CR Gets It Wrong Again

[DonC]

In today's main article Jeff refers to a blog post by Consumer Reports, which is apparently trying to become the font of all misinformation relating to the Volt. This blog post asserts that the Volt is not a purpose built EV for a number of reasons, all of which are incorrect. You can read the blog here: http://news.consumerreports.org/cars...ed-models.html

Here's my response. You may want to add yours:

Not sure if this article is testing its readership or if CR just doesn't understand the design of these cars. To begin with, the Leaf does not seat five because the batteries are under the floor. It seats five because Nissan decided to forego a thermal management system for the battery pack. Do a search and you'll find the interview with the head Nissan engineer who explains this. In this regard, yes it's nice to have a fifth seat, but it might be even better when your $10,000 battery doesn't die because you don't have a TMS and your battery has gotten too hot. (Doesn't seem like a close call to me).

Moreover, the Volt does not have the battery in the trunk. In a design taken from the EV1, the worlds first purpose built EV, the battery is housed in a tunnel through the center of the car. This design better protects the battery pack and the passenger compartment than if you had simply put the cells on the floor, which you can see if you compare pictures of the side impact tests on the Volt and the Leaf. Plus, as mentioned above, it provides an envelope for a highly effective fin based TMS.

Additionally, the weight distribution in the Volt is effected by the fact that it has an engine positioned in the front of the car. The engine is in the front along the transmission and two motors. This makes it impossible to have a 50-50 weight distribution, though in truth 45-55 isn't bad and the extra weight in the font helps in snow or rain. But the point would be that if you put an engine if the front of a Leaf and a Tesla Model S they wouldn't have a 50-50 weight distribution either. IOW the weight distribution has to do with having an engine not as the article suggests with battery placement.

Finally, the fact that the Volt is an EREV rather than a BEV means that it has different packaging requirements. Once you have an engine you need an exhaust system and many other things, all of which eat up space. Claiming that this is because of a purpose built design is simply wrong.

I forgot to mention that the Leaf shares a platform with the Versa. The blogger didn't seem to know this.

[mfennell]

My response (referring to another commenter):

Well said unclewainey. The Volt is not a "converted Cruze". They are both derived from GM's Delta II platform, as is the Buick Verano, and a number of cars sold in Europe, Asia, and Canada.

The flat battery design is simply a different set of compromises. It trades off crash protection for interior space.

Interestingly, a Nissan engineer has been on the record (shortly before finding himself looking for work I suspect) indicating that incorporating a thermal management system would have cost the 5th seat in the Leaf. Another compromise, one that ultimately hurts consumers. Not coincidentally, Nissan does NOT warrant battery capacity while GM does.

It's fine to have opinions but please do a little research next time.

I see that the blogger has to approve comments.

[Bob_Livonia]

All manufacturers have a portfolio of common platforms they use for vehicles of the same size. If they don't, they have gone out of business, or will do so soon because of costs.

To say the Volt is "the same" as the Cruze ignores obvious appearance and powertrain, not to mention the aerodynamics and the Volt being the most technically advanced car under $40k. You would find the same thing if you look at Toyota and Lexus, or VW and Audi.

I give CR about as much credence as I do advertising - they each have their own agenda (CR's being very liberal), and I take what each says with great skepticism.

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Moreover, the Volt does not have the battery in the trunk. In a design taken from the EV1, the worlds first purpose built EV, the battery is housed in a tunnel through the center of the car. This design better protects the battery pack and the passenger compartment than if you had simply put the cells on the floor, which you can see if you compare pictures of the side impact tests on the Volt and the Leaf. Plus, as mentioned above, it provides an envelope for a highly effective fin based TMS.

The article doesn't say that the Volt has a battery in the trunk. It says that it loses passenger space. Sensitivity costs credibility.

PS We won't know how effective the TMS is for a few years yet.

[jeffhre]

Well, I suppose you could argue that once Bob Lutz was sold on the range extender concept, then the Delta II was used basically for a ground up build for the Volt. But realistically you could also argue that a clean sheet configuration for the Volt, that was not tied to the Delta II, could have resulted in substantially different packaging for Voltec products.

