GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

This week General Motors will reportedly launch an advertising campaign about a compact, quiet, efficient electric car that has a gasoline engine to extend traveling range if needed.

The company will document that this vehicle has already been well received by drivers, enthusiast magazines, and has been called a “game changer.”

It’s name is the Chevrolet Volt.

“It’s really a relaunch,” said Chris Perry, GM’s vice president for U.S. marketing of the campaign to a Wall Street Journal writer otherwise focused on how the Chevy Cruze is dramatically usurping Volt sales. “It’s still a technological marvel. We need to remind people of that.”

But while the Journal documented GM’s counterbalancing pro-Volt views on its Web site – that’s ranked by Alexa as the world’s 231st most-visited – the writer made the case that GM is otherwise seriously working against itself.

Volt sales were only 603 units last month. Perry agreed the highly publicized federal battery investigation hurt the Volt, but in a more profound way, the WSJ contended, Chevrolet is pitting the Volt against its own Cruze.

Citing seven months of unsold Volt inventory on hand according to Autodata Corp., the Journal said the Volt is proving to be a tough sell against its cousin.

“It could take 20 years, or more, for a Volt buyer to earn back through fuel savings the roughly $20,000 extra cost compared with a Cruze,” wrote the Journal.

So while the WSJ let GM tell what it’s doing to promote the Volt, the story undermines GM’s intention to remind Americans that the Volt represents the vanguard of a new energy paradigm.

The Journal’s math also contradicts the well-regarded personal finance publication, Kiplinger, which several months ago calculated that within five years a Volt would far more significantly whittle down a $19,000 higher price gap when compared to a Cruze LTZ.

OK, which is it? WSJ says it takes 20 years or more to recoup the Volt’s extra cost. Kiplinger says in five years total ownership cost for a Volt (using premium at a near-future $4.65) is $7,747 higher than for a Cruze costing $18,305 less and using regular gas 30 cents per gallon cheaper. Disparity varies for this calculator depending on fuel prices.

But there is truth within the WSJ article, and it will be up to consumers – many of which do not know who to trust and too often are not sufficiently tech savvy – to discern the wheat from the chaff.

One truth that the WSJ mentioned is the Cruze is heavily cross shopped against the Volt – according to Edmunds, it’s fourth on the list behind the Nissan Leaf, and two versions of the Prius.

Last year the Cruze quickly gained sales momentum aided in part by weakness in the 9th generation Civic and more significantly, by the aftermath of the Japanese natural disaster in March.

“The Cruze is the most competitive compact Chevy GM has fielded in decades,” wrote the Journal, “last year outselling the Focus and the Honda Civic, once the king of the small-sedan segment.”

Another truth the Journal brings up is the trend toward much more efficient internal-combustion vehicles which is expected to continue in light of new federal and California efficiency laws.

“The most efficient Cruze model, the Eco, uses a 138-horsepower, turbocharged, four-cylinder engine and a manual, six-speed transmission to achieve an EPA rating of 28 mpg city, 42 highway,” wrote the Journal.

In related news, GM is expanding the Cruze line, but this wagon is not headed to the U.S.: “The Chevrolet Cruze station wagon, the third variant of Chevrolet’s most-popular car, will make its global premiere at the 82nd International Geneva Motor Show early next month,” Chevrolet said in a press release. “The station wagon complements the Cruze sedan and hatchback, which together have combined sales of more than 1 million vehicles globally since launch in 2009.”

As for the Volt, GM is not taking the suggestion of many GM-Volt readers to chop the price. Instead, Perry told the Journal that in addition to new “Just the Facts” advertisements, GM will minimize price objections by focusing on leasing, such as an ongoing $350 per month, 36-month deal.

But then after opening its article talking about how the Cruze is one of GM’s biggest competitors against the Volt, and noting GM’s efforts to relaunch it, the Journal then relaunched into yet more reasons why the Cruze makes so much more sense.

“For roughly half the price of the Volt, you can get the Cruze, a car that promises better gas mileage on long highway trips, when both are running on petroleum. And it takes regular gas,” wrote the Journal.”

