I wrote this:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/the-great-hybrid-showdown-chevrolet-volt-vs-toyota-prius/

and welcome any feedback (as soon as I put on my fire-proof suit). Paul

As one of the "eager cadre of early adopters", I was disappointed in several of your ill-informed assumptions. The two most egregious are the sticker price of 44K and the AER in the 20's. Once those assumptions were made, there was no hope that you could come to an accurate conclusion.
I do admire the Cajones it took to post your article here.
God Bless (duck and cover)
Tagamet

"Ill-informed": Straight from the father of the Volt (Lutz): "it should sell for $48k, possibly $40k (at a loss)" What are you assuming the price will be, and what are you basing it on?

"Ill-informed": GM has confirmed the range will be "closer to 32 miles" at highway speed driving. Drive like most folks on the freeway (10 over the limit), with the A/C and audio on, and let's see if that 32 mile range doesn't quickly melt into the twenties (or less).

"Ill-informed": Straight from the father of the Volt (Lutz): "it should sell for $48k, possibly $40k (at a loss)" What are you assuming the price will be, and what are you basing it on?

"Ill-informed": GM has confirmed the range will be "closer to 32 miles" at highway speed driving. Drive like most folks on the freeway (10 over the limit), with the A/C and audio on, and let's see if that 32 mile range doesn't quickly melt into the twenties (or less).

ILL-INFORMED as in not current. I could quote the Pope that the Earth was the center of the Universe, but given that that is not what he currently espouses, I'd consider relying on the quotes from the past as ill-informed and ill-advised. Even for a nacient pseudo-journalist.

And probably MOST ill-advised was the idea of writing an article to compare two vehicles which are still in development.

My problem with your article is that it is 30 months too early!

You are comparing two different types of vehicles, neither of which yet exist, and making some very large assumptions. With the Prius, you give it the benefit of the doubt. With the Volt, you assume the absolute worst and then make your comparisons.

Examples:

You assume $4.00 per gallon by 2011. Many "experts" are predicting $5.00 per gallon in 2008!!!

GM has said the 40 mile AER is at "end of life", so a new pack should do considerably better than 40 miles.

You seem to think that the newer model Prius will be priced about the same as the existing models. How did you get that information? And for your comparisons, you used a "base" price Prius, but a "max" price for the Volt.

Your bias to the Prius is all over your article. Here is just one quote: "The Volt’s efficiency losses of generation, conversion, battery storage, re-conversion to AC, and electric drive-motor losses equal or exceed the minimal efficiency loss of the Prius’ mechanical transmission." Unless you are a mechanical or electrical engineer, and have access to design and performance information that we do not believe has been released, how do you come to this conclusion?

Or how about this quote? "Unless GM is willing to heavily subsidize the Volt for many years, no matter how good it is, the Prius will kick its ass." So your opinion is based on pricing that is not really set, and you do not really care how the Volt performs, just that you think the Prius is a better vehicle!

That sure seems fair and balanced to me!!!!!

:p

I agree with Tagamet and Jim I, You should change the title to "The Great Concept Hybrid Showdown: Chevrolet Volt vs. Toyota Prius".

You may not be aware while you were writting that you were leading on the Prius. The URL name is giving itself a bad name. I wouldn't says "Truth" yet. I hope you learn something about from this. In many user's view may think that you were trying to troll the GM volt.

Paul Niedermeyer's article was interesting and useful in pulling together a lot of details for comparison. The last word I saw on pricing from Lutz was $48K and maybe $40K if they were willing to make some sacrifices. GM has a bad track record on their hybrid vehicle costs and I expect the Volt to be no exception.

Is projecting the 2010/2011 fight realistic at this stage? Yes and No.

The Yes: Toyota has a perfectly good car on the road today, clearly stated goals which are incremental and probably achievable and a lot of experience. They have firm plans and are actually building production facilities. I expect they know what they're doing. What Niedermeyer projects is probably realistic, except, perhaps the price. I think he's high, Toyota's got a lot of energy going into cost containment and volume increases can only help. If it wasn't for currency effects, I think we'be be looking at a $19K Prius very soon.

The No: The Volt is entirely speculative. GM's done nothing like it, their track record is bad, they've sent shifting messages about capability and cost. Niedermeyer, if anything, was being generous.

The Volt is going to get hammered on price. It's likely Honda's going to hit the very low end of the market with a pretty good car, Toyota will continue in low-mid price with a very good car, offer a better one for somewhat more and the Volt is going to debut for the price of a nice Beemer. If you're comparing a vanilla Prius 3 to a Volt, the money saved, if invested, pays for the Prius' fuel forever and then some.

It seems very odd that you would write such a biased article and ask for feedback here. I'm a bit skeptical of your motivation but since you've stepped up to the plate...

I have been unimpressed with the media for a long time now and the general disregard for reporting the truth only seems to wane as time goes by. I never studied journalism but I thought those that did have been tought this creed:

"I believe in the profession of journalism.

I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of their responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.

I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.

I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true.

I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.

I believe that no one should write as a journalist what he would not say as a gentleman; that bribery by one's own pocketbook is as much to be avoided as bribery by the pocketbook of another; that individual responsibility may not be escaped by pleading another's instructions or another's dividends.

I believe that advertising, news and editorial columns should alike serve the best interests of readers; that a single standard of helpful truth and cleanness should prevail for all; that the supreme test of good journalism is the measure of its public service.

