# Chevy Volt finally revealed for real!!!!



## fugdabug (Jul 14, 2008)

This is the article I just copied from Google News:


"GM officially lifts the curtain on Chevy Volt
By Shawn Langlois, MarketWatch
Last update: 11:41 a.m. EDT Sept. 16, 2008
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) - General Motors Corp. offered investors and its customer base a 

ray of hope on Tuesday when the troubled automaker officially unveiled its battery-powered 

Chevrolet Volt as part of its 100th anniversary celebration.
Chevy's plug-in hybrid, if it manages to live up to the lofty expectations, could become the new 

face of a company that's long been known more for horsepower and lots of metal.
The production version is less angular, and in the eyes of some critics, less interesting than the 

concept model that was the darling of the big Detroit auto show last year.
Design critiques aside, the hype surrounding the planned 2010 launch has only seemed to gather 

momentum in recent months as demand for more fuel-efficient vehicles continues to grow.
The compact sedan's drivetrain runs solely on electricity and can go 40 miles on a single charge, 

with another 360 miles or so available when the gas in its small fuel tank kicks in to recharge the 

battery.
The engine will deliver the equivalent of 150 horsepower with a top speed of 100 miles per hour, 

the Detroit giant said. GM still hasn't put a price tag on the vehicle, but some analysts have said 

it could reach as high as $40,000, about double the cost of traditional compact offerings.
This isn't the first time the public has seen the production model. GM posted photos of the Volt 

on its media Web site earlier this month, claiming human error, although some were convinced it 

was a marketing ploy. See Ahead of the Curve.
GM is celebrating its centennial birthday against a backdrop of plunging vehicle sales, tightening 

credit, still-high gas prices and the shake-up of the U.S. financial system.
In fact, the federal government's refusal to save brokerage Lehman Bros. (LEH
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc from bankruptcy cast a shadow of doubt as to whether automakers 

would gain access to $25 billion in loans that were written in to last year's energy bill. 
The ability to tap these low-cost loans is seen as crucial in the development of not only the 

Chevy Volt, but for the broader scope of plans GM has in place to transform itself to more align 

its production capacity with the changing demands of the thriftier consumer.
GM shares fell 6% in recent trades to $10.76. The stock, a component of the Dow Jones 

Industrial Average, is off 69% in the past year.
Shawn Langlois is a reporter for MarketWatch, and the editor of its community message boards."

Now tell me something... THIS is supposed to be good!???
In 1974 we had cars that would get 50mpg... and this thing is mainly a gasoline powered pretend EV hybrid! AND it will get about 22-26 miles to the gallon and only do 40miles on a charge? for between I estimate MSRP of $30,000 to $40,000... I don't care WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE... the numbers tell me that by 2010 we should be seeing cars doing well over 150 miles per charge! 40 miles... it is a LIE on four wheels.


----------



## TX_Dj (Jul 25, 2008)

fugdabug said:


> In 1974 we had cars that would get 50mpg...


Exactly which cars were getting 50 mpg in 1974? I call BS, because there is a misconception about VW Beetles that they were the most incredible of the 70's fuel misers, and it only got about 32 mpg when new.



> the numbers tell me that by 2010 we should be seeing cars doing well over 150 miles per charge! 40 miles... it is a LIE on four wheels.


We see cars doing well over 150 miles per charge TODAY.

Thousands of conversions get 40 miles per charge TODAY.

Are these two categories a "LIE on four wheels"?

Did you drive in excess of 40 miles on one leg of a trip today? If so, maybe an EV or PHEV with a 40 mile range isn't optimal for you. But if the ICE can push the car at 25 MPG, and you drive 80 miles, then you basically got 50 MPG, not unlike what some claim from a prius, or in your case, from a 34 year old car.

Is it optimal for everyone? No.
Does it meet most people's needs? Yes.
Is it reasonably priced for what it is? No.
Will it be the holy grail of bailout for GM? Not likely.
Is it a step in the right direction for the most notoriously reluctant US automaker? Yes, finally.
Would I still rather pay about 2x more and have a Tesla? MOST CERTAINLY.