GM might get a break from California laws set to mandate one in seven zero-emissions vehicles, the Journal noted, but its argument for the Cruze was pretty thorough.

What’s the smartest thing GM could do?

Many months ago GM took to calling the Volt a “halo” car. While there’s talk about GM advertising for the Volt, is the Volt actually most valuable as advertising for GM?

The company has already said as much and the Journal is only building on this using GM’s own statements against it, so what is the best plan for Voltec?

GM has said it will launch an all-electric 2013 Spark small car, and high-end Voltec Cadillac at an undisclosed future date.

It has said it will focus on getting the Volt established in America and abroad, so perhaps only patience is needed?

Or would sacrificial price cuts be a wise move?

While GM has never quantified the Volt’s dollar value as a halo to its bread and butter cars, Perry did tell the Journal that GM is already poised to trim its production.

“Mr. Perry also says GM is also going to more closely match production to demand and work down high inventories,” wrote the Journal. “That could mean more temporary layoffs at the Volt plant in Hamtramck, Mich.”

Whether this happens or not, would you say GM is managing the Voltec project as well as it could? Would it cost GM more to slash its MSRP and ambitiously roll out other variants sooner?

Or is the answer some other aggressive maneuver? Or is everything OK, and the facts will rise like cream to the top, and in a few months we’ll be wondering what was all the commotion?

Not sure, but certainly the Volt could be a game changer – many would say it should be a game changer. It is highly regarded, cost effective, and more.

According to the Journal, GM’s next move is to “relaunch” its halo car, hoping this time it will be heard, but will this and complementary efforts be enough? Or is GM leaving money on the table?

WSJ

A number of positive factors are weighing in the Volt’s favor as General Motors works to increase sales for its top-ranked, money-saving, environmentally friendly, super-high-tech vehicle in the face of heavy criticism.

Did I just write that? Is it true that the Volt is cutting edge, smart, and highly awarded, yet there are still those hoping to bring it down?

Yes I did, and these are the times we live in, but GM is yet counting on facts to win against smear attempts and non issues – such as the Volt’s battery pack running out of electricity in the Lincoln Tunnel … then seamlessly switching over to gasoline power.

But first, we’ll give you real – not faux – news.

Consumer Reports

It’s true that the consumer watchdog that takes pains to be seen as objective didn’t initially see the Volt’s value, but over the past year it has admitted facts are showing the Volt does make good sense – yet plug-in cars have received a bad rap in some quarters for no good reasons.

In December, Consumer Reports announced the Volt as number one in customer satisfaction, and most recently its 2012 Car Brand Perception Survey showed the federal battery investigation did misguide the general public.

On its survey, CR posed questions to take “America’s pulse” on plug-in vehicles. Of those surveyed, 43 percent said plug-in vehicles are as safe as gasoline-fueled automobiles and 20 percent deemed them safer. However, 28 percent felt that electrified vehicles are less safe than their gas-fueled counterparts.

The biggest concern was that they had limited range (expressed by 77 percent), followed by 44 percent saying they were worried about risk of fire during charging.

Other safety-related concerns included pedestrian safety due to silent operation (40 percent concerned), crash protection (39 percent) and post-crash fire concerns (35 percent), which relates directly to the recent Volt imbroglio. At the end of the listed concerns were electric shock (30 percent) and accident avoidance (29 percent).

The bottom line? It will take time to reverse misconceptions, and allay excessive concerns.

As has often been said, experiencing the Volt or other plug-in vehicles (usually) makes a huge difference in creating more accurate perceptions, and this was reiterated by Consumer Reports:

“Exposure to such vehicles and more education should help consumers better understand that electrified cars have been proven safe alternatives to traditional cars. It is a shame the Volt incidents likely misguided consumers and potentially impacted the short-term adoption rate for this promising new technology.”

Kelley Blue Book

Yesterday the provider of new and used vehicle info announced that the Volt edges out the Nissan Leaf in total cost of ownership.

