Jul 16

Plug In America study: Tesla Roadster to retain more battery capacity than originally anticipated

 

According to what may be the most comprehensive real-world electric vehicle battery capacity study to date, the Tesla Roadster’s battery has been projected to retain an average 80-85 percent of its charge holding capacity after 100,000 miles.

This data on the 2008-2012 electric car model that’s been in production the longest in this current era of EVs was presented by Plug In America on Saturday at the Teslive event in Milpitas, Calif., and it beats expectations originally set by Tesla.

 

Projections Tesla made in 2006 were that the car would retain just 70 percent after 5 years of driving 10,000 miles per year, or an average of 50,000 miles.

While the average was shown to be positive, Plug In America’s projections also indicate a considerable degree of variability between vehicles and cautioned against surmising that every Roadster will meet the higher benchmark.

The results were derived from responses by verified Roadster owners from around the world. Another way of parsing the “80-85 percent” per 100,000 mile number is to say the Roadster lost about 3.7 ideal miles of range per 10,000 miles driven.

“Our study also found no discernible effect of climate on battery-pack longevity,” said Tom Saxton, chief science officer, for Plug In America, who led the research. “Roadster owners in hot climates are not seeing noticeably different battery capacity profiles than owners in moderate climates.”

Qualified Results

 
Information from Tesla indicates 2,500 Roadsters in all were built, stats are provided by Tesla for more than 2,100 sold in 31 countries – with a good deal more than this believed to have actually been sold – and production ended January 2012.

The study compared two sets of data – one being 4-5 percent of all Roadster drivers accounting for around 10 percent of all miles driven – 122 actual owners – who responded to a several-minute voluntary survey. The other data set was from 106 Open Vehicle Monitoring System (OVMS) installed by Tesla owners. The latter is an anonymous data collection system. The two sets of data are not from the same people necessarily.

“To protect owner privacy, the OVMS data was contributed anonymously, so I can’t say exactly how much it overlaps the survey data,” said Saxton, “but I expect there’s some overlap. Still, the OVMS data is less self-selected so it adds to the quality of the distribution of the data for the study.”

The two sets of data for the most part agree suggesting reasonable expectation of accuracy and results are not far off of a smaller 2011 survey Saxton did in the Pacific Northwest.

What’s more, the study went in with eyes wide open, and stated since the 122 respondents were voluntary, they may have been biased either in favor or against the Roadster or Tesla, but that now seems less likely.

The respondents were reached online via social media avenues, and not via a comprehensive mailing to every single Roadster owner across the globe. Therefore, the more connected or socially engaged owners were believed more likely to have noticed the survey, and taken the time to answer it.

“I met a number of owners at Teslive who didn’t know about it,” said Saxton when asked about the quality of the data sampling, “and they are presumably far more socially active than the average Tesla owner.”

Green_Roadster
 

This said, the 4 percent is a relatively large sample size in qualified terms, and far larger, say, than some nationwide Gallup polls which may only survey a small fraction of 1 percent and deem that statistically significant to draw conclusions from.

The second-most comprehensive study Saxton is aware of is one also done by Plug In America on the Nissan Leaf. There just 1 percent of owners (240 people out of a far larger production volume) answered.

Between the two cars, Tesla owners indicated more favorable feedback in the hot climate areas, but here too, the survey allows for adjustment in time, assuming more data came forth.

“The data does thin out about 50,000 miles driven, so it’s possible a pattern may become visible as we collect more data, but with the current data set no climate pattern is visible,” said Saxton.

Other significant conclusions drawn by the Tesla survey include:

As there is considerable variation among vehicles with similar mileage, an individual
owner’s experience may vary significantly from the average.

The survey found no significant correlation between climate and battery pack longevity.

Individual experience may vary. The survey data for high-mileage vehicles is sparse with little variation in climate among those vehicles, so it’s possible an effect from climate will emerge as more data is collected.

The survey found no significant correlation between vehicle age and battery pack longevity, although the study has no data on the first year of use, nor use beyond 4.5 years.

The calculated amp-hour capacity is the most reliable measure of battery pack capacity. It would be a benefit if this value were readily visible to Roadster owners.

Lastly The survey’s written conclusions observe:

It’s curious that Tesla does not offer any sort of warranty on battery pack capacity, not previously as part of a new Roadster purchase, not as part of the extended warranty they are now offering Roadster owners as their warranties expire, and not even to Model S owners despite the purported improvement in battery chemistry and corresponding increase in both time and miles on the Model S battery warranty.

Plug In America was partly responsible in convincing Nissan to offer such a warranty after relatively small number of Leaf owners reported excessive capacity loss, particularly in hot first-wave roll-out states, including Arizona, Texas, and California.