I believe that the journalism which succeeds best -- and best deserves success -- fears God and honors Man; is stoutly independent, unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power, constructive, tolerant but never careless, self-controlled, patient, always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice; is unswayed by the appeal of privilege or the clamor of the mob; seeks to give every man a chance and, as far as law and honest wage and recognition of human brotherhood can make it so, an equal chance; is profoundly patriotic while sincerely promoting international good will and cementing world-comradeship; is a journalism of humanity, of and for today's world. "

How much of this do you see in today's journalism and more specifically how much is in yours? Although it appears to be more of a systemic problem than any one individual's inadequacies, each individual journalist should be held and should hold themselves accountable for their own efforts.

Perhaps your intent was to convince GM that a $44,000 price was far too high for the market, prehaps TheTruthAboutCars does not consider itself a journalistic endeavor, or perhaps you intent was to generate controversy. Either way, the meduim in which your article is conveyed will cement or persuade uneducated and/or ill-informed to believe as you conclude. This wouldn't be a bad thing if your reporting was anywhere close to being balanced and accurate.

-The only time I have seen 32 miles reported was on Yahoo news and the article stated "Without any braking -- in perfectly traffic-free highway driving -- the range would be closer to 32 miles, GM engineers said". Let's assume this is accurate, although strange that nobody else has reported this and no named sources have stated it. Most commutes (most miles driven) will be in heavy traffic. Given the lower drag and lower speeds in heavy traffic, much of the highway commuting will result in better than 32 miles range. Many commuters don't have the A/C blasting all of the time. A lot of the miles driven will be city miles. Also, as I'm sure you are aware but negelcted to include 40 miles has been mentioned many times as the end of life range. Around 50 miles has been given as the beginning of life. So, average lifetime range would more likely be about 44 miles.
-$4.00 for gas in 2011? They are predicting gas will be $4.00 this summer. Taking the average price of gas for 2007 and projecting it out over the life of the scenarios presented using the average yearly increase over the last 10 years would be a much more realistic assumption.
-You pointed out that interest is not included in your calculations which obviously would be unfavorable to the higher initial cost, but fail to mention that your totals are based on your estimated first year cost only.
-The sticker price of a 2008 Prius 1226 is roughly $26,400. Commodity prices have been skyrocketing during the last 2 years and are expected to continue to be under pressure as China and India ramp up their industry. GM may very well be factoring this into their expected costs. If commodities continue to increase at anywhere close to the same rate and labor increases at historical rates, then Toyota will be hard pressed to keep the Prius under $29K for the 2011 model unless they want to "subsidize" it.
-In scenario number 2 you assume absolutely no contribution from the battery for trips greater than the electric range.
-Where did your final analysis "adjusted/equivalent 100mpg" come from? Even at your misguided 32 miles average range this does not mess with the average daily driving patterns. Since you are making broad conclusion across the entire market, you should use actual driving statistics. I believe even with your 32 miles range and 50 mpg, the average equivalent for the Volt will be much higher than 100mpg.

If fair, balanced reporting does not favor the Volt then so be it but this isn't even close and really can't be done with any merit until hard facts are known about both vehicles.

I'll try to address some of your responses:

I was very excited about the Volt when announced. I am waiting for a personal EV, when one is available that is cost-effective.

The issue of the Volt's range is very important. Some of you seem to think that stopping and starting will increase range: you're absolutely wrong. Regenerative braking is far from 100% efficient; starting and stopping ALWAYS takes more energy than continous speed. It's the speed that is critical: drag increases disproportionately with speed.

EV's always have the best range in city driving, because drag is very low, and there are no losses in idling, etc. EV's make perfect city cars. But at higher speed, power is sapped quickly. I'm sure the Volt will do fine on the EPA City cycle, but you heard the quote from the man at GM about highway speed. It's the EV's bugaboo: the low energy density of batteries.

Plug in $5.00 gas for 2011; it won't make a material difference.

The Prius list price starts at $20,600, last time I checked the web. I've heard they're going for $19,900 on the street (dealer discounts). The long term trend of Prius pricing has been downwards, bothe in absolute dollars, and especially in inflation adjusted dollars. Toyota has said for some time that one of their specific goals for gen3 Prius was to reduce the Hybrid related costs by 50%. They've had five years to do that, through increased scale of production and other efficiencies. I firmly believe Prius prices will not increase materially, especially with their planned increase in production of 60% next year. They will have to keep prices low to move that many cars.

The debate of efficiency of the serial vs. parallel systems is impossible to prove definitively at this time. I have followed a number of detailed engineering threads at Green Car Congress, and I think it's safe to say that it is probably a wash, give or take a little. The losses of generation, storage to battery, conversion to AC for the drive motor, and motor losses certainly way exeed the minimal mechanical losses of the HSD at speed. The only way to recoup those higher losses will be for the Volt's gen-set to be materially more efficient than the quite efficient Prius Atkinson-cycle engine. I've seen various sets of numbers, and they convince me that if Toyota can find any improvement in efficiency in the gen3 Prius gas engine, it will be somewhat ahead.

No one brought it up here today, but often the argument is used that diesel-electric locomotives (serial hybrids without the batteries) must be built that way because thet's the most efficient way. NOT SO. All German diesel locomotives used a mechanical/hydraulic system that was more efficient, but more maintenance intensive than the American approach. American diesel locomotives' priority was low maintenance, and simplicity. When they were developed first, in the 1930's, diesel was cheap, and they were so vastly more maintenace cost-effective than steam engines, that maximum efficiency was not the primary critera.