“The Volt’s slightly lower maintenance and insurance costs gives it the competitive advantage, making it the 2012 Total Cost of Ownership Award winner in the Electric Car category,” wrote KBB in a press release, “The Chevrolet Volt has a five-year ownership cost expected to total $40,629, while the Nissan LEAF’s five-year expected total is $42,089 with all key costs to own a vehicle considered.”

This is a qualified win however, as more real world cost of ownership variables than KBB considered do stand to sway the results.

GM’s efforts

Among initiatives underway by GM are hoped-for results from the Super Bowl pregame commercial, and lower emissions Volts that qualify for single-person occupancy in California’s High Occupancy Vehicle lanes.

As we’ve already covered, the HOV-legal Volts are intended to spur sales in this all-important state, and thus count as GM’s efforts to revitalize the Volt’s image after delivering only 603 nationwide last month.

It should also be noted last month sales for the entire hybrid market were down by 30 percent, and the limited plug-in market was down 48 percent. Fact is, the first month of the year is traditionally a weak month, including for internal-combustion vehicles.

In contrast, December is traditionally a strong sales month with incentives intended to spur decisions before the end of the year, and during the already consumer-intensive holiday buying season.

So while the federal investigation begun in November and House subcommittee “show hearing” in January did nothing to amplify Volt purchases, ordinary market realities are also a factor to consider.

Bad News?

And speaking of factors to consider, the politically motivated shilling against the Volt and GM is beginning to sound all the more shrill.

For your review is a video where a commentator is short on facts, but does make clear that GM accepted billions a few years ago, is relying on government incentives, thus being a “shareholder,” said he was not inclined to be very charitable.

Actually, I knew over a month ago that GM was working to let some of its most unrepentant critics drive a Volt. The thinking was a drive does a good job of convincing doubters how good the car really is.

But alas, in this case doubt won the day, and the pundit still found reasons to chide the Volt and GM – which is once again the world’s largest automaker, earning record profits, and (still) employing an estimated 202,000 people around the world …

——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Dear GM-Volt Readers: We value everyone’s feedback on our daily stories, but – please – don’t post breaking news or other stories that we could be working on as a post here. Doing this will help ensure fresh daily discussions, and will be better for everyone. If you would instead, please e-mail story ideas to jcobb@verticalscope.com Thank you!

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

Not long ago Fisker caught a lot of media heat for accepting a $529 million federal loan, but the company’s latest “bump in the road” is that it has only received $193 million of it, and the rest has now been frozen.

The remainder of the U.S. Department of Energy money was contingent upon Fisker producing a certain number of Karmas by an agreed-upon deadline, and as GM-Volt readers know, other delays and recalls have slowed their proliferation considerably.

Because of the DOE’s funding freeze, Fisker has laid off 26 workers at its former GM plant in Delaware, but not before it completed “Phase One” of an approximately $175 million rehabilitation there.

Fisker has also laid off 40 employees from its Anaheim, Calif. headquarters, citing a flexible staffing arrangement which is not out of the norm for the auto industry – and most importantly – it is renegotiating terms with DOE officials so it can get its funding turned back on.

In a phone interview yesterday, Fisker spokesman Roger Ormisher said he hopes a resolution can be reached soon. He said he could not divulge how many Karmas were to be made by now, or what new terms they were aiming for, but said about 1,500 have been built, and “a few hundred” have been delivered to the U.S.

Fisker has also accepted several million dollars from Delaware business development authorities, and layoffs from GM’s former Boxwood Road plant intended eventually to employ as many as 2,000 has raised concerns from those hoping for an automotive industry revival there.

“We are frustrated that Fisker and the DOE have been unable to come to terms on revisions to their loan agreement in time to avoid this,” Brian Selander, a spokesman for Delaware Gov. Jack Markell reportedly said. “We do remain hopeful they will double their efforts to get people back to work at the Boxwood facility as soon as possible.”

The Wilmington plant is supposed to be where production of the Volt-competing Project Nina trio of extended-range electric vehicles starts later this year with sales beginning in 2013.