Tesla_Roadster
 

We asked Saxton therefore to clarify his thoughts on Tesla’s “curious” lack of battery capacity warranty.

“Having a warranty that covers capacity loss, like the Nissan Leaf does, gives owners more assurance about the long term utility of their vehicle. That seems like a selling point to me, although it hasn’t been a big issue with current Roadster owners,” he said.

We then followed up with Tesla but were unable to receive a reply before deadline. If we do later, we can update this.

The full survey can be found here.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 16th, 2013 at 5:55 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

COMMENTS: 58


  1. 1
    nasaman

    +16

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (6:41 am)

    Most interesting comment from the lead article: “It’s curious that Tesla does not offer any sort of warranty on battery pack capacity, not previously as part of a new Roadster purchase, not as part of the extended warranty they are now offering Roadster owners as their warranties expire, and not even to Model S owners despite the purported improvement in battery chemistry and corresponding increase in both time and miles on the Model S battery warranty.”

    Reason? I’ll proffer that Tesla wisely considers the great majority of their prospective buyers of both Roadsters & Model S vehicles to be viewing their unusually expensive cars NOT as a primary mode of transportation —but rather an adjunct to one or more other cars they already own. One reason I say this is that Teslas so far lack the “utility” of an EREV design like the Chevy Volt. A second reason is that most Teslas are regarded (in part, at least) almost as “toys” by their fairly wealthy owners.

    Further, Nissan’s LEAF marketers may have initially been influenced by similar thinking, yet more recently added a battery warranty clause because the vast majority of their buyers are clearly regarding the much cheaper Leaf to have a utility function and often consider it a primary vehicle.


  2. 2
    Eco_Turbo

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Eco_Turbo
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (6:46 am)

    Even more amazing when you figure Tesla’s battery is a bunch of 18650 cells welded together. These may be different chemistry, but you get the point. http://www.batteryjunction.com/18650.html


  3. 3
    James McQuaid

    +20

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    James McQuaid
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (7:24 am)

    This is good news for Volt battery longevity, particularly given the decidedly superior engineering of the Volt’s temperature managed battery pack.


  4. 4
    Mark

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (7:31 am)

    It makes sense, Teslas Modus operandi has been to set a benchmark or expectation level and then exceed it by a wide margin…. Lets hope that GMs engineers have done the same! So far all indications are that, after 24,000 km, I have seen no capacity fade on my volt. ( it still holds a 10.4 kwh charge ) and still has 60 km or more AER in summer months.


  5. 5
    nasaman

    +11

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (7:45 am)

    Mark: It makes sense, Teslas Modus operandi has been to set a benchmark or expectation level and then exceed it by a wide margin…. Lets hope that GMs engineers have done the same! So far all indications are that, after 24,000 km, I have seen no capacity fade on my volt. ( it still holds a 10.4 kwh charge ) and still has 60 km or more AER in summer months.

    I hope the “long-timers” here who recall my arguments years ago (based on my long experience with 20yr+ spacecraft batteries) will forgive me for saying, I told you so! ;)


  6. 6
    Raymondjram

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Raymondjram
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (7:46 am)

    There was one red Tesla roadster here, and I took two pictures of it around 2009. I haven’t seen it for a long time. It had Florida plates, but local transportation laws require that any imported vehicle cannot stay with its original plates for more than 365 days (a year after its arrival). I suspect that it may have returned to Florida.

    Raymond


  7. 7
    Raymondjram

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Raymondjram
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (7:54 am)

    O.T. – GM is at $36.50 today:

    http://seekingalpha.com/symbol/gm?source=email_rt_mc_price

    Raymond


  8. 8
    Mark Z

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark Z
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (8:21 am)

    nasaman,
    I object to the word “toys” being used to describe the Tesla Motors Model S. I have not heard the battery powered “Lunar Rover” referred to as a toy, and yet that vehicle also has a limited range. Would a “toy” vehicle get a 99 point rating from Consumer Reports? After putting over 10,000 miles on my Tesla Model S, I have found that no other vehicle is used. My ICE cars sit dusty, hooked to battery chargers to keep their 12 volt cells alive. The Cadillac XLR will be given to my niece today for her birthday!

    Talking to the sales staff at the Tesla Stores has revealed one important fact. Model S owners are replacing their BMW, Porsche, Mercedes, Cadillac and other fine vehicles with the reliable and superior performing Model S. All inventory of cars is available for sale, and Tesla is having a difficult time keeping their cars in the store! They now manufacture 400 a day and Elon said at Teslive that they will be raising that to 800 a day next year. The main reason for the lack of greater production is that Panasonic needs to increase their production of cells.


