. When GM begins that ramp up and output greatly increases, they will be able to drop the price significantly.
I do not believe that GM is basing the initial price on what they eventually realize the total yearly sales will be in the future; it is based on production of only 10,000 vehicle as planned. if they announce that they will produce more than 10,000 and are able to ramp up to the greater number, they will realize a greater return on the first year of Volts.
I am not so sure about some of the figures speculated so far. IMHO, there is a lot of room for the final price to come down even on the first generation. It will all depend on increasing the quantity of parts to produce the greater number of Volts that demand indicates are needed to be made. Whether or not GM will pass some of those savings along to buyers of the Gen 1 Volt is questionable. It would be great news if they did.!
We may see a GM manufactured electric motor in the Gen 2 Volts. The same may be true for the generator. Currently, GM gets them from a supplier; the current price of the Volt no doubt includes a markup on the cost of those parts. When GM does make its own motor and motor/generators they will be able to eliminate the profit their supplier charged and only mark up for their own profit.
As said here before by others, the cost by parts suppliers will be reduced. This will happen as they gain experience making the parts. Initially, they set the price high to cover contingencies in the start up of new component production. After time they recover these costs and can then lower the component price. An increase in quantity of components leads to a reduction in price because the manufacturing plant becomes more efficient with increased production. Another aspect is whether GM owns some or all of the production tools the supplier needs to make the component. In some industries, and depending on how the component is produced, the tooling used by the supplier is captive. GM works closely with its suppliers to keep the per piece price as low as possible. There are a number of ways, these prices can be kept lower as vehicle production is ramped up.
JTWISI!
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Nov 26th, 2010 (5:59 pm)Ford Focus EV will be in 19 cities so perhaps that is where the GM Volt will follow/go_to_next.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/11/22/1937800/ford-announces-which-cities-will.html
Ford announces which cities will get first crack at Focus Electric
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (6:27 pm)If the trade laws do not change …. any American company will be at a disadvantage and will not be able to prosper. The global market is rigged against them. While our major competitors like Japan Germany and Korea put huge tariffs on our cars .. we give them $7500 for each electric car they sell in the US and we let them build plants in the US and pay no US taxes. I wish Lyle would take on the task of listing the price of the VOLT in Germany Japan Korea… etc.
Nov 26th, 2010 (6:42 pm)Is that the bear they fed food scraps so he’d hang around the kill area? If so wouldn’t that get an asterisk or something?
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (6:52 pm)The truth is that a lot of people who don’t drive many miles could use a PIP and not use much more gas than if they used a Volt. I’m probably one of them. But at some point the question becomes whether you want the best or are willing to settle for something less. I’d suggest that the sales numbers of the Honda Insight and the Prius will tell you how this contest turn out.
My personal opinion is that Toyota would save themselves a lot of money by just killing the PIP now. Given the Volt it’s a solution in search of a problem. The HSD drive just can’t compete with a serial hybrid.
Nov 26th, 2010 (6:57 pm)FIVE? Holy crow! I thought GM’s 10K for the first year was small. At they all like at one dealer? (ok, just kidding). 5 Models would be great! Is the “HEV” like a Prius, or is it more a series EREV (just giving johnboy a poke). Seriously, the first two are EV’s Ala the LEAF or MiniCooper, but how will the PHEV and HEV’s differ. Technically the last 3 all sound like plugin HEV’s. Enquiringly minds want to know! In any case, the next several years promise an exciting variety.
TIA,
Tagamet
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:03 pm)I hadn’t heard a word about that (and I would have if it had happened. Even in red-neckville, that sort of thing doesn’t go unnoticed – nor is it smiled upon). This bear did have a tattoo on it’s lip, so the game commission had captured and tagged it at some point. With the size of this bear, they probably fed him people to keep him in the scrap area. It’s our way of dealing with prison over-crowding.
Be well,
Tagamet
+6
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:04 pm)No, it’s just personal. We don’t like you.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:08 pm)But the Volt isn’t a pure serial hybrid. The key differentiation is that the Volt has full performance in electric only mode, whereas the PIP will fire up the gas burner any time you push the throttle down far enough.
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:14 pm)If you are interested, why not find out and report back? Just a thought.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!****NPNS
Nov 26th, 2010 (7:51 pm)The story in our paper was this:
But there is a problem. Word out of the Poconos is that Price may have shot a bear named “Bozo” who was a mascot at Fernwood Resort, a well-known tourist stop on the border of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area.