----------



## fugdabug (Jul 14, 2008)

TX_Dj said:


> Exactly which cars were getting 50 mpg in 1974? I call BS, because there is a misconception about VW Beetles that they were the most incredible of the 70's fuel misers, and it only got about 32 mpg when new."
> 
> The FORD FIESTA...
> 
> ...


----------



## fugdabug (Jul 14, 2008)

Sorry I stand corrected, the Fiesta was put into production in 1976... I knew it was shortly after my first marriage (1974)... anyway.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I would rather have the tesla for no other reason than the 200+ mile range. A rating that tesla did not have to fight to get the EPA to agree with.

The other option is to simply buy a volt and hack it to fit a bigger battery instead of the ICE. But at $40k new, its still a tough sell.

I agree that 50 MPG is not very good, but at least the option not to use the engine is there for shorter trips.

As for meeting the need of "most people", that idea comes from national statistics that shows the average distance most people drive every day is ~30 miles.

Toyota wants to offer a plug in version of its prius hybrid in 2010, and if they can beat the price of the volt, GM is in trouble.

I would consider saving up $40k for one of their deactivated EV1s though......


----------



## TX_Dj (Jul 25, 2008)

> Each to his own... I personally think this GM offering is a travesty. Sorry just my honest opinion...


GM is a travesty, period. The only reason I'm doing an S10 conversion is because there is ample aftermarket support and a ton of them broken down in junkyards waiting for me to take parts from. 

Needs are, at least in this country, given a back seat compared to wants. "I want that flashy wasteful sports car." "I want that big guzzling SUV." "I want that jacked-up high-rise-sized 4x4." But somewhere deep inside there's a quiet little voice that's saying "I need a small economical vehicle that seats 4 with anchors for a child seat." But that voice is overpowered with "I NEED THAT 180 MPH SPORTS CAR WITH THE 600 HP MOTOR!!!"

Mmmm, motorcycle. Now that's a want that I need.


----------



## KiwiEV (Jul 26, 2007)

I'm left feeling bittersweet about the GM Volt. 
I like it, because it's a plug-in hybrid that is more electric than gas-powered. For example, when it runs out of electricity, the engine only supplies enough electricity to get you where you want to go so you can recharge via a power point - the engine doesn't supply any charge to the batteries. So it really is the true definition of the term plug-in hybrid.

However I dislike it because I dislike GM (pictures of crushed EV1s linger in my mind). I also dislike it because I believe we have the technology to drive 300+ miles on batteries alone. Only a brave few are going down that road but they are _already_ being heralded for it.

Hybrids like the Volt will still serve a purpose, but they are just stepping stones to the future of personal transport: pure battery electric vehicles.


----------



## fugdabug (Jul 14, 2008)

david85 said:


> I would rather have the tesla for no other reason than the 200+ mile range. A rating that tesla did not have to fight to get the EPA to agree with.
> 
> The other option is to simply buy a volt and hack it to fit a bigger battery instead of the ICE. But at $40k new, its still a tough sell.
> 
> ...


heee heeee! yeah, I know what ya mean... 200 miles is a LOT of range! Yeah but buy a Volt to hack it... uh... 40K is an expensive hack! Ah the 30 mile commute/shopping/school run. I see what you mean, by 'most'. For us up here in Northern Minnesota, everything is a minimum of about 20 miles for the 'corner store' and a run to town... arf! Yes, I have been hearing quite a bit about the hybrid plug in change for the Prius. I understand the batteries for the present model are a $5,000.00 trip to the dealership garage!!! The EV1... somebody just recently wrote an article on one that they were re-working or re-furbing and there was a problem with the original voltage or something like that... will have to see if I can find that. OH wait, it wasn't an EV1, it was a vehicle originally made for the Chicago(?) area postal service, it was an experimental series of vehicles made in the 1970's, that's what it was. Yeah an EV1 would be worth it to refurb and upgrade. if'n I had the 40K for disposal...  oh yeah Casino here I come!!!