Fisker has said it has other financing options it can act on if a renegotiation cannot be reached, including perhaps tapping into private equity funds. To date, Ormisher said Fisker has garnered over $850 million, and most recently secured around $260 million toward this total.

The company has been successful in garnering private support, and at the same time admits it continually has its proverbial hat out as it attempts to become a full-fledged U.S. advanced-tech automaker in these times of economic uncertainty, litigiousness and government regulations.

It could however seem a bit ironic that some in the mainstream media jumped on Fisker with a faux expose delivered with the sober tones of a breaking investigative piece. The allegations were that Fisker shamelessly took $529 million then built the Karma in Finland as if it was a hoodwink against American taxpayers.

Actually, Fisker had long since planned this, had fully divulged it to the government, and paid for Finnish Karma production with separate funds.

Of federal dollars, Ormisher said $170 million went toward domestic engineering and development costs. He previously said that Fisker first approached domestic automakers to rent manufacturing capacity, but those attempts all fell through.

Even so, $336 million in federal funds are now on hold for other reasons, as the government did have strings attached after all.

DOE loans and guarantees have reportedly been receiving increased scrutiny since Solyndra filed for bankruptcy in September after taking a $535 million federal loan in 2009.

And Fisker has given pause to some observers. A few months ago, it said it might deliver 3,000 Karmas by year-end, but delays turned this into less than 300 before a minor recall. Last month, Fisker decreased its 2012 sales projection to about 10,000 Karmas from an original 15,000.

Still coming at you is the Karma. No pics of the Ninas are provided because we’ve not seen one yet. If you see one somewhere, please be sure to email it to us.

The Karma’s price has also increased by as much as 20 percent since introduction. Unplanned-for increases aside, the Karma is intended as a high-profile splash prior to $40-50k-plus Ninas.

As for the layoffs, they have not affected Karmas, which are still emerging from the Valmet plant onto boats to Fisker’s worldwide customers.

“Fisker Automotive’s product strategy is to first and foremost establish strong Karma sales worldwide in 2012 and generate a strong business,” said the company in a statement, “and then to plan for the introduction of Nina at Delaware Assembly with the help of a loan from the DOE or other sources.”

According to Ormisher, Fisker still has around 600 employees in Anaheim, and the DOE snafu is not a major concern.

“This is a bump in the road,” Ormisher said while acknowledging that launching a new car company is tough, and missing a goal here or there is to be expected.

And one way or the other, he said, Project Nina is going to happen and the company is nowhere close to going out of business.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Dear GM-Volt Readers: We value everyone’s feedback on our daily stories, but – please – don’t post breaking news or other stories that we could be working on as a post here. Doing this will help ensure fresh daily discussions, and will be better for everyone. If you would instead, please e-mail story ideas to jcobb@verticalscope.com Thank you!

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

A methodical teardown and analysis by a team of automotive engineers has revealed the Volt to be at least as advanced as some of you already know it is, and it appears also to have been designed from its inception for future upgrades.

The teardown was the sort of thing automakers more often do behind closed doors to reverse engineer a competitor’s vehicle, but this one by Munro & Associates was attended by Reuters and EE Times.

Based on Reuters’ report, Automotive News noted that the Volt’s complex electronics are a “blank slate” ready for “quick improvements,” thus making this first-of-its-type car one step closer to consumer electronics which also see more frequent updates than automobiles usually do.

Although we have no word on whether GM intends to tap the Volt’s inherent potential anytime soon, GM has acknowledged that room was made for future plans from the beginning.

“This heavy emphasis on advanced electronic systems management was a deliberate program priority,” said GM’s former vice chairman Bob Lutz previously.

Deconstructing the new EREV

The teardown was not performed under GM’s watch, and for the most part, GM continues to keep many developments secret as it conservatively moves forward, with the Volt leading the way.

GM could not prevent some engineers from gaining further insights, however, as they removed over 600 components from the Volt. These were carefully cataloged over a three day time span at Munro’s Troy, Mich. warehouse/headquarters.