Mechanical drive to the wheels is intrinsically more efficient than going through a generator/electric motor conversion.

To attack my article because all the hard facts aren't available has nothing to do with journalism. That sounds like the equivalent of attacking Iraq because we don't know whether they do or don't have WMDs. I make it very clear what I based my information and calculations on; I certainly willing to look at alternative methods, if they're objective.

I didn't anticipate how this article would come out; I approached it objectively, and frankly, I was shocked and surprised; as I said, I was an early Volt enthusiast. But I don't see a lot of objectivity here at this site. Many here seem to think that the Volt will be the Messiah, coming no less from the man (Lutz) who says that Global Warming "is a crock of ****". And who also says that "hybrids make no economic sense".

But yes, GM will birth the Messiah, and the planet will be saved. Happy waiting!

until the finale where you showed your obvious bias:
"I didn't anticipate how this article would come out; I approached it objectively, and frankly, I was shocked and surprised; as I said, I was an early Volt enthusiast. But I don't see a lot of objectivity here at this site. Many here seem to think that the Volt will be the Messiah, coming no less from the man (Lutz) who says that Global Warming "is a crock of ****". And who also says that "hybrids make no economic sense".

My "bias" took forty years of hard evidence to develop. That's how long I've been following the industry and GM. I once held Lutz in fairly high esteem, but eventually his BS hit my limit:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/general-motors-death-watch-169-those-who-do-not-learn-from-history-try-to-rewrite-it/

The last time he sucked my in (partially) was when he announced the Volt. As the facts (and Lutz's BS) have unfolded, I ran out of patience.

...
The last time he sucked my in (partially) was when he announced the Volt. As the facts (and Lutz's BS) have unfolded, I ran out of patience.

That's about as clear an admission of guilt as I've ever heard.
Thanks.

You seem to be chasing ghosts with your article and the rebuttal hear. Most of your last post was spent pointing out some common misperceptions regarding electic only or seriel hybrid transportation, but none of those were mentioned on this thread.

I, too, have been very disappointed with GM's choices for product development. This disappointment is not because I think they should have forsaken profitable business decisions for questionable ones that benefit humanity or country, but rather because they missed a business opportunity that also carried those benefits. I have been convinced for a long time that electrical propulsion is the drivetrain of the future, and it also should be much more the drivetrain of the present than it is. There are many benefits to the EV drivetrain as I imagine you already know, and the biggest benefit is the ability to efficiently use stored electric energy. This does not mean it needs to be a BEV only as many others believe, although they may end up being the best long term solution. Plug-in hybrids with an electric drivetrain and fully capable stored electric range sure seem logical to me and put passenger much farther along the path of development than even Toyota's HSG. Toyota and you appear to recognize this with the announced path to a plug-in vehicle. The only problem is that they will have to increase the battery significantly, add charging capability, increase the power electronics, increase the motor, etc. This is not really a continuation down one path as it is a jump to another. Guess which other path that is? In my mind, as well as yours and Toyotas apparently, it is the path the Volt will be on if it does get produced.

I am neither a GM enthusiast nor Bob Lutz proponent, although he did see a good thing when it hit him in the face. The good thing being the Volt and I don't believe it hit him in the face until after the Jan '07 unveiling. I believed then it was a last minute, makeshift prototype that adapted from the E-flex platform they were devolping for hydrogen fuel cells. They saw Tesla, rising gas prices, and public sentinent and dipped their toe in the E-Rev waters. If they had put much thought and effort at that point, I don't think it would have been announced as a Chevy nor as comfortably under $30K. I said then and still believe that had they really intended to produce the vehicle, it would have been branded as a Cadillac. Since the response was so significant, they have pushed forward. They are still struggling with the tight wiggle rooom that a Chevy branded vehicle affords them. Changing the outlook to $35K seemed resonable given the technology and I think they may be able to sell it for up to a few thousand more, depending on market conditions in 2010. They know $48,000 is out of the question, regardless of what their costs are. They have been building cars long enough and have done enough work with batteries and the E-flex platform to have known within 20% of what the costs would be. The price bantering seems more like strategy than honesty and the price will end up being what they feel the market will bear. If that means it is sold for no profit or at a loss, how would it be different from the early years of the Prius?

It wasn't so much the figures that you used to base your analysis on as much as the missuse of them and the ones you had to have walked over to get to them. What about using a more realistic average range. Did you here 32 at normal highway speed with no AC from a GM engineer or did that come from the Yahoo article that said only 32 miles free highway driving? If from Yahoo, then lets assume it is true but drop your assumptions about other conditions. GM has also mentioned 40 miles end of life for all normal driving conditions, as well as around 50 beginning of life. You must have seen this. So pick a reasonable number for average range. Even $5 average gas cost from 2011-2021 seems a little low to me, don't you think? Wouldn't it be more relevent to use the average inflation rate for gas during a the past 10 or 20 years and take the arbitrariness out of the equation? Go to Toyota's website and look for pricing on the 2008 Prius 1226 model. This is how I found 5 versions of it for $26,400 and more. This model is more comparable to what GM has announced for the Volt. What happened to the battery range on your longer trips calculations? Also, do you think that absolutely nobody will have access to daytime charging, because you account for no effect from this on electric miles?

You wrote, "I was very excited about the Volt when announced. I am waiting for a personal EV, when one is available that is cost-effective."