  9. 9
    kdawg

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kdawg
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (8:40 am)

    I wonder how much data GM polls with OnStar about battery longevity of the all the Volts on the road. I know they’ve done lab testing and made announcements that the batteries are lasting much longer than originally anticipated. I’m just curious if they are using OnStar data as well. It would be a much larger sample size than the minuscule 3% Tesla has from people responding to telephone calls.


  10. 10
    kdawg

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kdawg
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (8:55 am)

    Raymondjram: O.T. – GM is at $36.50 today:

    I assume you mean closing price yesterday since the market doesn’t open till 9:30AM.

    Looks like just before the bell people are bidding 36.95 and asking 36.99.

    EDIT:

    “General Motors Raised to Conviction Buy From Buy by Goldman Sachs”

    trading at $36.39 as of 9:45AM


  11. 11
    George S. Bower

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (9:06 am)

    I’ll just repeat what I said about this yesterday over at EVs:

    Whoa. I don’t know about the statistical accuracy of this. It looks like they had to extrapolate the data to 100,000 miles. Also looks like they only had 1 vehicle with a highest mileage of 88,000 miles and only 4 vehicles over 60K miles.

    The high to low numbers at 25,000 miles suggest that some cars were plus or minus 10% of the average. So I guess you would speculate that the results presented should be that the range after 100,000 miles would be 75-85% capacity.

    At any rate that is pretty good…but we need a bigger sample. time will tell

    and I was backed up by a statistician:

    “As a statistician I second George S. Eric, please change the article’s title from “retained” to “projected to retain”, and the exact number “85%” to “around 85%” or something like that. Furthermore, the uncertainty increases dramatically away from the dataset’s support (i.e., the range of actual observed mileage numbers, which maxes out at <90k in this dataset) – and as George says and even the article admits, the impact of climate or age in years cannot be accurately extrapolated as well given the paucity of data on the high end.

    That being said, overall the dataset does seem to be good news. The bogeyman of EV's supposedly super-short battery life seems to exaggerated."


  12. 12
    Mark Z

    +5

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark Z
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (9:07 am)

    Jeff has included a link to the original article and I highly recommend reading it. Filled with charts and graphs, it is exactly the data that the readers of this forum love to analyze. The discussion of “Standard Mode” and “Range Mode” is examined. The charge mode is a critical variable of battery performance over time, since the driver selects how their battery is to be charged. If the standard 90% setting is used, battery longevity is increased. Since each driver uses and charges their vehicle battery differently, results will vary. In regard to Model S, the size of the pack will also affect life, since an 85 kW pack is used at a lower percentage of total capacity than a 60 kW pack.

    In regards to Battery Warranty, Tesla Motors modified the Model S warranty earlier in the year. Here is the quote:

    “Battery Warranty

    The battery pack in your car is obviously very important and expensive to replace. In developing the Model S, we took great care to ensure that the battery would protect itself, always retaining a few percent of energy. If something goes wrong, it is therefore our fault, not yours.

    Except in the cases of a collision, opening of the battery pack by non-Tesla personnel or intentional abuse (lighting the pack on fire with a blowtorch is not covered!), all damage is covered by warranty, including improper maintenance or unintentionally leaving the pack at a low state of charge for years on end. The battery will be replaced at no cost by a factory reconditioned unit with an energy capacity equal to or better than the original pack before the failure occurred.

    The intent is to provide complete peace of mind about owning your Model S even if you never read or followed the instructions in the manual.”

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/creating-world’s-best-service-and-warranty-program-0


  13. 13
    George S. Bower

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (9:28 am)

    Mark Z,

    Thx Mark,
    When they were talking about a lack of warranty it didn’t ring true.


  14. 14
    kdawg

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kdawg
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (9:32 am)

    Mark Z: The battery will be replaced at no cost by a factory reconditioned unit with an energy capacity equal to or better than the original pack before the failure occurred.

    What’s considered a failure? If the pack only retains 69% of it’s energy after 5 years, is that a failure?


  15. 15
    Steverino

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Steverino
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (10:14 am)

    George S. Bower:
    Mark Z,

    Thx Mark,
    When they were talking about a lack of warranty it didn’t ring true.

    The article says Tesla does not warrant battery *capacity*. It did not say there was no warranty. In contrast, GM warrant’s the Volt’s battery capacity.