Pennsylvania Game Commission officials say Price legally shot the bear on state games lands, but how ethical was the killing of a bear that residents said knocked on doors for food.
Maybe it was some other bear but this sounds like it.
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:14 pm)#1 Threat in America… Bears!
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:17 pm)The only time it isnt, is in CS mode during high-power demands over 30mph. And then, it could be argued about the “indirect” connection to the ICE.. but that’s a dead horse.
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:25 pm)This plant is pretty nice. Everything is new (well some reworked equipment). Its the old MTP, or WAP.. Wayne ass’y plant. From what I can tell (with limited knowledge) everything seems to be on schedule. Im sort of excited about the Focus, but would really like to learn more about what Ford comes up with regarding a PHEV.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:27 pm)After the El Segundo demo drive in Sport Mode. I called the order manager at my local Chevrolet dealer. Asked him to add the rear facing camera and parking assist to my order. He thanked me for the addition. I also raved about the Volt to him. Saying the demo drive was more than expected and that he had better order as many as he can because they will sell for sure. He replied with a polite, “Thank you…thank you very much”.
BTW: Currently on a visit back East. Rented a Black Malibu LT. Really like this car.
=D-Volt
Nov 26th, 2010 (8:56 pm)I’m an advocate for workplace and city parking facility recharge stations. Recently petitioned a local building expansion committee (won’t be specific) with the need for 10 to 12 recharge stations in all parking garages. I mentioned the many new EV’s coming out (by name). And offered much information on the J1772 recharge system. Received a very warm reply, “Thank you very much for your forward thinking! Will pass this along”.
Everyone should pitch in by mentioning the need for parking area recharge stations in your town. This is what the EV movement is all about. Play a part in getting America and Canada off pump gas. It’s the right thing to do. And we’ll all be better off for it.
NPNS
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2010-11-12-volt12_ST_N.htm?csp=usat.me
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:01 pm)You’re correct that the bear was Bozo and had been fed for years by a grounds-keeper at the Fernwood resort (I’ve been there). The 71 year old groundskeeper that had been feeding the bear had been told repeatedly in no uncertain terms by Game Commissioners that he had to stop doing that (it’s illegal), but by report he had fed the bear the day before it was shot. The hunter had no idea that the bear’s fear of humans had been stolen by the grounds keeper. He says that he had been tracking that bear for over 3 years prior to the kill. So what should have been the best hunting day of his life is spoiled by the groundskeepers inappropriate behavior that ended in the bear’s death.
I just read 6 or 7 news reports of the situation (found 35 or 40) and interestingly, the closer to PA they were authored, the more blame was placed on the groundskeeper. The article in the San Diego paper by Ed Zieralski was really weak, in that rather making statements, he asked questions – “Turns out this bear had been hand-fed since it was a cub and actually used to knock on doors for food.”…”The bow hunter said he’d been hunting the bear for three years. Did he know it was a mascot for a tourist spot and restaurant?” Who is the real Bozo here? The guy who hand-fed this cub from the time he found it and then let it become domesticated? The bow hunter who must have thought it was strange that the bear just looked at him as he poured nine crossbow arrows into it?…(notable omission of the 3 other hunters whose arrows were included in the 9)
Personally, I think that the groundskeeper was just plain selfish. He gained a lot of secondary rewards by feeding the bear – feels good, local notoriety, etc, but he clearly ignored the orders of the Game Officers – and it cost that bear its life. JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
/this may well qualify as the farthest OT post to date. Terribly sad to boot.
+3
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:20 pm)Hi Fellas
I work on the GM pickup assembly line. We all know here how much it cost to build a 4 door fully loaded pickup. This year it cost us about $17,800 to get one out the door. I am surprised at people raising cane about the Volt’s seemingly high price, well for the last 10 or so years people have spent that much on trucks. Trucks were GM’s biggest profit maker for years, 40 percent markup more or less which allowed them to lose money on the little cars it didn’t know how to build cheaply. Let’s see what happens with the Volt.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:28 pm)Yes. I’ve had a similar experience.
I think most people would be surprised to know how little parts can actually cost. When quantities get somewhere between 100K and 1M units, the negotiated price beyond that point tends to decrease rapidly. And often, the actual negotiated price is hidden from many people within the company, and only the initially quoted prices are shown. There’s actually a fair amount of secrecy in parts procurement.