----------



## fugdabug (Jul 14, 2008)

KiwiEV said:


> I'm left feeling bittersweet about the GM Volt.
> I like it, because it's a plug-in hybrid that is more electric than gas-powered. For example, when it runs out of electricity, the engine only supplies enough electricity to get you where you want to go so you can recharge via a power point - the engine doesn't supply any charge to the batteries. So it really is the true definition of the term plug-in hybrid.
> 
> However I dislike it because I dislike GM (pictures of crushed EV1s linger in my mind). I also dislike it because I believe we have the technology to drive 300+ miles on batteries alone. Only a brave few are going down that road but they are _already_ being heralded for it.
> ...


Oh, see I was in the understanding that was part of the downfall of the design that part of the power of the engine would be used to recharge the batteries as well... and to me that was like saying, "well you're really going to get a lot LESS per mile..." It really is a screamin' shame.


----------



## oldtimer (Jul 30, 2008)

Our Prius (08 - pkg 6) now has 5000 miles on it and we have averaged over 50 mpg. Actually I can get 60+ mpg but my wife, the primary driver, has a leadfoot. The plug-in version, if and when it arrives should boost mileage considerably. 
We did have 50 mpg cars available in the early 70 to mid 70's, but gas didn't "jump" to over 50 cents a gal until late in 1973 catching me with a couple of 454 ci new cars in my garage. 
Currently, since I can't seem to find a buyer for my 04 Jeep Grand Cherokee V8, I am looking into ways to improve gas mileage avg on it to 25 mpg, since my driving needs are under 2000 mi per year, we use the PRius for our travels.


----------



## Wingnut (May 17, 2008)

In 1996 GM produced the EV1 with a range of EV160 miles (256 km) (NIMH).
12 years later ..... Its successor, the GM Volt, has a range of 40 EVmiles (64km) ??? 
Along with all that lost research and development it could of had in the last 12 years from the successful EV1... GM has managed to lose 10 Evmiles/year for the last 12 years too!!?? Maybe they deserve to struggle! Reap what you Sow....... 
They DID do better


----------



## Cornelius (Sep 15, 2007)

While I can certainly appreciate the technology and effort that has gone into the Volt, I can't help but think that it looks like a $40,000 Chevy Malibu. I know GM had to drastically alter the appearance of the original show prototype to improve the aerodynamics, but this just does not look like a $40K car to the typical consumer.

For $40K one could buy a Chevy Malibu and have $20K left over for gas. Using $5 per gallon, and the Malibu's EPA mileage estimates, that's 100,000+ miles of driving to break even. We are back to the same problem with hybrid cars; consumers do the math, and buy the hybrid when it makes sense financially. Unless the price of the Volt comes down, or the cost of gas goes way up, this is going to be a tough sell for many buyers.

I really want to like the Volt. I wish it had more EV range, but I can see the point of reducing the range and keeping the battery cost down. Besides, I'm one of the 90% who drive less than 30 miles per day. That's a big part of why I drive an EV.


----------



## fugdabug (Jul 14, 2008)

oldtimer said:


> Our Prius (08 - pkg 6) now has 5000 miles on it and we have averaged over 50 mpg. Actually I can get 60+ mpg but my wife, the primary driver, has a leadfoot. The plug-in version, if and when it arrives should boost mileage considerably.
> We did have 50 mpg cars available in the early 70 to mid 70's, but gas didn't "jump" to over 50 cents a gal until late in 1973 catching me with a couple of 454 ci new cars in my garage.
> Currently, since I can't seem to find a buyer for my 04 Jeep Grand Cherokee V8, I am looking into ways to improve gas mileage avg on it to 25 mpg, since my driving needs are under 2000 mi per year, we use the PRius for our travels.