  16. 16
    nasaman

    +8

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (10:15 am)

    Mark Z: nasaman,
    I object to the word “toys” being used to describe the Tesla Motors Model S. I have not heard the battery powered “Lunar Rover” referred to as a toy, and yet that vehicle also has a limited range…

    My apologies, Mark! I meant no offense & I only view the “toy” aspect as just PART of the reason people buy Teslas —I say the same thing about Ferraris, Lamborghinis, etc as well as the coming Caddy ELR. (In fact, for years I’ve kidded an old boss in the space program about his love/lust for expensive, high-performance computers, arguing good-naturedly that I see PCs as simply TOOLS.

    PS: I know some of the astronauts who drove the Lunar Rover and I guarantee you they saw the “toy” aspect of it! ;)

    EDIT: I just saw a post on FB by a fellow EV enthusiast… He says, “Let’s see, if I sell the tractor
    and the BMW … if I cash out the IRA … yes that’ll do it, we can get a Model S.”
    He also posted the following picture, which I hope proves a Model S is utilitarian enough for everyone… ;) ;) ;)

    1005615_553519164684453_1610572067_n.jpg


  17. 17
    nasaman

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (10:25 am)

    Mark Z: …[Tesla states:] “In developing the Model S, we took great care to ensure that the battery would protect itself, always retaining a few percent (my emphasis) of energy…”

    As both the Zimmerman Prosecution & Defense lawyers said repeatedly in their closing arguments:
    (a few percent) —“REALLY?!?”


  18. 18
    DonC

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (10:26 am)

    kdawg: What’s considered a failure? If the pack only retains 69% of it’s energy after 5 years, is that a failure?

    Degradation isn’t damage so it’s not covered. Note that in the study about 20% of the Roadster battery packs were completely or partially replaced. I found that to be astonishingly high. It would be interesting to know more about this.

    Mark Z: Jeff has included a link to the original article and I highly recommend reading it.

    I think the authors did the best job they could but the numbers are very small, the data is dirty (many pack replacements), and some of the findings aren’t believable. The small numbers is always a problem. In FDA trials the small trials always yields results that can’t be duplicated in later larger trials. No one understands why, it’s just the way it works. My guess is we’ll see the same thing here. Of particular interest here is that the study couldn’t find any correlation between age and degradation or between temperature and degradation, and we know that both age and temperature adversely affect cell capacity. Since we know from lab testing at the cell level that charge cycles, C rates, SOC, time, and temperature all effect capacity losses, when a study finds otherwise that’s a good reason to start looking for errors or limitations in the study. LOL (Not saying they didn’t do the best they could with the data).

    Personally I don’t see this as a big deal because Tesla has been very good about setting expectations. Given it said the pack would retain 70% of capacity after 5 years, there is not a lot to complain about if the real world performance meets or exceeds that benchmark. Compare this to Nissan’t claims that the Leaf battery would retain 80% after 10 years and a real world result of 80% after 3 years.


  19. 19
    Mark Z

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark Z
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (11:16 am)

    nasaman: …I know some of the astronauts who drove the Lunar Rover and I guarantee you they saw the “toy” aspect of it!…

    I can imagine how true that was.

    Apologies accepted and thanks for a good laugh with the Tesla Tractor. Elon wants to build a truck, so extra utility is planned with new models in the future.


  20. 20
    kdawg

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kdawg
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (11:24 am)

    DonC: Degradation isn’t damage so it’s not covered.

    But at some point wouldn’t it have to be? I picked something close to what Tesla promised in my first post, but what if its only 45% after 5 years? Is Tesla just going to say “Oh well, not our problem”? Is it some % in between? Would be nice for the MFG to put something in black & white.


  21. 21
    Mark Z

    +8

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark Z
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (11:30 am)

    nasaman,
    Elon is referring to the SOC left when a pack is no longer being charged. They are keeping a few percent to prevent bricking. However, even if the customer bricks the battery, they are covered.

    Anyone who buys a BEV must either trade in the vehicle or buy a new battery eventually. The range today will not be the range 5 years from now. This was and continues to be a major reason to consider a Volt when the buyer cannot afford a battery pack replacement in 10 years. The ICE will allow you to keep on going when the battery range is less.


  22. 22
    Noel Park

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Noel Park
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (11:58 am)

    James McQuaid:
    This is good news for Volt battery longevity, particularly given the decidedly superior engineering of the Volt’s temperature managed battery pack.

    #3

    Exactly! +1


  23. 23
    Noel Park

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Noel Park
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:01 pm)

    Mark: So far all indications are that, after 24,000 km, I have seen no capacity fade on my volt.

    #4

    46K MILES on mine with the same result. NO noticeable reduction in range. If anything, it’s gone up a tad. Maybe I’m learning how to drive it a bit better.

    Edit: Knock on wood, LOL.