And contrary to popular opinion, as quantities go up, quality and reliability generally increase as well. This is because people gain experience in making the part the more they make it, so they get really good at making it after a while. Specifically, more automation can reduce price and increase quality, provided unit volume is high enough to justify the expense of the additional automation.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:33 pm)Now THAT is hysterical–just about spewed coffee out of my nostrils!!!
You are EXACTLY right, Tag. Yes, technically, the last 3 SHOULD all be PHEV’s, BUT alas, I digress… I will know a LOT more details in the Dec/Jan issue, so in the mean time, we can make some EDUCATED guesses, until I get something in stone…..;^)
The NEW PHEV should be the ‘next gen’ Escape. I would almost liken it to what GM semi-scrapped/back-burnered/kinda re-front-burnered with what WOULD have been the Saturn Vue 2-mode. THAT was a shame, as the timing/time-line was PERFECT, imho…..
As for the 2 next-gen lithium-ion battery-powered HEV’s: One will be the successful Fusion/Lincoln version, while the other one is slated to be ???????? They have been pretty covert on this one. SHEER conjecture on my part, some possibilities MIGHT be the Ranger, Expedition, Edge, or Fiesta. (Or their equivalent size that’s already in the pipeline…)
With Ford’s new business model, as evidenced by finally getting the Fiesta to the states from Europe, we will only see 3-4 year runs/cycles on new models. So the target is REALLY moving these days.
As well, a lot of people either forget or never knew about the Electric Ranger we made from model year 98-02. Of course, there were roughly only 1500 TOTAL produced in that timeframe. I think there would be a great market for that type of vehicle today.
I believe that the bottom line is this–Most large world-wide manufacturers will HAVE to present a diverse portfolio of offerings to even compete in this arena. Why, you may ask? There is NO one solution for ALL customers…..;^) As always, the more, the merrier, the better for us ALL–JMHO
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:40 pm)As I said before, I think 1) is the least likely.
In other words, there’s nothing inherently expensive with electric drive. Once they start building higher quantites, the cost will come down a lot.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (9:44 pm)nasaman,
NASA man thanks for the memories. I was stationed in Norfolk, Va and had just gotten my re-enlistment bonous as an E-5 navy nuc. I bought a ’82 Z-28 having traded in my cherished ’75 Chevy Monza which had a built 283, Muncie Rock Crusher 4 speed and narrowed ford 9 inch read end. Loved that car and when I went to buy the Z-28 (blue with grey rockers) there were 2 mechanics at the dealership fighting over my Monza.
But I really loved the heck out of that Z. Was like a go cart when it come to handeling, even if it only had 160 hp in that anemic 305.
Again thanks for those memories
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:10 pm)I agree with you about economy of scale but typically the BMS of an electric car is an expensive item. GM joined with IBM to develop the software algorithms that make the various drive states work seamlessly. These items are not inexpensive.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:11 pm)This points out the need for a lower trim option of the Volt. Many on this site have requested a minimum of “bells and whistles”. For those that want the extras, they can buy it, but for those that don’t, why force then to pay extra?
And by the way, this is an area where the Leaf seems to beat the Volt. In other words, the Leaf comes with a more basic trim package standard, and that may be one of the reasons the Volt is more expensive.
And in general, GM seems to agree that EREVs should be less expensive than BEVs:
Specifically, on this chart, it seems to show that an EREV with 64 km (40 miles) AER should cost less to build than a BEV with 117 km (73 miles) of range.
See here for details:
http://gm-volt.com/2009/07/30/guest-post-from-gms-frank-weber-on-long-term-cost-advantage-of-erevs-over-bevs/
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:32 pm)Regardless of what’s asked, purpose continues to be the same: SELLING HIGH-EFFICIENCY VEHICLES
Attempt to divert all you want by asking unrelated questions. It all comes back to sales in the end.
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:37 pm)IBM software was used in the development environment and testing of the Volt, but I don’t believe there’s any IBM code on the Volt firmware itself.
And although the non-recurring costs of software are somewhat high, the recurring costs are practically zero, so additional software development doesn’t make each car more expensive to build.
Bottom line:
More complex – yes
higher development cost – yes
higher unit cost – no
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:41 pm)Efficiency doesn’t really matter.