In Early 2006 we had just purchased our Toyota Corolla after trading in our Dodge Caravan (which replaced the car I just converted to an EV that we bought new in 1990), and were on our way to Massachusetts... met a woman in Wisconsin that had just bought a Prius. She was impressed with the mileage but said the disturbing thing was that she wasn't told initially that she would have to bring it into the dealership for a major 'extrusion' when and if she had battery trouble. We had a choice the Corolla, or a Prius, and at the time we were happy with the Corolla. Cost-wise and with the fact that the Prius was in 'first-gen' phase. Nan and I both well understand 'first-gen', decided to give them a bit to work out the details and bugs. We were actually sad to lose the space with the Dodge... I could haul 4'x8' sheets of plywood with no problem in our Caravan (the extended model) but now... phttttt! Take today, I am getting a delivery of 24 batteries, I have to use the Ford F250 (4x4) to meet the truck up at the hardtop and unload the delivery... glad it is sunny. Tomorrow I have to go into Grand Rapids to get 6- 8' sheets of 1/4" plexiglas for a panel project I am doing for a local hospital... will have to use the F250... on top of the cost of the plexiglas that means a fill... about $100.00... (that is my gas budget for the trip). Well,.. life in the Northwoods. IF my Dodge could have gotten even 30mpg... instead of 21mpg we may have kept it and dumped the F250 (course it was nice the other day to haul my tools, jack and 125lb swage block out to my tractor to repair a bent steering rod!!!)... The every day for me is like this. For those less ex-urban and more sub-urban or urban, no. 
That is why I am doing what I have chosen to do with the experiments in EV, THIS is where we can cut the sheep from the goats! Mileage is a must true, but physical practicality is also a consideration. And I will not take a pittance offering like the one I see from GM. They can suck rocks if that is their mentality. I want to see this country produce a car the rest of the world will buy again. Or a line of vehicles including industrial use types, with top of the line tech... and non-ICE dependent,.. Hybrid no problem, but they have to be a REAL DEAL WORTH THE INVESTMENT thing. 
As a people that claim to be a 'superpower', we should be that, a super-power in tech and education and innovation. Not a nation of 'consumers', a nation of innovators for mankind as a whole. If we cannot do this then what does that say about our place in history..?


----------



## fugdabug (Jul 14, 2008)

I am just finished reading that San Jose CA has been awarded the plant siting of a new TESLA factory. They are going to (supposedly) produce 3 models, the Luxury sports model ($109,000), the roadster ($60,000) and a 'sedan' for about $35,000... of course the BBC report didn't mention anything about the range of the Sedan. However it did mention that Lotus is the builder of the system used by TESLA. And that it will be running into 'stiff competition with the GM Volt'. Well, things ARE getting interesting,.. just as the economy goes to tanking...  gonna be fun times... I think our homebuilder community should come up with something to give them all a run for their money!!!.. I still think the major innovation can come from this community!


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Cornelius said:


> While I can certainly appreciate the technology and effort that has gone into the Volt, I can't help but think that it looks like a $40,000 Chevy Malibu. I know GM had to drastically alter the appearance of the original show prototype to improve the aerodynamics, but this just does not look like a $40K car to the typical consumer.
> 
> For $40K one could buy a Chevy Malibu and have $20K left over for gas. Using $5 per gallon, and the Malibu's EPA mileage estimates, that's 100,000+ miles of driving to break even. We are back to the same problem with hybrid cars; consumers do the math, and buy the hybrid when it makes sense financially. Unless the price of the Volt comes down, or the cost of gas goes way up, this is going to be a tough sell for many buyers.
> 
> I really want to like the Volt. I wish it had more EV range, but I can see the point of reducing the range and keeping the battery cost down. Besides, I'm one of the 90% who drive less than 30 miles per day. That's a big part of why I drive an EV.


You have raised some of the most important points about hybrids. The up front cost VS the saved fuel over the life of the vehicle. The prius can be a sound investment if you keep of for more than a few years, but most people that can afford one prefer to trade up every other year, so there are no real cost savings that way.

The corolla is actually my preferred donor at the moment. Doing the leg work right now for a possible conversion using lithium batteries. I'm aiming for a 100 mile range.