If you truely believe this, then you should be cheering on the Volt, Tesla, Fisker, MiEV, et al in spite of your dislike for Mr. Lutz. These vehicles will push advances in battery technology and the electric drivetrain with far more force than the Prius. The natural evolution for technology is to start towards the higher end and work it's way down. Toyota's HSG was a bit of an exception because it didn't really offer much advantage for the high end.

Tagamet: If I'm guilty of anything, it's of managing to keep (or find) objectivity. That's a quality that I find generally in limited amounts in this and other EV circles. Would you like to read my test of a ZAP vehicle? It's at TTAC.

Why are you trying to make me feel guilty of something? Have I sinned in the Church of Volt? Blasphamy of the High Priest Lutz?

You've got it all wrong; I'm not a troll, I'm not anti-Volt. I'm thrilled that GM is developing it. It will be a step in the eventual development of practical cost-effective cars. I want one (an EV), but one that's cost effective. My problem is with GM's overall strategy and decline, and how the Volt isn't going to solve that. My guess is that GM's ADD will kick in eventually, when they lose enough money on it, and other competitiors (Subaru, Mitsubishi, Nissan, etc.) come out with more cost-effective EV's. At that point, GM will do what it has always done - find some excuse to move on to the next "exciting" thing to distract its stockholders and gullible public. Do you remember the Vega? The X-cars (Citation?) The GM Wankel engine? The EV-1?

My problem is not with the Volt per se, but with the way GM and Lutz are managing/hyping it. And how people are falling for an idealized image of the Volt. It's going to dissapoint, like every EV always has, because the great majority of folks don't fully appreciate how vulnerable range projections for an EV are. How EV's do great in city driving, and get clobbered at higher speeds. The truth can be hard to accept. Someday...

How about if I rerun the cost numbers with electricity rates as in some cities/states that have demand charges, where you would pay 20cents or more to charge your Volt. That will make it even less economic.

You write about wanting to be objective yet talk about GM and EVs as though they left you standing at the alter. You do realize that CEOs, employees and conditions change don't you (Vega? Are you serious)? If your intent was to sound objective you failed. Miserably.

Anyway, everyone has their opinions and the assumptions they use to support them. If some of us don't agree with your assumptions, opinions and yes, your subjectivity, that doesn't make you a bad person. ;) I guess we will have to wait a few more years to find out who was using better assumptions.

Paul-
I appreciate your effort to compare the Volt and Prius, I made a similar effort too:

http://gm-volt.com/2008/03/28/is-there-a-financial-benefit-of-a-volt-over-a-prius/

Some issues in your analysis are:
1. Bob Lutz personally told me he never said 48K for the Volt, that was a misquote. Closer to 40K than 30K is all he will say.
2. The Volt will have a near 50 mile AER when new

Also, saving money isn't necessarily what its all about - driving without any gas is priceless!

Welcome to the forum.

Any number x, where x> 35K is "closer to 40K than 30K," so that doesn't quite rule out 48K. Or 110K.

Lyle:

I would like GM to issue two clear range projections: one on the EPA City cycle; and one on the EPA highway cycle. As I assume you know, all EV's are profoundly more efficient in city driving than highway driving. A 50 mile range on the city cycle may be materially less on the highway. I suspect that's where the quote from the GM Volt engineer comes in about "closer to 32 miles" in regard to steady highway speed driving.

Your statement about a 50 mile range is irrelevant without a context: is it at 20mph? 30? 50? 65?

Driving without gasoline is "priceless". Now there's objectivity!

Paul

Paul, you are just going to have to wait until the design has been locked down and they get the next generation mules on the road (not the Malibu body but the actual locked down design). Then and only then will they be able to give you the accurate numbers you so pessimistically seek. I'm guessing next year you will get much more accurate specifications. At this point in the design the stated specs. can and will change. Don't believe me? Let's come back to this thread next year and see what specs. they quote.

I'd like to know what rate you put in for electrcity for coming up with these numbers... I will only pay 5 cents per kWh in North Carolina.

Other comments:

1) You are not taking into account tax credits for the volt in the final price
2) You are not mentioning the intangibles: ie 'people just want to stop buying gas.' Many people will pay more to have less variable costs (in this case, gas). Compare this to a fixed rate loan or a variable. The variable is going to be a lot cheaper, so why doesnt everyone get variable? Because of the unknown. Personally, I want to know I can get around without gas if we have an energy crisis.

There have been a studies that show the standard hybrids are a waste. If you took the batteries out, the MPG is almost the same without all the added weight. The volt is actually displacing petrol in a very real way. its an interesting article, but I dont think people like you 'get it' There is more to a volt than strict finance.

IF we were basing all of our decisions based on strict finance, then no one would be buying a lot of cars out there that sell like hotcakes.

Let me say one more thing... I attended an energy conference in D.C. this past week put on by the Energy Information Administration (under the DoE). There is considerable risk that we are going to really hit an energy crisis in a few years, and unless you are driving electric, your Prius will be sitting in the garage going no where. I personally dont believe in peak oil, but I am willing to hedge my bet with something that could be sustained, had we a catastophic loss of oil production.

I'll leave you with a few parting thoughts and comments:

It wouldn't take having final vehicles for GM to issue a range prediction for city and highway cycles. It's all in the computers. They've been playing with those numbers from the very beginning. But they've NEVER said what driving cycle their 40 (or 50) mile range is based on.