Among other things, the Volt’s circuitry suggested a development plan not just for the Volt, but also for other GM electric vehicles, such as the Spark EV.

Analysts observing the Volt’s teardown confirmed GM clearly left unused circuit board space for more computing power to improve performance – be it EV range or power or both.

“They’re reserving a lot of this real estate for future development so that they can easily put more components on here if they want to,” said John-Scott Thomas, a senior engineer at UBM TechInsights, of a circuit board removed from the Volt’s battery pack.

Munro & Associates CEO Sandy Munro was similarly impressed with one of the Volt’s circuit boards held up for inspection.

“This is, without a doubt, the most advanced board I’ve seen General Motors put out and it’s got room to grow,” Munro CEO Sandy Munro said. “This is hot stuff.”

Incidentally, Munro & Associates did a similar teardown of a 2007 Prius a few years back, but no one was talking about that vehicle during the Volt dissection.

Holding up a circuit board from the Volt’s inverter with its 32-bit Freescale Semiconductor chips, UBM’s Thomas said it was “more of a development board. This is their first pass. There are places here where you can see that it looks as though you should be able to put an integrated circuit and there’s nothing there,” he said. “They might already have plans to add that in at a future date.”

Freescale and Japan’s Renesas Electronics are dominant forces in the $23.6 billion global auto chip arena, controlling about two-thirds of the market.

The Volt actually has about 20 Freescale chips – around twice as many chips as a typical internal combustion powered vehicle.

In their haste to get the Volt to market, GM’s engineers were said by Freescale to have taken a conservative approach with the Volt’s internal layout.

“They didn’t have as much time to do as many redesigns,” said Freescale auto field engineer John Cotner. “Risk reduction was a more important factor than it is in a lot of vehicle design.”

Automotive News quoted chief Volt engineer Doug Parks who has previously said GM played it safe with the first-generation vehicle which was built in anticipation of next-generation batteries and other future refinements.

For at least the past 18 months, Cotner said, Freescale and GM have been working on the next technological leap. The route they are taking involves fewer, smaller modules in electric vehicles.

GM would not divulge however whether the Spark battery will make use of Freescale chips.

On a more general note, Parks and others have said GM is of course working on Volt improvements.

“We do want to try and design more performance in the car, maybe get a little more EV range for our money,” Parks told Reuters.

Whether the pace will be quickened or curtailed remains to be seen.

GM has also said it is waiting until May or June to decide whether to fulfill its projected 60,000 unit production this calendar year, or notch it back if it sees less demand.

Assuming GM and the Volt can get past the malicious PR gauntlet they had to run through last year into this, and demand increases, the Volt will be ready for Gen Two – in fact it is already partly built into the Volt’s DNA.

It was a forward reaching plan begun with gusto that’s now taking on a more sedate and measured approach.

GM has a major head start, and a look inside the Volt proves it.

Driveforinnovation.com

——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Dear GM-Volt Readers: We value everyone’s feedback on our daily stories, but – please – don’t post breaking news or other stories that we could be working on as a post here. Doing this will help ensure fresh daily discussions, and will be better for everyone. If you would instead, please e-mail story ideas to jcobb@verticalscope.com Thank you!

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

Today’s GM-Volt post will be a hybrid-hybrid article. What’s that, you ask? Rather than re-phrase a report from Japan about the Prius c by The Truth About Cars, I’ll paste it in below my brief.

TTAC has been known to upset people, but that’s its contrarian schtick, and its Managing Editor Bertel Schmitt is sticking to it.

2012 Plug-In Prius.

And for your more plain vanilla, just-the-facts reading pleasure, I’ll start with the latest about another Prius, the Plug-in. Both are due in March (limited availability for PIP).

PHV/PIP

Toyota has upped its fuel-efficiency projection for its Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle (PHV), according to Bloomberg, which reports the automaker expects to top the Volt in its U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fuel economy rating.

Toyota’s U.S. Group Vice President Bob Carter, said the Plug-In Prius (AKA PIP) should manage 50 mpg in hybrid mode for combined city/ highway mileage, and earn 95 MPGe assuming its 4.4-kwh lithium-ion battery is recharged frequently.