If someone built an inefficient car that runs on domestic fuel with low emissions, that would satisfy everyone’s concerns.
Bottom line: Once you move away from gasoline, the whole game changes.
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:43 pm)Just 3 days left on the Volt countdown clock.
=D-Volt
Nov 26th, 2010 (10:49 pm)I have to disagree, somewhat. Efficiency does matter but reducing oil consumption and emissions matters much more.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:00 pm)Thanks for reminding us of this chart presented by Frank Weber (now back at Opel) in July last year.
I like the distinctive styling of the Ampera so much I was once seriously thinking of buying one in Europe and shipping it back to the US. No More! The MSRP for the 2011 Opel Ampera has been set at €42,900, which is roughly $58,740 at today’s exchange rate, including VAT. Although as a foreigner I wouldn’t have to pay the VAT, the price to Europeans is really outrageously high!!!
What can GM be thinking!?!? I know they will ship the first Amperas to Europeans until they’re built there. But at this price will the numbers sold ever justify building them there??? I’m stunned! It would be cheaper for a European to buy or lease a Volt here & ship it home if they can get by any financing or export/import problems! It would appear to me GM Europe expects to sell Amperas to the wealthy that buy up-scale cars like the Jaguar, Bentley, Mercedes AMG, Ferrari, etc —i.e., to the fairly wealthy middle class rather than to the common man. Much as we’ve complained about our MSRP, nearly $60,000 is truly shocking compared to a US lease with $2,500 up front and 3 years at $350/month!
Any of our European friends here have any thoughts on this?
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:09 pm)Lyle has posted today’s entry in his “Chevrolet Volt Driving Log” the CS entry says 48.8 miles and 1.0 gallons of gasoline. That’s just under 50 mpg for CS driving. Pretty good.
+2
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:16 pm)And notice that today he logged more total miles (114), EV miles (65.2) and CS miles (48.8) than ever before. BTW, his 65.2 EV miles was a “personal best” for today too. Anyone think he might actually be enjoying driving this car? 😉
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:25 pm)Great day for CS mode! I hope there’s more of that! Of course, I also love the 150+ MPG over 1000 miles of driving!
join thE REVolution
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:28 pm)Let’s call this bear stuff on topic for its relevance to the Nissan trained polar bear — another travesty.
When I first read the article I felt somewhat bad for the hunter, but then I thought: What kind of “outdoorsman” would think that a bear could be so huge and NOT be a pet? Really. Seems that Bio 101 would teach you that, absent human based food, there just isn’t enough energy available for a bear to be so large. You were making a joke about feeding the bear humans but to sustain that size a bear would have to have some very “unnatural” food made available to it. In this sense the “I’ve been tracking him for years” story makes you wonder what kind of genius the hunter was not to have figured it out several years ago.
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:31 pm)(It was 171+ mpg at 1005 miles.)
+1
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:42 pm)Do you really want proof that there are no other dual fuel cars that can get 171 MPG by only counting the second fuel for this number?
-1
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:43 pm)Stop the stupid stuff will you. Honda has sold a lot more Civics than Toytoa has sold Priuses. And this means what? Right now Nissan has sold zero Leafs and GM has sold zero Volts. Come back in five years and maybe you might have a point. At the moment you don’t.
What you’re doing is comparing the cumulative sales of CD Players to the cumulative sales of MP3 Players in 2001 and contending that this proves a CD Player is superior or has done more for music or something. But in fact all it proves is that the MP3 Players represent new rather than old technology. Just accept that the Prius was great technology before it was supplanted by better technology. If you want to stay in denial fine but it’s obvious by the fact that 90% of Leaf owners are Prius owners what is happening, and that is that the great migration from parallel hybrids to EVs has started.
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:47 pm)I’m not surprised. Just look at how complicated and expensive they made the drivetrain. they could have lost a couple MPG and saved thousands making it simpler. For god sakes you could do a home conversion with 150-200 mile range for that cost.