Regarding my predicitions of the future of the Volt:

Bob Lutz has historically (and repeatedly) championed "halo" cars,; showy, if impractical vehicles to generate press and enthusiasm. What have his pet projects been before? Dodge Viper, Plymouth Prowler, Chevy SSR. And just before the Volt, it was going to be the 1000hp Cadillac Sixteen V16 (cancelled due to rising gas prices). All of these vehicles have been impractical, and have not sold well.

Based on this and the history of GM, I think the Volt will become another "halo" car, so GM can trumpet its technical prowess. But like the SSR, which was also overpriced and sold dismally, the intrinsically expensive Volt will not sell well, and Lutz will go on to say: "See, I told you, hybrids are not an economic viable solution".

The problem is, the Volt is neither fish nor fowl (practical hybrid or EV). It's trying to do both, and will not do either well. My article shows that as a practical cost-effective mass personal transportation solution, it doesn't do well against cars like the Prius and upcoming Honda hybrid.

And as an EV (and I suspect many here really want an EV) it doesn't do well either. It's range will be too limited. And if you're going to drive it primarily on its EV range, you're paying for an expensive gen-set that adds weight, and will require maintenance. Yes, oil will have to be changed, and the gas eventually too. It's still an automotive engine being lugged around.

There will be practical (more) cost-effective EV's coming soon. Nissan, Mitsubishi, Subaru already have announced specific products. They're going to be much cheaper than the Volt.

When these competitive pure EV's come out, the Volt will be stuck in an unhappy place between the Prius (and Honda) on one side, and these EV's on the other. The Volt will bear the burden of trying to be both, and pay the price in extra expense, weight, and other limitations.

But GM and Lutz won't care: they'll be trumpeting their fuel-cell cars by then, having lost interest in the Volt, just like it lost interest in the SSR, EV-1, Wankel engine, Olds diesel, etc., etc.

My recommendadtion: hold on to your excitement (and money), and wait to see what the market will offer; by 2012 or so, there will be a raft of EV's coming on line. Otherwise, you might end up driving tomorrow's SSR, or Prowler, or whatever.

Yeah, Lose that excitement. Be a robot. Too much excitement is bad for the heart. Don't spend that money... Um, on those stickers or magnets or die-cast models. Yeah, that's a waste!

Why? Because I know. After all, it's all in the computers. I can predict the cost of something before everyone sets the final design. Before all the different departments from manufacturing to finance sign off I know the numbers. They just don't work out. The EV will win. Heck, Fusion is only a short time away so why even bother? Let's just light up some cigars (cancer will also be cured by the time you get it) and go to the races (let's enjoy it now before all the oil is gone.. Oh yeah that other poster said they didn't believe in peak oil so... let's just enjoy)! Oh and Bob, don't cut your hair so short. I hate you bob. I mean I love you... Noooooooooo!

Electrified cars ARE the way of the future. The only reason we havent converted yet was the low price of oil (and availability). You can shout all you want about the prius, but the sooner people jump on the band wagon that allow us to shut oil out completely from normal transportaton, the better.

For me, the Volt goes way beyond simple economics. It is giving everyone a chance to be the first to participate in the next generation of transportation without oil. For me, thats priceless. Its not going to be cheap initially, but it is also not out of the range of many buyers, considering 30k+ cars are the norm for a wide swath of the population.

I have come to the conclusion that this guy just likes to hear himself talk about how right he always is.

Here is how he comes across:

If a manufacturer from Japan makes something, it will always be better and cheaper and more reliable. GM is just blowing smoke and wasting money and time. They can't win, so why even bother???

The stereotypical "legend in his own mind"!

But he sure wants us to think he has written a completely objective comparison, doesn't he?????

I didn't think your article is as horrible as some think.

With respect to comparing the "cost effectiveness" of the Volt and the Prius, anyone who would consider buying a Volt as a tool for improving their personal financial situation needs to repeat grammar school.

Cost effectiveness is not the "great white hope" of the Volt.

The Prius, regardless of its current or future MPG, is primarily a gasoline burner while the Volt is not.

Imagine a day when you no longer ask the salesperson at your auto dealership what kind of MPG you can expect from your new car, but instead ask, "This thing doesn’t BURN gasoline/ethanol/soy beans/cow manure/..., does it?"

It is difficult to anticipate how long a vehicle like the Volt would remain useful. I hope there will eventually be an affordable EV with a range sufficient to replace it.

In the meantime, I think of the Volt as a transition vehicle - an electric commuter car with a comforting emergency back up system. Even if it never becomes available to John Doe, but results in him demanding a vehicle that doesn't oxidize itself all over the place, I’ll give GM kudos for their project.

I was kinda hoping Paul would do this after several posts have pointed to the inadequacies of his analysis. Since that hasn't happened, I just couldn't let it go. I'm sure there are some booboos here, so please call 'em if you see 'em.


14.7%/year since 1990 $1.19 then $3.33 now, most of increase happened since 1999
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_history.html

32 miles reported was on Yahoo news and the article stated "Without any braking -- in perfectly traffic-free highway driving -- the range would be closer to 32 miles, GM engineers said"


http://www.toyota.com/prius-hybrid/features.html Prius Touring price $23,370. To actually buy one, put in your zip and see what comes up, $26,400 is what the lower price one's cost in my area but we will use $23,370 since the Volt will likely have the same dealer pricing issues.