  24. 24
    Raymondjram

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Raymondjram
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:15 pm)

    nasaman:
    PS: I know some of the astronauts who drove the Lunar Rover and I guarantee you they saw the “toy” aspect of it!

    You may be one of the few to be close to a real Lunar Rover. I have seen only reproductions in museums (one at the Kennedy Space Center). I learned the history through the “Moon Machines: Lunar Rover” documentary, and how these two GM engineers convinced von Braun with their toy version. It is basically a platform with motorized wheels and two beach chairs to sit on. For those who haven’t seen it, here it is on YouTube:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbpmox-_bDM

    I saw the first deployment live on TV during the Apollo 15 mission, and I know that if the batteries were replaced, the three Rovers will be operational again. This is why electric vehicle will be the most cost efficient vehicle we can buy and use. They have few parts to break down, and as long as the batteries are charged they will keep running. I can bet that the original Tesla Roadsters will last over one hundred years and keep running with newer battery packs.

    If we return to the Moon, GM can send a Chevy Spark EV with modified wire wheels, and use it there!

    Raymond


  25. 25
    George S. Bower

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:27 pm)

    Noel Park,

    Just saw your post from yesterday.
    Sounds good.
    Go for it. (Spark EV)


  26. 26
    George S. Bower

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:30 pm)

    Raymondjram:

    If we return to the Moon, GM can send a Chevy Spark EV with modified wire wheels, and use it there!

    Raymond

    Now that’s the power of positive thinking!!

    Who knows, when my Volt lease is up I just might have to get one of those Spark EV’s.


  27. 27
    Raymondjram

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Raymondjram
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:45 pm)

    George S. Bower: Now that’s the power of positive thinking!!

    Who knows, when my Volt lease is up I just might have to get one of those Spark EV’s.

    I just remembered something: the vacuum of space. The coolant bottles, brake fluid bottle, and all hoses of the Spark EV need to be redesigned to run on the Moon. Not a big issue. But the astronauts will sit in better comfort, play tunes, and then really kick up dust with the Spark’s 400 foot-pounds of torque!

    Raymond


  28. 28
    Raymondjram

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Raymondjram
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:47 pm)

    George S. Bower:
    Noel Park,

    Just saw your post from yesterday.
    Sounds good.
    Go for it. (Spark EV)

    Yes! I asked for this! Be a new pioneer!

    Raymond


  29. 29
    Chevy Volt Update

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Chevy Volt Update
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:48 pm)

    I work for the local utility company DTE and know many people who work at GM, here a few rumors that I have heard lately, these are rumors, but sound reasonable to me.

    1). GM will lower the price of 2014 Chevy Volt, since they are under mounting pressure to drop price, owing to the fans here :-) They have not finalized the price yet (it depends on how the market reacts to the price reduction of 2012/2013 models) , but GM insider says most likely it would be reduced to $37,495 (there is a remote chance it would be even lower than that), so after $7500 rebate, it would be less than $30k, which is VERY important. The only reason GM has not been aggressive as Nissan is that they have already lost over $3 billion.
    2). Due to the stupid comments by Akerson, the sales volume of 2014 will be less optimistic as people will hold out for the 2015 model and purported price reduction of $10K, GM is considering to reduce the production of 2014 models, as they also received complains from dealers for unsold Volts. One reason for the tiny gain of 2013 over 2012 is this: Last year, many Chevy Volt were sold to fleet customers, such as Federal, local governments, GE, utility companies, etc. Simply looking at the retail level, sales has been up by probably 30% this year!
    3). The Cadillac ELR will be sold at a price for GM to break even (excluding the fixed cost) . By then, we would know the real cost of manufacturing a Chevy Volt, but keep in mind the material cost of Cadillac will be higher (likely to be $3000-$5000).
    4). The next Chevy Volt will be further refined, let’s keep the pressure on GM so they reduce the price w/o decontenting the vehicle!!!

    We folks at DTE support our country, our community and our companies!!! God bless you all!


  30. 30
    nasaman

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:49 pm)

    Chevy Volt Update: (See above post)

    OT but an intriguing, well-written, even provocative article: …”There is an all-new 2015 Volt 2.0 coming some time in 2014, and savvy potential buyers are holding off for this significantly improved version…” *

    This article is over a month old (but I’ve just now seen it —sorry if anyone here has seen it earlier), and the author says it is speculative. But I find it thought-provoking and well worth a quick read. It’s called “The Dramatically Improved Chevrolet Volt 2.0″ and you’ll find it at… http://www.thestreet.com/story/11947283/1/the-dramatically-improved-chevrolet-volt-20.html

    *Be SURE to read pgs 2 & 3 of “The Dramatically Improved Chevrolet Volt 2.0″ for the “real meat”!