Nov 26th, 2010 (11:55 pm)He said “mass produced hybrid or gasoline powered” not “dual fuel”. And yes, I’d love to have you give an example of going 1000 miles in ordinary driving over 16 days giving anything close to 171 MPG. I’m sure I’m not alone in being all ears. From everything I’ve seen the PIP won’t get anything close to 171 MPG — more like 58 MPG. http://www.autoweek.com/article/20101122/GREEN/101129980
Nov 27th, 2010 (12:06 am)Hey everybody remember when I showed you an electric delivery truck from Youtube a few months ago. Well it looks like UPS and Fed Ex may be using them the brand is called Navistar and it looks like UPS may also be using another type of electric vehicle as well but the only thing I don’t get at all on the second article is that they said they been investing in electric vehicles since the 1930’s yeah right how can that be because UPS has only been around 1996 but if they are wanting electric vehicles then I hope sometime in the future I’ll see one driving in my neighborhood sometime in the next few years here in Washington State. Here are the links but I still don’t buy into the 1930’s thing on the second article at all. http://www.hybridcars.com/news/fedex-and-ups-add-electric-drive-vehicles-27727.html http://www.hybridcars.com/news/fedex-and-ups-add-electric-drive-vehicles-27727.html
Nov 27th, 2010 (12:10 am)A Chevrolet Spark BiFuel would get more than 171 MPG. This is a dual fuel vehicle as the Volt is.
Off course the Volt is much better because the combined MPG(e) is around 70 MPG(e) when driving almost 80% on electricity. The Spark would never get more than around 35 MPG(e) combined as it uses LPG as the first fuel.
Nov 27th, 2010 (12:17 am)Whoops I didn’t mean to put up two of the same links here’s the other one but just to say once again that I don’t buy into the 1930’s thing. http://www.hybridcars.com/news/fedex-and-ups-add-electric-drive-vehicles-27727.html
Nov 27th, 2010 (12:22 am)Okay that was odd I guess that article I was going to put up may be the same website but I don’t get why I could put this one in maybe it was fake hmm? Unless the website has some type of error problem directing you to a different page when posting it as a link?
Nov 27th, 2010 (12:27 am)As mentioned, he asked for an example of a hybrid — a vehicle which uses a gasoline and an electric propulsion system — or a gasoline powered vehicle. Vehicles using the same engine and dual fuel sources — CNG/gas or LPG/gas or even E85 vehicles — don’t remotely fit what he asked for.
+1
Nov 27th, 2010 (12:32 am)The sales of Volts have just begun, skippy. What will be interesting to watch is the number of Prius owners becoming “former Prius owners” in direct proportion to the increase in Volt sales. I have no doubt Toyota is going to lose a lot of would-be repeat customers.
Nov 27th, 2010 (12:37 am)Also here’s the official Navistar website and I do hope that all UPS and Fed Ex buildings will use these vehicles in the future. http://estartrucks.com/estar?_oskwdid=8820216&_engineadid=8531041055&gclid=CI7KjuOWwKUCFQQ-bAoddgILZQ Also there is a video on this website called. Watch the video to see what all the wow is about. Enjoy.
Nov 27th, 2010 (12:52 am)Actually the vehicle brand is called Estar just to say my mistake.
Nov 27th, 2010 (1:06 am)This will seem like a bargain in a few years. The country already hit $157 a barrel. That too will seem cheap in 5 years. Everyone who has a Volt will thank the almighty they have one. As a military retiree, watching our great country subsidize the entirety of the world through trillions spent on campaigns over to nations who despise everything we stand for, well, I’m proud to see every single company announce an EREV.
CHEVY VOLT: American-made, American-FUELED. Help stop terrorism the ONLY way feasible.
Nov 27th, 2010 (1:12 am)Here is an electric version of an Estar UPS truck.
Nov 27th, 2010 (1:16 am)http://www.roadtransport.com/blogs/big-lorry-blog/2008/04/going-green-at-the-cv-show-mor.html
Nov 27th, 2010 (1:16 am)Fellow Volt patrons, one other thing to mention, and I greet the great next generation of workplace compatriots for understanding this better than me – telework, telecommuting, virtual workplaces, in essence, cutting out Fossil Fuels to stow 2 tons of metal and steel to go 30 miles to a place the younger set believes is unnecessary to travel to and fro. Well, I’m working from home all 5 days a week. I do miss people, but generally, that’s because I haven’t gone that last step to install webcams and conferencing on a grand scale. When I do go in to conference or work side by side, I hope to do so in an electric car.
+1
Nov 27th, 2010 (1:19 am)Netflix has a great movie, free thru streaming on peak oil under documentaries.
Nov 27th, 2010 (1:53 am)Here’s the one I was actually talking about that I was showing everybody on Youtube.com http://boulderev.com/
But still I think the Estar would be the winner in appearance.