“It’s still an estimate, but we are confident it’s going to be 95,” Carter said of Toyota’s projection Tuesday. The EPA rating will be known “in a couple weeks,” he said.

In comparison, the extended-range electric Volt can go 25-50-plus miles on a charge, is rated at 37 mpg combined, and 94 MPGe.

Toyota’s news represents an increase from a September estimate of 49/87. Satoshi Ogiso, chief engineer for Toyota’s Prius models, said the higher estimate follows further battery pack testing and additional newly developed “control programs.”

But before Prius fans get too excited, GM Spokesman Rob Peterson said driving conditions further separate the PIP from the Volt.

“The big difference here is in real-world conditions,” Peterson told Bloomberg. “The Volt’s ability to go all-electric at all speeds for 25 to 50 miles allows most drivers to commute on electricity only.”

The PIP has an electric-only mode top speed of 62 mph compared to the Volt’s top all-electric speed of 100 mph.

“At any point in time that a Prius driver exceeds 62 mph, their gas engine goes on,” Peterson said.

What’s more on average Volt drivers are filling their gas tanks but once a month, Peterson said.

For the PIP’s first year, Toyota aims to sell 15,000, compared to 45,000 year-two Volts to U.S. customers.

But as you’ve also no doubt noticed, Toyota has a huge head start in gas-electric vehicles, and dominates in the hybrid market segment, routinely occupying top billing for U.S. hybrid sales with its Prius line. The regular Prius, now called the third-generation “Liftback” has loomed largest taking over half of the limited hybrid car market.

Counting Prius v sales, the 2011 year-end total for the Prius line was 136,463 units sold compared to the next in line, Lexus (another Toyota brand) CT 200h, which sold 14,381 in 2011.

Toyota has chosen to lump all Prius sales numbers into one category, and it is projecting all four Prius models combined to account for 220,000 U.S. sales in 2012.

The company is now demoted to third overall in global sales, however, following disastrous effects from the March earthquake and tsunami.

GM has regained this spot, followed by Volkswagen, with Toyota following.

Toyota Drowns In Orders For Game Changing Engineering Feat Prius C

By Bertel Schmitt

Note: TTAC is one of our sister publications. Bertel spends his time covering the auto industry in China and Japan, not to mention Europe and the U.S., and previously worked over 30 years at a high level for Volkswagen.

When I called Toyota’s new Aqua / Prius c affordable compact hybrid first a “gamechanger,” then an “engineering feat,” this attracted the attention of self-styled jargon vigilantes. They demanded equal platitudes to be bestowed on domestic models. In the meantime, the Japanese game changer threatens to change Toyota’s best laid plans: It sells ten times better than expected.

Someone at Toyota told The Nikkei last week that the company “received about 120,000 orders for its new Aqua compact hybrid between its Dec. 26 release and Jan. 31, 10 times the monthly sales target of 12,000 vehicles.” Toyota markets the car as the Aqua in Japan. In the U.S. and other markets, it will be called Prius c.

These orders go on an already big pile. When the car was formally launched on Dec. 26 in Tokyo, Toyota “had received orders for 60,000 Aqua hybrid cars ahead of its launch,” says the Wall Street Journal. At that time, the waiting period for the car after an order was placed was said to be four months.

The onslaught of orders puts Toyota in a quandary. Not only have they planned for 12,000 units a month, these plans are also hard to, well, change. As Prius c Project Manager, Masahiko Yanagihara, had patiently explained to this reporter, the Aqua/Prius c is being built in the Iwate plant of subsidiary Kanto Auto Works in Kanegasaki. This plant has a maximum capacity of 30,000 units a month, if Toyota pulls out all the stops and works overtime. However, the plant also makes “other cars, such as the Ractis, Belta, Blade etc.” Until Toyota finds ways to expand its production capacity, the car will remain in short supply.