----------



## oldtimer (Jul 30, 2008)

okay lets look at the math, my Prius over 5000 miles has used less than 100 gal. My Jeep that it replaced get 14.5 mpg avg so 5000/14.5=345 gal. 245 gal @ $3.99(today's price) = $977.55 over 3 months. or $3910.20 yearly. difference in price of Prius $28057. less street value of jeep at that time $17004. = $11,053. divided by 3910.20 = 2.83 years payback. And of course gas has to remain at $3.99 (LOL).
I chose to keep the jeep and let go of my 1994 Suzuki Sidekick since my miles driven aren't all that demanding.
I agree everyone has to decide, based on the math, what's best for their situation, but as a former auto sales person, I take issue with your 2 yr example, average now is 7 years age before trade.


----------



## saab96 (Mar 19, 2008)

KiwiEV said:


> I also dislike it because I believe we have the technology to drive 300+ miles on batteries alone.


Sure we do. But could you afford it? Just because it's GM doesn't mean the end product of a 300 mile range EV would be any cheaper than a Tesla. GM doesn't have that much control over battery costs.

People have this, I dunno, blind faith in mega corporations to wave their magic wand and make Jetsons style technology affordable. I guess this is an outgrowth of living in the computer industry and Moore's law, but this is not directly applicable to cars. Automobiles have some cost issues that just never ever go away.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

oldtimer said:


> okay lets look at the math, my Prius over 5000 miles has used less than 100 gal. My Jeep that it replaced get 14.5 mpg avg so 5000/14.5=345 gal. 245 gal @ $3.99(today's price) = $977.55 over 3 months. or $3910.20 yearly. difference in price of Prius $28057. less street value of jeep at that time $17004. = $11,053. divided by 3910.20 = 2.83 years payback. And of course gas has to remain at $3.99 (LOL).
> I chose to keep the jeep and let go of my 1994 Suzuki Sidekick since my miles driven aren't all that demanding.
> I agree everyone has to decide, based on the math, what's best for their situation, but as a former auto sales person, I take issue with your 2 yr example, average now is 7 years age before trade.


Thats good to know if people are trading up less often these days. Theres really no reason for a 2 year rotation on cars anymore. If I read your numbers right, you paid close to $40k for a new prius? That is what the volt will sell for, but the 48 MPG is less than impressive in chevy's case. But then again, driving style may bring that higher up. I have a hard time seeing how the volt will compete with the prius once the plug in version is offered, but we shall have to see.


----------



## KiwiEV (Jul 26, 2007)

saab96 said:


> Sure we do. But could you afford it? Just because it's GM doesn't mean the end product of a 300 mile range EV would be any cheaper than a Tesla. GM doesn't have that much control over battery costs.


It still sounds possible. Let's say GM bought a few _thousand_ 100kWh LiFePO4 packs for $20k each (the power of a bulk purchase), then put some aerodynamic mods into the Volt, removed the engine and associated junk that's not required, dropped the battery pack in and put in some components. According to the Tesla's specs, with that sized pack (almost double the capacity of the Telsa's) careful driving should exceed 300 miles range. 
A company like GM could sell that for under $50k and still make a good profit.

Regardless of whether GM do it first or not, it will happen in the next few years. I was hoping a big auto maker would lead the way though...


----------



## drivin98 (May 9, 2008)

fugdabug said:


> ... of course the BBC report didn't mention anything about the range of the Sedan. ...



The Tesla Model S should have about a 200 mile range.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2008)

Well the Volt is not an EV anyway so what's the beef? The Volt is a Hybrid and the Prius does not have any further EV range than that and it is only at 30+ mph limit anyway. I agree that the Volt should have a bit more range and to have it a plugin too. But make no mistake it is a hybrid and not an EV. If it ever becomes a full fledged EV then I'd expect it to have a very good range. But since it has an ICE there is just no way to have a super long distance battery pack installed. But I feel better than 40 should be paramount since it will be in competition with the Prius and Honda Hybrid. If it does not perform any better then many will stay with a known winner of the Prius or Honda Hybrid. They both have the market cornered and to break into that you must produce something better than either and both at the same time and looks will not do the job. 