Electricity rates in the US have increased by 1.8%/year on average from 1985 to 2008. Today the average resi rate is $0.10 so projecting using past rate of increase gives $0.1055/KWh in 2011
http://www.eei.org/industry_issues/electricity_policy/state_and_local_policies/rising_electricity_costs/assessing_rate_trends.pdf

Charging is 90% efficient so full recharge takes 8.8KWh

Most recent comments were that based on costs, the Volt is looking like it should cost $48 yhey will try to keep it around $40K. GM acknowledged that it is a Chevy and the price will stay within this brand's image. As long as it's a Chevy, won't go above $40K but I'll $44K to humor Paul

Scenario one: 35 miles/day
Volt: all electric commute using 35/42.8 and 7.2KWh recharge(assume 1/3 highway in traffic, 1/6 highway no traffic, 1/2 city for combined 42.8 mile range) , $0.756/charge and $236 total in 2011, $2560 over 10 years with 1.8% electricity rate increase
Prius (2010): 50mpg, $5.02/gallon gas in 2011 and using 14.7% annual rate of increase calculates to $1,097 in first year and $21,949 over 10 years
Analysis: Accounting for time value of money (5% annual compounded monthly) and the differences in risidual value (Volt's battery pack will be roughly 12KWh after 10 years) will yield a slight advantage to the volt after 10 years.

Any scenario in which more battery only miles are driven per week will only favor the Volt more. I could have picked the average annual increase in gas prices over the last 10 years if I wanted to skew the results even more for the Volt. Frankly, even if gas price increases slow down and the Volt ends up costing more than the Prius I would still be satisfied with my decision. The Prius doesn't interest me that much, and I would have bought an American car and not used 2200 gallons of mostly foreign, polluting fuel.

One thing is clear; there's no doubt the Volt won't come anywhere near its 40 mile range on the highway. On this site elsewhere there is a posting with info from GM about the energy requirements of the Volt: 8kwh in the city, 25kwh on the highway, and 30kwh @65mph with a slight degree of uphill. If the Volt's battery has an 8kwh usable capacity (between 80% and 30% SOC), then that information tells us clearly: in the city, that 8kwh gives about an hour range = 30-40 some miles. But that 25-30kwh requirement at highway speed = 16 miles!

Would anyone correct me if I'm wrong, please?

One thing is clear; there's no doubt the Volt won't come anywhere near its 40 mile range on the highway. On this site elsewhere there is a posting with info from GM about the energy requirements of the Volt: 8kwh in the city, 25kwh on the highway, and 30kwh @65mph with a slight degree of uphill. If the Volt's battery has an 8kwh usable capacity (between 80% and 30% SOC), then that information tells us clearly: in the city, that 8kwh gives about an hour range = 30-40 some miles. But that 25-30kwh requirement at highway speed = 16 miles!

Would anyone correct me if I'm wrong, please?

PAUL ! All we've done is correct you. All it brings is another feeble attempt on your part to change issues to find something, anything, that you wrote correctly.
On the last round you omitted any regenerative braking and the fact that the aerodynamic drag has been substantially reduced (which improves most of the figures). Add to that the END OF LIFE battery numbers you quote, and... Oh never mind. You win.
God Bless,
Tag

Ooops, the numbers I used didn't seem right (too good to be true). Gas rose on average 5.85% annually since 1990 and 12.5% annually since 1998.

Gas will be $3.95/gal or $4.74/gal in 2011 and $11,373 or $18,748 total depending on which rate you choose. The Volt will cost significantly more or nearly the same. I also didn't previously question your use of 50mpg for the life of the Prius. That economy is dependant on the performance of the battery in city and busy highway driving. Personally, I will be much more comfortable betting that gas will rise at similar or higher rates in the next 12 years than they have in the last 10. Additionally, I will have the pleasure of driving the Volt vs the Prius.

"One thing is clear; there's no doubt the Volt won't come anywhere near its 40 mile range on the highway. On this site elsewhere there is a posting with info from GM about the energy requirements of the Volt: 8kwh in the city, 25kwh on the highway, and 30kwh @65mph with a slight degree of uphill. If the Volt's battery has an 8kwh usable capacity (between 80% and 30% SOC), then that information tells us clearly: in the city, that 8kwh gives about an hour range = 30-40 some miles. But that 25-30kwh requirement at highway speed = 16 miles!

Would anyone correct me if I'm wrong, please? "

Your wrong! I believe 22KWh was mentioned a long time ago as possible load at slight grade at high speeds. Just do a simple sniff test. It doesn't matter very much to the Volt' overall economy (and to a lesser extent the Prius) what the load is on an incline. What goes up must come down and unless the driver is careless most of the PE gained on ascent is recovered on descent. It is the load on level ground or over the course of an entire cycle that matters. Below is data from the EV1. Power requirements at highway don't vary that much other than drag. EV1's drag coefficient was much better than the Volt's will be so energy consumption for EV1 was less but it gives a feel for what the Volt will require.

CONSTANT SPEED RANGE @ 60
mph
Range: 89.1 miles
Energy Used: 14.58 kWh
Average Power: 9.79 kW
Efficiency: 164 Wh/mile
Specific Energy: 29.8 Wh/kg

Tesla's Roadster has a slightly higher Cd (.3) than what is claimed for the Volt and the Roadster is rated 4.66 mi/kW·h (or 37.28miles/8KWh) for 2008 EPA highway cycle. Thus with low power accessorries, slightly lower drag and low rolling resistance tires; the Volt should get about 40 miles range for 2008 EPA highway cycle per 8KWh from battery. Where do you propose the rest of the energy will be lost to reduce the range to 32 miles or less?

Ok, I'm the resident pessimist here!

Going to say this again, why the Prius vs Volt? Sigh.