Nov 27th, 2010 (2:06 am)But however it seems this vehicle get’s 20 miles more in range at 120 so you never know it may be a win win situation for Ups and Fed Ex who knows only time will tell?
-3
Nov 27th, 2010 (2:14 am)everyone working on the Volt needs to take a cut in pay to build a profitable car and get the price down, everyone.
Nov 27th, 2010 (2:19 am)Could you be a little clearer, I don’t unerstand your figures
Nov 27th, 2010 (6:38 am)Amen about more choice is GREAT. I’m really glad to hear that Ford is jumping in with both feet! They sound like a very nice “mix”. Most excellent and thanks for the info.
Sorry for the delayed reply, but I was “called away”.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 27th, 2010 (6:44 am)Our online host, Dr Lyle Dennis, enters data in a Volt Driving Log from his car’s driver’s information display. Based on that actual data from the 1st 16 days prior to yesterday:
“MILESTONE ALERT: Lyle has updated his Volt Driving Log showing a full 16 days of data totaling 1005.7 miles driven and 5.87 gals of gas used, equaling 171.33 miles/gallon. It’s doubtful any mass-produced hybrid or gasoline-powered car has ever before logged over 1,000 miles at an average of over 171 mpg, thus I believe this represents a true milestone in automotive history! Can anyone prove me wrong?
/BTW, Lyle hasn’t yet had to stop at a gas station for a fillup —he’s still got ~1/3 tank left!
.
+1
Nov 27th, 2010 (6:48 am)How long have you been a hunter? From your post, I’d say that you haven’t spent day one in the woods hunting. By your reasoning. if I saw a huge trout in a small stream, I’d say “Uh Oh, looks like a pet fish”! Every species has one or two that grow exceptionally large, and given that this one is not the world record, I guess the other one was a pet as well? Naw.
JMO.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 27th, 2010 (6:53 am)I LOVE “holiday leftovers”, Tag —looks like you do too! 😉
+2
Nov 27th, 2010 (6:57 am)Maybe that combo should be standard on a Z-Spec Volt, to automatically take pictures of the cars it passes 😎
+1
Nov 27th, 2010 (7:02 am)Will be more fun to photo the gas stations.
NPNS
Nov 27th, 2010 (7:47 am)Around $40K cost has come from a few sources, so it very well may be accurate. Then again, there is only one source that really knows so it is really fruitless to debate what the actual cost is. No doubt this first generation Voltec isn’t cheap to produce and the opportunities for cost savings going forward are omnipresent. Yes, lowering cell costs will probably, hopefully, be the single biggest reduction but there are many other areas. With EVs, lowering weight is also a double bonus because you not not only increase specific vehicle power but also increase range. Sure, regenerative breaking cuts into the range gains but they are still there since regen is far from 100% efficient. Since the Volt has a tranny, albeit a EVT tranny, the weight gains could be slightly higher than they would be with a pure series EREV.
Because of the power and range gains of reducing weight, there are some cost savings that may be gained by actually increasing the component cost. The car platform may be the biggest opportunity for improvement in this realm. Currently, the Volt is based on the Delta II platform, which was designed for a standard ICE vehicle. It is designed for high volume and should be fairly cost reduced. GM may need to put a little cost back in to lower the weight and create an EV or EREV specific platform that has other advantages as well, e.g. pack configuration and placement.
Cell advancements are not limited to cost reduction. Costs for Li batteries have come down fairly consistantly for some time now. These improvements, alone, are modest but noticable but coupled with other cell improvements such as energy density, power density, thermal properties, and life cycles they are significant. All of those features factor heavily into the future of EREVs. Advantages of simple cost reductions are obvious but some of the others are compounded. For example, life cycle and/or SOC window improvements and/or power density would allow for a smaller battery with a larger operating SOC. There will be some tough decisions in this regard since eliminating the need for liquid cooling of the pack would be a huge advantage and this may require keeping a larger SOC window.
Liquid cooling is a big cost, weight, and comlexity adder. So improvements to the cells and performance over time knowledge base that allow for effective non-liquid cooled packs would be a large advancement. Doing away with liquid cooling would also make battery pack size a more practical optionable component. After cell improvements, offering battery size options is probably the next biggest advancements EREVs will see. Sizing the pack to the customer’s needs is a huge cost improvement. Just think of the 25 mile commuter or better yet the 60 mile commuter. BTW, the longer the commute that is matched in AER, the more cost effective EREVs become because basically only cell costs have to be added while other costs are basically fixed.