This shortage will only be exacerbated when the car is launched worldwide this year, while production remains back in Japan. Dubbed as “the world’s most fuel efficient hybrid car,” the Prius c is slated for sale in 50 countries, including the U.S. In Europe, Toyota will release a new small hybrid based on the Yaris compact. It will use the same hybrid system as the Aqua. Timing for the overseas launch has not been released. In the U.S., the Prius c is said to have a starting price of around $19,000. A look at gasoline prices and world news says that an affordable 53 mpg (EPA, city) car could not have come at a better time. If there would not be that bottleneck called Iwate. And the Yen.

Toyota has been hesitant in establishing hybrid production outside of Japan. The numbers seem to back this up. The Prius is Japan’s best selling car. This year, the title could go to the Aqua/Prius c. Outside of Japan, hybrids are still a niche play. The market share of hybrids in the U.S. was 2.11 percent in 2011, down from 2.78 percent in 2009. The Prius c is the little car that could change that.

Bloomberg
——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Dear GM-Volt Readers: We value everyone’s feedback on our daily stories, but – please – don’t post breaking news or other stories that we could be working on as a post here. Doing this will help ensure fresh daily discussions, and will be better for everyone. If you would instead, please e-mail story ideas to jcobb@verticalscope.com Thank you!

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

By now a lot of you have seen the brief TV commercial Chevrolet will use for the Superbowl.

Actually, the spot with aliens invading a suburban garage for “the third time this week” to investigate the extended-range electric car will be aired during the pregame, but GM is hoping to share the love with a broad audience in any case.

The aliens, who seem to be tech savvy themselves have to be told the Volt works with electricity and gas.

The Volt is still alien to many who do not know how it works, or even know it exists.

Is this the message GM thinks everyone needs to grasp, and is the consternation by the house owner an echo of feelings felt by some at GM?

I called GM Spokesman Rob Peterson yesterday, and he said he did not know what the thought process was for choosing this ad over the Hamtramck ad you saw the other day.

Also undisclosed was how much GM paid for it.

Peterson made sure to clarify this was to be for the pregame only, then it would remain online.

It will feature the familiar voice of Tim Allen explaining, “advanced technology, really advanced.”

Among media observers yesterday, the in-touch and tech-savvy writers at AutoGuide said, “We have to admit that Chevy is going to have to really step up their game if they hope to change the general public’s perception of their Volt. Aliens just won’t cut it these days.”

And that intrepid info network known as Fox, which at times gives the Volt reasonably straight coverage, then alternately turns its merciless pundits loose on it, said GM is essentially re-launching the Volt after much bad press.

This could be close to the case in the wake of the trial of public opinion surrounding the federal battery investigation, House subcommittee hearing, and lambastes by, well, Fox News and others

If anyone is checking GM-Volt for the first time, we’ll repeat: the Volt battery fire threat should have been treated more like a non issue, and was said to have been obfuscated and politicized.

The Volt does make sense on many levels and had been intended to appeal to all political stripes, as you can learn on other pages of this site and by many real world Volt drivers.

Federal safety authorities have furthermore declared the Volt safe, noting not one has ever caught fire on the road, and GM has said the extreme scenario to which investigators subjected it to induce a battery fire is unlikely to happen in real life.

GM is not at fault for what happened, and it has sought as best it could during the past couple months to reach out with an exceptionally liberal customer service policy offering loaners, buybacks if asked, and other assurances for any Volt driver even slightly concerned.

Not surprisingly, GM has had critics at every turn. And it has had supporters who understood safety issues in question were nothing to be alarmed about.

The aliens ad will be another attempt to put a single simple message in front of Americans about how the Volt works.

It is no tech dissertation, but perhaps GM hopes it will grab people’s attention enough to make them curious enough to ask.

What do you think of GM’s new ad for this prime time event?
——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Dear GM-Volt Readers: We value everyone’s feedback on our daily stories, but – please – don’t post breaking news or other stories that we could be working on as a post here. Doing this will help ensure fresh daily discussions, and will be better for everyone. If you would instead, please e-mail story ideas to jcobb@verticalscope.com Thank you!

———————————————————————————————————————————————————