I'm going to shock people here and say the article is badly flawed. This is about economic feasibilty right? We can agree the Volt and the Prius are totally not the same car in appearence or style? Ok.

Rewrite this and compare the Prius to the Hyundai Accent...here I'll do it for you:

They both have almost identical footprints. They both have 110hp 4 banger engines.

Head room: Accent 39.6, Prius 39.1
Rear Head room: Accent 37.8 Prius 37.1
Total Passenger Volume: 92 Accent 96 Prius

So for argument sake, the Accent is the MOST SIMILAR to the Prius once you take off the 'hybrid bits'

MPG Accent 30- Prius 46

NO fancy MATH! I go to the gov't site on estimated fuel usage (www.fueleconomy.gov).

Annual cost $1687-Accent, $1061-Prius. = $626
Annual cost to insure a Accent over a Prius +345 (Geico)

Yearly advantage saving on a Prius $281. Cost difference between Prius and Accent? $11,000.

YEARS TO MAKE UP DIFFERENCE: 39.14

Quick everyone, drive a Accent!

/you lose

OK, who are you and what have you done with the real Statik?

OK, who are you and what have you done with the real Statik?

Just send me a PM when you whenever you want me to 'poo-poo' something...

/wave

Using this author's criteria, you might as well buy a stripped down Honda Civic vs. the Prius, as it will take decades for the Prius to justify it's higher price.

The Volt will have conventional vehicle performance, whereas the Prius is a dog, and an ugly dog at that. Moreover, the Volt platform allows you to fuel up with E85.

If the Volt has good styling, the Prius will see it's sales nosedive.

What makes you think the Prius is a dog? Try a little perspective; the Prius is considerably quicker than my first-edition Cavalier was, which I happily drove for 10 years. Prius owners are generally happy with the performance. And there's no reason to believe people willing to spend extra $$ for a save-the-planetmobile would be bothered by mediocre performance; they're motivated by other things.

And a stripped-down Civic to Prius comparison doesn't make much sense, as the Prius is pretty nicely equipped and bigger. Compare a Prius to a mid-upper line Civic, maybe. Or a stripped Accord. Allowing for 12K miles/year, a base (not stripped) Prius wins back its cost over a base, stick Accord in about 5 years, based on gas at $3/gallon and making allowance for the time value of money.

...is a difficult thing to do. Or is it?

http://mysite.verizon.net/davidlarall/CentsPerGallon.jpg

DavidLARall,

Sure, if you take only that portion of oil / gasoline prices over however many years you want that cover a linear segment, then it is predictable. I am surprised you didn't start in 2001, so that you could show a steeper and straighter trend.

If you look back over a longer period, you will see the last few years have been far more unpredictible, but India and China's growth are now factors that cannot be ignored. It will be interesting to see what impact plug-in hybrid vehicles have on prices in a few years (not to mention the oil now being extracted in the upper midwest).

The Prius will end up being a footnote, as it is a dead-end parallel hybrid configuration.

My choice of the lower x-axis limit is not as arbitrary as you might suggest. I am simply following Mr. Hubbert`s thesis (http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/1956/1956.pdf) of peak oil. I believe we are already on the dwindling supply side which peaked sometime between 1998 and 2002. Thus, we see an excellent fit to an exponentially increasing price (straight line on a log plot.)

I agree. An exponential plot is a better fit than a linear one. I think peak oil is later than 1998 - 2002 though. Therefore, the curve is to shallow. Without interference (rationing) I expect Gasoline to pass $8-10/gallon by 2010. I base this on peak being between 2008 - 2010, with a best guess of 2008. I state this really hoping I am wrong.

Mr. Hubbert`s thesis is excellent, but assumed BAU when he arrived at those dates for peaking. He did not know that in 1973 and 1979, OPEC, would kindly help us to be more efficient in our oil use. Note the 'old' C & C peak of May 2005 was pased in January 2008 at 74.47 million barrels /day.
Source: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3835

PS: With rationing, the Volt just looks better and better. The car can only compete on whole of life costs.

Kind Regards
David

There's a HUGE oil deposit in the Dakotas (USA) that may have a genuine impact on the "peak oil" predictions.

Just read about the Dakota oil deposits a few days ago. It sounded too early to say what the recoverable deposits will be. Either way, they aren't easily accessed and it will be expensive oil. I am not convinced that peak oil is imminent, but it's hard to argue that it will not happen this century. Even with the Dakota deposits, it has certainly occurred with US domestic supply. It's also pretty clear that the majority of cheaply recoverable deposits have been found.

One way or other demand will be constrained by supply and price. This is what we have been seeing develop to a small degree over the last several years, more so in Europe and other areas with relatively expensive fuel compared to the US. We can continue to make small steps at improving efficiency of the ICE and the occasional medium step of today's hybrids, but it will be a long drawn out and, I believe, painful process with periods of hyper inflation like the last few months. All the while, we will be polluting and hemmoraging money to the oil rich countries of the world amongst other things in support of affordable and sufficient oil. OR we can rip off the bandaid and start weaning ourselves off of oil with endeavors like the Volt.

To me, the peak oil issue is very similar to the global warming issue. The are plenty of people on both sides of the debates but does anybody on either side really want to find out with reasonably certainty. I sure don't, because we will have to be on the wrong side of these issues looking backward. Vehicles with plug-in capabilty offer us the opportunity to ease the pain at the very least and perhaps taking major strides in making both issues irrelevent at best.