  31. 31
    TedinFortMyers

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    TedinFortMyers
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (12:54 pm)

    Over 58,000 miles on my Volt and no reduction in battery capacity. 2011 Volt #1506.

    Take Care, TED


  32. 32
    nasaman

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (1:01 pm)

    TedinFortMyers: Over 58,000 miles on my Volt and no reduction in battery capacity. 2011 Volt #1506.
    Take Care, TED

    Hey Ted, you’re one of the early Volt buyers to whom I said, “I told you so” —right?


  33. 33
    Noel Park

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Noel Park
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (1:02 pm)

    Chevy Volt Update: The only reason GM has not been aggressive as Nissan is that they have already lost over $3 billion.

    #29

    Comment………………………………………………………………………….. No comment.

    Edit: Just to be clear, that’s the nicest thing I can think of to say.


  34. 34
    Jackson

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jackson
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (1:22 pm)

    Really, really OT:

    What kind of EVSEs do you guys have in your garages? Is there one to steer clear of?

    My wife has taken to EV driving with a vengeance. She’s scoping out all the free public ones, and now wants one in the garage. This will require some extensive electrical work; as our main panel is maxed out, but we “know someone” who says that he’s seen them for sale in warehouse stores such as Sams or Costco. I think I’d rather take a look online …

    Edit: I noticed in the forums that some Volt users install 30 amp chargers, while ones which are ‘guaranteed compatible with the Volt’ are typically rated between 15 – 18 amps. Is 30 amp safe, and is it overkill?


  35. 35
    Kent

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kent
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (1:46 pm)

    nasaman: OT but an intriguing, well-written, even provocative article: …”There is an all-new 2015 Volt 2.0 coming some time in 2014, and savvy potential buyers are holding off for this significantly improved version…” *

    This article is over a month old (but I’ve just now seen it —sorry if anyone here has seen it earlier), and the author says it is speculative. But I find it thought-provoking and well worth a quick read. It’s called “The Dramatically Improved Chevrolet Volt 2.0″ and you’ll find it at… http://www.thestreet.com/story/11947283/1/the-dramatically-improved-chevrolet-volt-20.html

    *Be SURE to read pgs 2 & 3 of “The Dramatically Improved Chevrolet Volt 2.0″ for the “real meat”!

    Thanks for the link! I had not seen this article before. Although it’s just pure speculation, I certainly hope it comes to fruition.


  36. 36
    Darius

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Darius
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (2:02 pm)

    nasaman,

    Kind of our wish list implementation.

    Someone has to ask GM when do they expect or plan first EREV CUV, SUV or utility pickup arrival like VIA is doing or something in respose of Tesla Model X. Or they just relay on VIA spin those segments and Tesla taking 100% electrified SUV market with Model X?


  37. 37
    Jackson

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jackson
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (2:13 pm)

    Darius,

    I don’t know for sure, but I suspect GM won’t put out larger EVs until they can be sold for less than 6 figures. Pay enough, and you can get pretty much anything you want; even Semi tractors. GM is in the mass-market segment, and is looking primarily for breakout product thresholds. Full-size pickups and SUVs aren’t there yet.

    Hopefully, the EREV CUV won’t be long in coming.


  38. 38
    JohnK

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (2:36 pm)

    nasaman: will forgive me for saying, I told you so!

    I don’t FORGIVE you, I THANK you! It helped give me confidence back in the early days. I’m now happily with my Volt for 2 1/2 years.


  39. 39
    Mark Z

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark Z
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (2:37 pm)

    Jackson: …I noticed in the forums that some Volt users install 30 amp chargers, while ones which are ‘guaranteed compatible with the Volt’ are typically rated between 15 – 18 amps. Is 30 amp safe, and is it overkill?

    A 30 amp ChargePoint was installed for my 2011 Volt. Absolutely safe for the vehicle as it is the same amperage as the ChargePoint public charge stations. It requires a 40 amp circuit breaker. The Volt drew about 12.5 amps from the charge station. Having 30 amps made it very practical for the Model S and occasional Leaf drivers.

    Have an electrician check the circuit breaker panel to avoid the overload you are concerned about. I had a second meter and additional panel installed for a cheaper electric rate.


  40. 40
    jeffhre

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    jeffhre
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (2:37 pm)

    Mark Z: This was and continues to be a major reason to consider a Volt when the buyer cannot afford a battery pack replacement in 10 years. The ICE will allow you to keep on going when the battery range is less.