Pete : )


----------



## TX_Dj (Jul 25, 2008)

But Pete... the concept car WAS an EV... I think that's why people are bent out of shape about it... it was going to be an EV with hundreds(?) of miles range, and it was going to be sleek and sporty and the next big hot ticket "gotta have it gadget"...

But now it's a 4 door economy sedan PHEV with a hefty pricetag which looks like an ugly re-work of a Malibu...

Considering that the general public, unless they are hardcore bowtie fans, have a perception that GM products are fall-apart throw-away vehicles, some of which barely last until the note is paid off, those same people will have serious problems spending $5-15k more for the volt vs. buying a Prius and upgrading it to PHEV. *shrug*

It's apparent that GM doesn't want to do what *we* want, so echoing Pete's sentiment, why do *we* care?


----------



## John (Sep 11, 2007)

I think GM have tapped into the parnoia the general public (who don't know beter) have about EV's and that is the fear of running out of electrons and what on earth would they do if that happened. I think GM are taking the necesary intermediate step to dispell the myths and build the market for EV's. With the volt they have a vehicle they could very easily change to a pure EV with a much larger battery that is if the price of batteries ever do become reasonable.


----------



## saab96 (Mar 19, 2008)

John said:


> With the volt they have a vehicle they could very easily change to a pure EV with a much larger battery that is if the price of batteries ever do become reasonable.


GM is already saying they are going to take a loss on the Volt. I don't see how anyone could have expected more than 40 miles range out of it. That's already as much range as most DIY conversion BEVs, so if you want to use it like a BEV, you will be able to. What's going to be sad is the Prius plugin which is going to get like 10 miles or less of pure electric range. So sad coming from the creators of the Rav4EV.


----------



## John (Sep 11, 2007)

saab96 said:


> What's going to be sad is the Prius plugin which is going to get like 10 miles or less of pure electric range. So sad coming from the creators of the Rav4EV.


I don't think Toyota are taking the Volt too seriously as competition for their Prius though I wouldn't mind betting they wouldn't bother with their plug in experiment if they didn't have a niggling concern and people weren't modifying them anyway. It looks like the Volt will be in a different price bracket for a start. I think they might also be of the opinion that a serial hybrid cannot be very efficient while in ICE powered mode. The energy from the ICE has to go through more transformations before it reaches the wheels than in a parallel hybrid.


----------



## oldtimer (Jul 30, 2008)

David85 - you misread, my sticker price on 08 Prius was $28057., and that is with the pkg 6 options(pkg 7 offers leather seating), the difference to "trade up" from my jeep would have been $11003.

Gottdi - EV range on Prius is more like 44 mph before ice kicks in and you can with a few driving tricks maintain ev range even further. There is no limit, per se, on ev range. The PHEV version I understand would be 40 miles, if and when it is released( waiting on improved batteries, I've read).

I have a hard time understanding why the Volt will have such a limited range EV or hybrid. But since its nearly two more years before its official release, maybe the general can make some iimprovements.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2008)

No the Volt was always going to be first a Hybrid then either an all out EV or Hydrogen fuel cell electric. That is what is being pushed. Start with a hybrid (sorta Green) then move towards a greener way to power the vehicle. I don't expect it to ever be a full EV. The Concept was only show it's design and to use a basic electric motor to motor around on stage. No need for anything more than that was needed. Concepts are just that and not a full fledged vehicle. Watch the commercials about GM in general. They are moving towards full green but no really a full green vehicle from the start. It is on step at a time towards that goal. In other words they have eternity to meet that goal. One step at a time. The volt is a hybrid and that is what it was expected to be. I will stick with a Prius for now. Actually I will stick with my Ghia EV. I was aware that the Prius IC will kick in around 36 mph. EV range is limited and not much more if even 40 miles before the batteries need charged. With some special hacking and an extra battery pack the MPH is raised and some now can go 50+ mph and up to 20 or so extra miles and can be plugged in. Stock is under 40 mph when the IC kicks in. If someone here owns one and drives one and can state for sure what the kick in speed actually is then what I know it is under 40 mph. Distance is not an issue as the motor will always keep the battery charged. That is why many want the Prius to be an extended range plugin hybrid. And on that can be driven faster and further on EV only. Then when the battery is low to a specific point the IC will begin to charge it until you can plug it in. Only a dream for most Prius owners but it is being done by a few. 