What is the downside? Gas supply/demand is not nearly the issue many percieve, so we spend a few thousand dollars extra per car and most likely only for the first generation or two of plug-ins. Say for the first 2 million vehicles (I think it would be less), the total cost of ownership price premium is $6,000. This is $12B. This is peanuts in terms of our economy and still would be even if it takes twice as many vehicles and twice much of a premium. Even in this peasimistic scenario we will still have drastically improved the quality of air in our cities, diversified our energy use, and reduced the annual outflow of many billions of dollars to oil rich countries. This is why I feel so strongly that plug-ins like the Volt should be embraced and that the government should offer incentives to help insure their success. The early adopters will be taking the risks that everyone will benefit from.

The Volt, as proposed, not only takes the huge leap onto the path towards oil independance but it does it with style and performance. For those that cannot see this nor value any of this, please go ahead and buy your Prii or other non plug-in and be done with it. You can thank the rest of us later, or not.

I think we have a few things in the news that just might balance each other out, if we're lucky:

1) Around 4.5 Billion recoverable barrels worth of shale - North
Dakota (discovered in 1995 but the assessment was increased). Very difficult to extract, harder than tar sands. Will start seeing real oil in 5 years.

2) Around 33 Billion recoverable barrels worth of deep well crude - Brazil. Will start seeing real oil in 5 years.

3) Russia seems to have reached peak - last year's 10 mbd should be highest production number reached - Number two world producer of oil.

If Russia starts to fall off now finds 1 and 2 will not help us. If Russia can hold on for 5 more years before falling off finds 1 and 2 will probably not be enough to hold us at current levels, assuming everything else stays the same. Projected max output from the Alberta tar sands is 5 mbd which will be reached around 2015 or later. Same for Ven.

However, as the poster above wrote this oil will be a lot more expensive. Cheap oil is a thing of the past.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/17/autos/chevrolet_volt/index.htm?source=yahoo_quote

Talking about design:
Chevy Volt is no "electric Camaro"
For efficiency's sake GM's electric car will look a little tamer than the concept car, but still no Prius.
:)

Actually, as a fellow columnist, I thought the article was well-written. The numbers look ball-park right and Paul was pretty balanced on his impartial analysis.

But I can't be impartial. I'm a Volt fan.

Short-term economics has little to do with it. In the long-term, EREV's are the future and someone has to drive the technology development to get us there. Tired being upstaged by Toyota, GM has made the choice to be that company.

Banking on the "green" or just plain "different" cool factor to sell Volts is a major roll of the dice, or maybe more like a hail-Mary, but it looks like a good play call to me. I'll be out there cheering the whole time and hoping Bob Lutz has the arm to get it to the end zone.

I have a Nissan Altima Hybrid. I keep it until a more (to Me) refined Prius comes out. Personally I want hight all electric speed, a plug for more all electric range. And a nicer interior (like the Altima) Thanks so now I don't have to follow the forum as closely, just wait for the next gen Prius. :)

The one problem that I have always had with the peak oil projections is that they are always based on the status quo. They do not account for any shift towards electric cars.

We are on a sight devoted to an electric car. I am sure that most here feel that in less than a generation you will not be able to purchase an automobile with an ICE. The only thing that I would like to see is a floor put on gas prices so it does not fall below $3.00 per gallon. Lets put some nails in gasoline's coffin and bury it for good.

Actually, as a fellow columnist, I thought the article was well-written. The numbers look ball-park right and Paul was pretty balanced on his impartial analysis.


I have read several of your comments and found them very thoughtful, but I strongly disagree with this assessment. Paul showed a strong bias towards the Prius with much of his analysis (32 AER for life of vehicle, $4/gallon gas for life of vehicle, lowest cost Prius available today, etc). I can't say the Volt looks like it will be a cost positive purchase versus the Prius for many if any early adopters, but it is really too early to draw any strong conclusions. Gripperdon's comments underscore why accuracy in reporting is so important.

As many people on this site realise and hopefully other non-enthusiasts will realize, it is not just about total cost. There are so many other factors why people may be interested in the Volt. Even so, I do know costs will play an important role and one that could prevent many customers from even seriously considering the Volt. Most of those people will get there impressions and understanding from the media. This is why I think it is so important that the media be accurate and unbiased in their reporting.

Koz,

For the first 10,000 people, the Volt probably won't be about cost/benefit. The problem for GM is that the next 10,000 people probably won't be motivated that way.

The higher the premium, the fewer people will look past the cost/benefit to some fuzzy (to them) societal good.

Many people don't look past purchase price at all. Cheapest whatever wins.

Exactly! That's why everyone drives a Geo metro, Chevrolet Aveo, Dodge Nitro, Saturn ION, or other bear bones model. No wait...

I think Tesla did the world a great service breaking the golf cart image. Man did it ever! As soon as the street racers get a hold of these cars and see what they can do the rest will be history.

Why do I have to be a hippy, penny pitching, tight wad to drive a car with a battery in it? I think the technology is expensive because it gives the car better performance (rail car like acceleration) and makes me feel less of a fool for not having to send my money to far away exotic lands. I don't currently drive an old Ford Pinto either! Do you? The next time some one asks you if it would be cheaper to buy X or Y ask them what they drive. Then ask them the same question. If they DO drive a Ford Pinto or similar car then say you are sorry. ;)

Wow took me so long to read this thread I got logged out....

Lots of folks in here like the controversy... I love the comparison to the hyundai accent laughed almost off the couch....