    Getting a lot of plus 1′s; for a back handed compliment :)


  41. 41
    JohnK

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (2:50 pm)

    Just an observation. This all speaks to the topic of bridging the gap from early adopters and enthusiasts to the general population. I have personally noticed what to me seems a dramatic increase of the Volt population in the Detroit area. I’ve seen it in my neighborhood and at work. I’m sure that it is not due to my personal influence (well maybe a little bit), but due to the engineering and quality. I am a software developer and a nerd. There are LOTS of engineers and car enthusiasts in this town. We just can’t help but appreciate this car.

    I really do hope that the general population of car owners across this country catch on to what a great thing we have going for us!


  42. 42
    JohnK

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnK
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (2:58 pm)

    nasaman: Hey Ted, you’re one of the early Volt buyers to whom I said, “I told you so” —right?

    Me too (see comment #38). BTW, Hi to you TED! I was #2 in line at my dealer. Ted was #3 at my dealer, but he got his car first (seems like maybe my car either had problems or got rerouted to a higher priority customer). Ted travelled all the way from Florida to Detroit to purchase his Volt. Worth the effort, not so Ted?


  43. 43
    kdawg

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kdawg
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (4:10 pm)

    Jackson: I don’t know for sure, but I suspect GM won’t put out larger EVs until they can be sold for less than 6 figures.

    If Mitsubishi can sell the Outlander PHEV for the same price as the Volt, GM should be able to come up with something.


  44. 44
    Charlie H

    -9

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Charlie H
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (5:37 pm)

    Noel Park,

    That’s not helpful. If it’s not true, explain the real situation and how you know. As far as I know, the development cost was about $1 billion. Akerson said they were losing money on every one and I interpret that to mean unit cost, with negative amortizaiton of development. That was before GM amped the rebates. The situation now is undoubtedly worse. $3 billion seems a bit out there but it could be true, depending on what costs GM’s accountants think should be assigned to development.

    nasaman,

    I couldn’t help but notice that the article ends with “as of this writing, the author is long F(ord).”

    The most speculative item in the article is certainly the date. Is there any solid reason to believe it’s the 2015 Volt? And not the 2016? Or 2017?

    That said, GM is probably feeling under some pressure to bring out the 2.0 in 2015. That pressure is provided by the Prius, which is being redesigned for a 2015 release. If I recall correctly, Toyota has announced that the 2015 Prius is a redesign and, whether you love Toyota or not, you must admit that they do not announce anything lightly.

    We can expect two things from the 2015 Prius:
    - Lower drag. In a standard hybrid Prius, this will improve fuel economy. In a Prius PHV, this means more range per KWH.
    - PHEV capability as an option and I think we can expect them to be more serious about it. We can still expect them to offer less range than the Volt but that means their car has a much lower list price and, with likely better CD MPG, people that commute short distances but often drive long distances (me! me!) will think the car is a better value.

    Also, Toyota reduced costs between G1 and G2 and then again between G2 and G3. They may be reaching the point where this becomes very difficult but I don’t expect a general price increase for the Group 2 (and it will probably have a few more features than the current version – not much, just enough to satisfy a current Group 2 owner that the new one has “more”).

    I think we can expect the car to have more powerful electric motors and a higher power-density battery and I think they’ll return to a smaller ICE. The base car is likely to switch to Li-Ion (it will lose 100lbs or more on account of that and gain a little interior or cargo room). It will be able to capture more braking energy and it will also allow for EV operation under a wider range of conditions.

    As with the current Prius, it is likely that the drivetrains will be identical in the standard and PHV versions, so the development of the Prius PHV will largely be amortized along with the 500K units/year of the standard Prius. Financially, the Prius will remain a formidable foe.


  45. 45
    Raymondjram

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Raymondjram
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (5:45 pm)

    kdawg: If Mitsubishi can sell the Outlander PHEV for the same price as the Volt, GM should be able to come up with something.

    I have high expectations that GM will surprise us with a EREV CUV for 2014…

    Raymond


  46. 46
    Darius

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Darius
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (6:07 pm)

    Jackson,

    Most probably you are right but GM executives using quite aggressive rhetoric on this subject and worth asking anyway.

    http://insideevs.com/gm-exec-says-transition-to-electric-vehicles-is-right-around-the-corner-charging-infrastructure-needs-to-catch-up/#comment-111731


  47. 47
    Darius

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Darius
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (6:27 pm)

    Charlie H:

    It is always funny some outsider strarts speculatimg of company product profiatability. Are you some sort of spy or what?
    Nissan, Ford, Toyota are happy with electrification why GM shall be not?

    Toyota talking crap as other people. I remember their hydrogen scam very well.


  48. 48
    Jackson

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jackson
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (6:40 pm)

    Charlie H = john1701a ?