And furthermore, why are you doing this so early DonC, we're on West Coast time and I need some more sleep

[DonC]

The article doesn't say that the Volt has a battery in the trunk. It says that it loses passenger space. Sensitivity costs credibility.

The article claims the Volt lacks a fifth seat because it's not a purpose built EV. That's just wildly incorrect. The Volt doesn't have a fifth seat because it has a thermal management system which occupies the space that would normally be used as the fifth seat. Nissan engineering has admitted that if the Leaf had a TMS it wouldn't have a fifth seat either. Inaccuracy costs credibility.

As for how well the Volt's TMS will work: The Volt battery comes with a warranty. The Leaf's doesn't. Seems like a pretty good indication of what we can expect.

And furthermore, why are you doing this so early DonC, we're on West Coast time and I need some more sleep

Trying to get you to adopt better habits. If I have to be up then you need to get up too!

[mfennell]

Well, I suppose you could argue that once Bob Lutz was sold on the range extender concept, then the Delta II was used basically for a ground up build for the Volt. But realistically you could also argue that a clean sheet configuration for the Volt, that was not tied to the Delta II, could have resulted in substantially different packaging for Voltec products.

As Lutz tells it in Car Guys vs Bean Counters, the original back-of-a-napkin design included the 'T' shaped battery. That's not to say that the engineer (can't remember his name) wasn't already thinking of the compromises they'd have to make to produce the car with existing platforms, though, as you'd expect a smart/practical guy to do.

Voltec brings its own set of problems for sure. Where would you run an exhaust system in a Tesla S?

[cmr]

sorry folks but 5 people don't fit in a leaf....... just because they made the seat flat and had enough room to put a set of seat belts in the middle doesn't actually mean a person fits there...... i park next to a 2012 cruze every day and 3 can't fit across the back of it either. we have already tried to put 3 baby seats across the back of it and that doesn't work either. i wish everybody would just stop with the seating for 5 crap.... it's no more true than a camaro seating 4..... yeah... sure, it's there but that doesn't mean it can be successfully used in any meaningful way. i also have an 08 civic and 3 don't fit across the back of it either but the seat belts are there..... so what.

[Codyozz]

You guys are a level headed bunch most days, but please fall in line and agree that from a marketing perspective and from a "perceived needs" perspective the lack of a 5th seat is HUGE! Yes the design is technically superior, but you guys have all said it before, we need an MP5.
As for Nissan and their Leaf. Come on CR, the Leaf is FULL of compromises. Even the warranty exudes that compromise. Am I the only one who sees the pack design of the Leaf as weird and seemingly randomly placed underneath the car?? Am I the only one who sees the design as far from conventional? I am guessing that at Least 50% of Leaf owners DON'T like the body design of the leaf as a whole. The headlights are good for wind, but fugly as hell. The car looks like a Nissan Murano on steroids, yet squished a bit. My favorite design element is the tail lights. That's pretty nice. Lastly, um guys... How come no one has mentioned the TOTALLY un-flat cargo floor in the Leaf? Tell me that ain't a huge compromise? How bout the energy sucking Heater (addressed/fixed this year)?

[cnicholson]

The article claims the Volt lacks a fifth seat because it's not a purpose built EV. That's just wildly incorrect. The Volt doesn't have a fifth seat because it has a thermal management system...

Umm... stop drinking the bath water. Do you really think they sat down and said: "We need a mid sized sedan with 40 miles of EV, luxury appointments and only four seats."? The car doesn't seat five because of DESIGN COMPROMISES that would NOT have existed if the Volt was designed from scratch. Are you saying that no future EREV or BEV will have a fifth seat because that inherently conflicts with having long-life batteries?

I know two people who are not buying Volts (despite my evangelism) because they have three kids. One is getting a PiP, the other is considering a Model S. I don't think they care WHY it doesn't seat five. They just know it doesn't.