Please lobby for cold weather config option

[dgb40356]

How do we sign the petition?

[tboult]

This is sooo frustrating. Now even that Google cached version of page 3 of the thread is Error 404.

tboult....looked like you had tons of good pics for this. Any chance of a repost - of if the forum doesn't want this info for some reason, perhaps you could PM me (or email if I send you my email address)? Pretty please....?? The text and matching pics looked like they'd have been invaluable to actually perform this hack and now they're gone. ;-(

yes I'll reconstruct needed info but maybe not this week (too much work..I expect a 10hr day on the 4th).
Since I don't own the copyright on the figures I'll need to find them again on a pubic site, or redraw.

(Note copyright violations are a reason the my have to pull stuff down.. especially if GM is not happy with it).

[Bob_Livonia]

Warm the transmission? There is no transmission

Not true! Granted, it's not the normal transmission (it's continuously variable), but in the normal transmission housing (take a look underhood), it contains the traction motor, motor generator, oil pump, and gears and clutches for changing the modes. References:

http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread....perating+modes
http://www.designnews.com/document.a...Layout=article

Any other transmission has the benefit of underhood heat. Components are designed and spec'd for continuous operation within a certain temperature range.

[Bob_Livonia]

Running the ICE "more efficiently than resistive heating from the battery" Uhm, no. More quickly for sure, but certainly not more efficiently since by definition gas is not 'efficient'. This is the entire reason of having an electric car!!

Your experience not having the ICE fire up much due to cold in Michigan is not relevant - we're in a colder part of the world. Lucky for you if it doesn't run much....but our situation is VERY different - thus the very reason for this thread.

You missed my point completely. At some temperature, it is beneficial for the engine to come on - the engineers didn't just make it that way for the hell of it. Yes, we (and others) had an unusually mild winter here, but I do drive to parts of Canada where the Volt advisor's advice not to drive the Volt there when the temperature is below minus 24 (degrees F, I assume, which would be -31C) is relevant.

Efficiency has to do with the bottom line - range and fuel used for X miles. EV range and battery power is reduced at low temperatures anyway (the battery is electrically heated), so you may get better overall results utilizing the waste heat of the engine, which is increasing CD range (counter-intuitive as it may seem) by reducing demands on the battery for heating and running with cold, thick and bulky transmission fluid (yes, there is transmission fluid with a heat exchanger). Granted, the car doesn't know you are a mile from home when it might turn on the engine.

If you and others are so dead set against the engine running, you are always free to buy a Nissan Leaf instead. At least north of the 49th parallel (Ottowa is only about the 45th, not that much different than from here), you won't have the quickly and permanently degraded battery range those in Phoenix and hot areas are experiencing on their Leafs. Good luck with an all-electric Leaf at -31 degrees C!

[maestro77]

@Bob_Livonia
I see you've deleted the insult you hurled at anyone who doesn't share your world view. I guess I rest my case about that point I was making! For those interested, you said: "You may wish to second guess GM, but please have your facts straight. Petition? Get a life! I can think of many petitions in the political world that are based strictly on bigoted opinions and not the facts."

Transmission. None of those mechanical items are a transmission - not even close. You said transmission and I simply corrected you. And, for the benefit of those reading this, those other bits don't need to be explicitly heated. The ICE only INSISTS on running the first time after start up. Afterwards, if you go into Comfort mode (and don't use much of that heat for the cabin by keeping the blower low so the electric heat is used to heat the coolant loop and not cabin) then you can generally keep the ICE off. THUS, as per GM design, all those other mechanical elements DON'T get heated. Unless WOT wishes to correct me, explicitly heating the traction motor and planetary gear is not necessary (they'll generate some heat on their own via friction. So in fact, you're the one second guessing GM by inventing requirements not ever indicated by GM.

Mostly though, my earlier comments still stands. That it would be nice if you assisted the original poster (and others who have follow on posted) instead of trying to demonstrate that we're all foolish for having a different opinion (based on our substantially different geography/climate) than you do.

Oh, I see you've posted again further putting down our desire to minimize gas use. Whatever - I've said enough and won't respond to you again - others can judge your comments for themselves.