    Charlie H: “That’s not helpful.” john1701a: “That’s not constructive.”

    Charlie H: Whatever Toyota does is golden. john1701a: Prius is god.

    Charlie H and john1701a: Persistent single-mindedness in oposition to those who dare to not kowtow before the mighty “T”, continual Prius advancement-by-threadjack.

    One cannot help but wonder.


  49. 49
    Jackson

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jackson
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (6:43 pm)

    Jackson: Hopefully, the EREV CUV won’t be long in coming.

    Clarification: If the CUV doesn’t have the same (or more) AER as the Volt sold that same year, I ain’t interested. Yes, this will take a larger pack and more money.

    When first floated, the MPV5 idea would have used the same pack as the Volt, but only get 30 AER miles. The cause would likely have been the increased aerodynamic drag of a CUV design. Given longer battery life (and a few more cells), perhaps a higher AER could be achieved than first supposed.


  50. 50
    Eco_Turbo

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Eco_Turbo
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (7:21 pm)

    Charlie H: the Prius will remain 10 year old technology.

    Because of the gas guzzling transmission. Toyota has suckered so many other companies into paying them a royalty for HSD, they should just pay GM a royalty and build a PriVolt. They would be doing the World a favor. The Japanese would love it. The over 100 Km/h alert would be going off continuously. 8-)


  51. 51
    Noel Park

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Noel Park
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (7:23 pm)

    Darius: It is always funny some outsider strarts speculatimg of company product profiatability. Are you some sort of spy or what?

    #47

    Thank you very much. +1


  52. 52
    steve

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    steve
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (9:39 pm)

    James McQuaid:
    This is good news for Volt battery longevity, particularly given the decidedly superior engineering of the Volt’s temperature managed battery pack.

    Might be true, but the battery chemistry and mechanical design of the cells in the volt is different. The results of one doesn’t necessarily carry over to the other. It’s encouraging, but not directly relevant.


  53. 53
    kdawg

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kdawg
     Says

     

    Jul 16th, 2013 (10:28 pm)

    Eco_Turbo: Because of the gas guzzling transmission. Toyota has suckered so many other companies into paying them a royalty for HSD, they should just pay GM a royalty and build a PriVolt. They would be doing the World a favor. The Japanese would love it. The over 100 Km/h alert would be going off continuously.

    Just wait. Toyota is slowly getting to where the Volt was 3 years ago. The day they make a Volt knockoff, all of the Prius fanboys will say “THIS IS THE BEST CAR EVER!”


  54. 54
    Tom Saxton

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tom Saxton
     Says

     

    Jul 17th, 2013 (12:28 pm)

    DonC: Of particular interest here is that the study couldn’t find any correlation between age and degradation or between temperature and degradation, and we know that both age and temperature adversely affect cell capacity.

    Just to clarify, the study didn’t examine the effect of cell temperature on battery capacity, it examined the effect of climate on battery capacity. They aren’t the same. The active thermal management system is intended to protect cells from extreme temperatures regardless of climate.

    As for the age issue, I was as surprised as anyone but I present what the data says, not what I expected it to say.


  55. 55
    Silver Lotto System

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Silver Lotto System
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2013 (2:54 am)

    Simply desire to say your article is as amazing. The clearness to your post is just cool and i could suppose you’re an expert in this subject. Fine along with your permission allow me to grasp your feed to stay updated with drawing close post. Thanks a million and please carry on the enjoyable work.


  56. 56
    Charlie H

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Charlie H
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2013 (7:40 am)

    Eco_Turbo: Because of the gas guzzling transmission. Toyota has suckered so many other companies into paying them a royalty for HSD,

    It’s hard to imagine Nissan (royalty) and Ford (cross-licensing) as “suckers” when they’re not one of the companies that went bankrupt.

    And it’s difficult to read “gas guzzling transmission” without laughing, as HSD is the one innovation that gets a 50mpg car on the road at an affordable price.


  57. 57
    Charlie H

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Charlie H
     Says

     

    Jul 18th, 2013 (11:45 pm)

    Darius: It is always funny some outsider strarts speculatimg of company product profiatability. Are you some sort of spy or what?Nissan, Ford, Toyota are happy with electrification why GM shall be not?Toyota talking crap as other people. I remember their hydrogen scam very well.

    Akerson’s an outsider? They why is he getting that big paycheck?


  58. 58
    Rick

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Rick
     Says

     

    Jul 29th, 2013 (12:26 pm)

    Great article. It will be interesting to see how this whole thing turns out. If made affordable, will this technology beat out Prius, or like the other commenter said will they just make a knock off?