Clearly volume and advancements should bring down the motor and power electronic costs. These are high $/lb items and are not yet produced in high volume since they don’t appear to be off-th-shelf items. I see future cost savings here but not much weight savings.
The ICE is another often talked about component. A lot of people want to see diesels or HCCI engines in the future. I hope this isn’t the case except for high load or high mileage scenarios. For consumer autos, I’ld much rather the focus be on lighter, potentially less expensive designs, and less NVH confined designs. GM had to make some compromises in CS efficiency because of NVH concerns. Without those concerns, perhaps they could use a engine with a lower max BSFC but a higher effective average efficiency in the Voltec vehicle. I strongly believe a rotory engine of some sort will be the best mid term solution. They can have significantly reduced weight, size, and NVH. They also should be able to be less expensive in qty. Coupled with other weight reductions, GM should be able to reduce the generator portion of the EREV to the 35-40kw range.
The AC, sterio, tires, etc are also supposedly new and low volume items.
The opportunities to cost reduce, gain efficiency, and performance increase Voltec are abundant and I’m very much looking forward to what rev 2 and 3 bring.
Nov 27th, 2010 (8:00 am)Depends on the mood I’m in that day.
+1
Nov 27th, 2010 (8:56 am)Koz,
I agree with what your saying. So, the long term cost needs to come down $7500 just to reach todays realized cost.
I posted earlier about this same subject, and when you look at the Volt as two components 1) Std ICE stuff 2) EREVE stuff, it appears that of the $40k, it splits evenly between the two pieces. We know GM knows how to build ICE based cars, and they are not going to make any significant price reductions in this department, so that leaves the $20k for all that is EREV.
So, can GM really bring the price down to even today’s realized cost of about $33k after the rebates expire? Thats over a 37% reduction of that $20k!
The good thing is the rebates should last for a quite a while, but eventually that step change in price is going to come.
As I stated earlier, this is a real issue for all EV\EREV’s, and price does matter.
+1
Nov 27th, 2010 (9:01 am)Donny needs to get out of the big city for a weekend up Nort’, eehhh!
+1
Nov 27th, 2010 (9:03 am)Nasaman,
That statement alone, makes me drool….
/Left over turkey has the same effect
Nov 27th, 2010 (9:08 am)Are you not “discounting” the value of equipment “markups”?
+2
Nov 27th, 2010 (9:15 am)OT: But the one encouraging sign with the next generation (IMO), is they are putting less value in owning large homes, and are opting to purchase smaller homes that meet their needs, not wants.
I heard about this trend and when I spoke to a young man who works for me, he made mention of looking for a home, and they were specifically looking at buying as small as practical. Being a frugal person my whole life, I really appreciated what he was doing. He and his wife could have easily afforded a McMansion, but instead chose a path of less consumption.
Made me a little jealous that the new generation was actually thinking long term about what they are doing.
Amazing if you really think about a purchase and put that purchase in the “NEEDS” or “WANTS” column, just how few things one really needs to live and be happy.
/Ok, sorry about the green rant, even though I do not consider my self green, just practical.
Nov 27th, 2010 (9:19 am)Not sure what you mean?
I am basically saying you need to reduce the EREV portion by 37%, be it by new technology, cheaper materials, labor, margins, or “markups” (dealer markups?). Since the other 1/2 of the equation is a basic ICE, I cannot see much room for improvement, besides the normal reductions you get today when you buy an ICE, which is not a whole lot.
Nov 27th, 2010 (9:36 am)Is anyone else experiencing that this page never seems to completely load?
I have firefox 3.6.12 and it just never finishes, but I can post and see new posts. Never had this issue before.
Maybe it’s just me?
Nov 27th, 2010 (9:37 am)Never mind. It loads fine now…
Nov 27th, 2010 (10:09 am)Yeah, if I’m out in the woods carrying a bow that shoots sticks and come face-to-face with an 800 bear, the first thing I think of is *not* going to be “Where’d I put those donuts”. (g)
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 27th, 2010 (10:29 am)New thread is up.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The VOLTS ‘ Wheels On The Road!!