[ari_c]

I heard back from my VA. Very Cold is around 14F. I was hoping it would have been lower. I would really like three options, Cold, Very Cold, OFF. Supposedly,this change became available around Feb 2012.

I don't know of any way to petition, but a good start would be to contact your Volt Advisor and ask that this feature should be available to all 2012 models. It is in the vehicle documentation.

I asked if this option is hardware or just software(firmware) and if it is just a firmware change, why it would not be made available for all 2012 builds. I'll post when I get a response.

Update: Response from my Volt Advisor

The difference for this feature is actually in the hardware itself, because the heating system is designed differently. Unfortunately there is not an upgrade for the engine assisted heating options, but if this changes in the future we'd be happy to let you know.

Looks like I will be doing the hack sometime between now and December.

[Bob_Livonia]

@Bob_Livonia
I see you've deleted the insult you hurled at anyone who doesn't share your world view. I guess I rest my case about that point I was making! For those interested, you said: "You may wish to second guess GM, but please have your facts straight. Petition? Get a life! I can think of many petitions in the political world that are based strictly on bigoted opinions and not the facts."

So much for trying to keep it civil - I had deleted within the hour what you re-posted. No good act goes unpunished.

Engineering by petition is questionable. We must bear the burden of many of the political petitions out there as the cost of direct democracy. Engineering is not a democratic process. Sure there are features, often with a cost. It's one thing to listen to the voice of the customer, but it must be tempered by engineering data and tradeoffs, which for some, may be different than what you are demanding, plus you don't pay the warranty bill. If you don't believe me, just read Bob Lutz's "Car Guys vs. Bean Counters". Some of the worst GM cars were based on clinic results. Specifically, on page 96:

However, the product creation system, as a whole, is too "democratic", gets too many inputs from too many cooks, and has to abide by too many questionable (but well-intended) "criteria" or maxims

I can see for you, this is a much more emotional than rational issue, and you don't seem to have any respect for opposing perspectives. I should have never touched this. When someone is making a fool of themselves ("the car doesn't have a transmission", even though it looks like a transmission and performs a transmission's function, in this case an infinite number of ratios), just get out of their way.

[Bob_Livonia]

@Bob_Livonia

Oh, I see you've posted again further putting down our desire to minimize gas use. Whatever - I've said enough and won't respond to you again - others can judge your comments for themselves.

I'm not quite sure where I may have said this. I certainly may have said something advocating the use of gas at times (perhaps advocating the Volt over the Leaf?), but your take of it as "putting down our desire to minimize gas use" is certainly your opinion, not mine.

FYI, I saved 1,551 gallons of fuel over the past 15 months by putting the 32,822 miles on my Volt (65.6 lifetime MPG, considering 18,520 were CS miles) rather than on my GMC Yukon XL (estimated 16 MPG). Even considering the 4-cylinder Chevy Malibu (est. 25 MPG lifetime) that was replaced by the Volt, I saved 813 gallons of petrol. So don't go off about me putting down anyone's desire to minimize gas usage; why else would I have bought a Volt? In my case, it is the overall result that counts, rather than some extreme minimizing, such as foregoing heat.

[Mike-o-Matic]

FWIW, my 2012 Volt was built in mid-May, VIN ending in C/28233, and I do NOT have the 'new' options. Here's what I do have, and FYI I'm paraphrasing a bit:

* Auto Fan Speed
* Auto Heated Seats
* Remote Start Auto Heated Seats
* Auto Defog

EDIT/addition: So given my late build date... what's up with that??!? Thought I'd find the new options in there when I went to look. Maybe they changed their minds about whether it was a good idea?

[ari_c]

...In my case, it is the overall result that counts, rather than some extreme minimizing, such as foregoing heat.

Hey, sounds like you are saying extreme minimizing is a bad thing

I only forgo heat when I want to do my daily commute in the winter. It's all part of the game. I know I am treating my Volt like a BEV, but the only BEV I liked was a Tesla, which was a bit out of my price range. I purchased the Volt to avoid using gasoline, and I'll do my best to achieve that goal.