Nov 27th, 2010 (11:13 am)Thank you Tag; somebody needs to stomp on DonC for his complete know-it-all attitude. I could elaborate on this for huge whitetail deer, too, but the point is about him confusing self-made ideas with facts. He tried to quote bogus info on FL’s reliance on coal recently. He also stated that the people of PA’s experience with oil was from the 1850’s. The topic was too old for me to bother anymore, but as a matter of fact, the WORLD’s oldest CONTINUOUSLY operating OIL refinery is in Bradford, Pa. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvYgXJgoLJ0 Apparently, his at-some-point residence in PA made him an ‘expert’ on all things Pennsylvania, amongst all his other areas of ‘expertise’. BTW, I have called Erie and Dubois home at points in my life, so I am familiar with your neck of the woods.
Nov 27th, 2010 (11:55 am)Keeping in mind all the various technologies that all OEM’s can possibly design into any vehicle, I completely agree that the (current) cost to manufacture Volt is indeed the $40,000 as described.
This doesn’t mean that the cost will stay that way for a very long time.
As well, now that the EPA energy efficiency numbers are known, GM can aggressively proceed to escalate all those efficiency values. (Although Lyle’s real world tests are apparently blowing away all those rather conservative estimations.)
The first priority GM has had in all this was to make it reliable (no technical risk taking), refined, and to do it under the gun of public impatience to “prove it can be done”, and “get it done ASAP”.
Cost reductions are definitely on the way.
And, from my own experience in driving the Volt on March 13th, once you yourselves have driven it in EV mode, you will certainly realize that the new standard in knowing what luxury is is the Volt driving experience. It is a mystically luxurious peacefulness that is stunningly wonderful.
Nov 27th, 2010 (8:05 pm)“They have the scaled operations and the dealer networks. The idea that a bunch of E.V. companies will come along and G.M. and Ford will go out of business is kind of crazy.”
Guess what, Steve, GM DID go out of business, and they didn’t need an EV startup to do it.
Steve simply doesn’t understand the auto industry and what keeps the industry from being crashed by outsiders. It’s not the dealer networks, Stevie, it’s their massive investment in powertrains and all the elctronics that control them. If EV’s become practical because of a practical battery, every automaker immediately loses billions of dollars of now-obsolete assets and has a boatload of engineers that are also now useless. Their mechanics at the dealerships are now more or less obsolete as well. Aside from being something of a sleazebucket, Steve is also (like all sleazebuckets) a dope as well. Intelligent folks don’t act like Steve. That’s why they’re called intelligent.
Nov 27th, 2010 (11:59 pm)Yes, I saw your earlier post but don’t fully agree with it. Either I’m being too gullible with info from GM or you didn’t read my post all the way through. There are a lot of non-EV only Volt components, at least by your definition, that are not yet mainstream (low rolling resistance tires, low power radio, low power electric AC, multi-loop/AC thermal exchanged cooling system, windshield wipers, extra insulating motor mounts, etc.). With expected cell improvements and all of the other potential cost improvements, I think GM can pull $7500 out of the cost (assuming the cost reslly is $40k) in the next 3-5 years. It doesn’t appear to be a gimme but doesn’t appear overwhelming either. To pull out significant cost beyond this does seem to be a tough task. I believe the will also decontent to pull out more cost (less AER option, eliminate EVT, change to active air battery cooling, steel wheels, standard radio, no 5-year Onstar, no Nav package, eliminate the manual position shifter, etc).
Longer term (beyond 3 years), I do think the non-cell EV-only costs should be able to be brought down to less than $2k in todays dollars (certainly if anything close to GM’s claim of $2K for ICE and all of it’s associated components is to be believed).
Nov 28th, 2010 (1:44 am)And we should believe GM because…? (not trolling, just a serious question)
I think what’s more important is what motive do they have for telling the world that the Volt costs $40,000 to build (regardless of whether it’s an accurate figure or not)?
Nov 28th, 2010 (11:36 am)I don’t believe them so much as they’ve earned a bit of skepticism but in this case it’s immaterial in a sense. If they overstated that costs, more likely than not IMO, then that is less that the costs need to be cut. So, it’s sort of relative, the higher the costs the more cuttable they are. The lower, the less cutable but also the less cuttable they need to be.
Nov 30th, 2010 (6:03 pm)So the dealer makes no markup whatsoever. I don’t think so.