I still think that the Volt can do better then 40 miles. Remember that no one here has any true inside scoop on the Volt so all that is being touted is just plain old speculation. Can't make a comparison from speculation. They did make the EV-1 so they do have the knowledge to do real well. The Volt may be the best Hybrid EV when it arrives. And the price is only speculation too. Think they will actually charge more than the Prius? I highly doubt it. They will want piece of that business. If they want it they must be better and cheaper or at least the same in price. They know it and so do you. Don't let speculation drive your thinking. : )

Pete




TX_Dj said:


> But Pete... the concept car WAS an EV... I think that's why people are bent out of shape about it... it was going to be an EV with hundreds(?) of miles range, and it was going to be sleek and sporty and the next big hot ticket "gotta have it gadget"...
> 
> But now it's a 4 door economy sedan PHEV with a hefty pricetag which looks like an ugly re-work of a Malibu...
> 
> ...


----------



## LeTank (Jun 24, 2008)

It's a friggin tragedy. In 1996 they had the EV1 which got close to 80 miles per charge and then they slap us in the face with this junk that gets 40 miles per charge? haha. Did GM claim insanity, or will they when they also claim bankruptcy? Do they think Americans are just so stupid to just buy a piece of junk like that to get 40 miles per charge when they can build their own that gets 60? haha. I think I am going insane just watching GM do crazy stunts. 

I need an asprin.


----------



## professorjohn (Sep 18, 2008)

what is the problem with the volt? WHY does it only get 40m pr chg.?
battery pack?. weight?.....ammenities?....choice :A,B,C and a few more to the X,Y....Z?


----------



## professorjohn (Sep 18, 2008)

or....maybe GM is getting in line with the banks to get bailed out....kind of a death by cop thing...?


----------



## The Flying Dutchman (Aug 15, 2008)

Within a few month's the first 30 production verhicle's are gonna be tested.

I think these test car's are going to perform better, and better, like something magical is happening. *whoa*

The 40miles thing, it's just a trick, people are speculating alot about it, so it's a populair topic (The Volt) , so all people know, and are waiting for the official test results.

Suddently after the first few test drivings, the car can magically get a range of 50 miles *whoa*

After that it will be 55miles *a bigger whoa*

And then it turns out to be 65 miles with a few more adjustmets * WHOOAAAAAA !!! *

And to make it an even better *WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA* the car is gonna cost only 30k.

*WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*

And stocks will rise again.

But that's just what im hoping 

GM know's how to get 60 miles + .
It's gotta be, they got so much going on on research.
They already know how to make this verhicle 10years ago, maybe 20...

U can only imagine what kind of technology these guys have, it's gotta be awsome...

I don't know, but I believe i red 2 years ago that they are spending 1 billion dollar on research every year !

1 billion
every year
research

*damn*

They probably already know how to make flying cars.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

The Flying Dutchman said:


> .
> 
> U can only imagine what kind of technology these guys have, it's gotta be awsome...
> 
> I don't know, but I believe i red 2 years ago that they are spending 1 billion dollar on research every year !



and yet a guy in his garage with 30 bucks created a fusion reactor (verified) at age 17 while the scientists in europe can't get their's working for 6 billion euros.

You seriously have no idea how much research budgets are wasted into nothingness... ask any REAL engineer about it... it's all a joke. If you offered anything revolutionary they'd laugh at you and say "we don't have the machines to do that... so think this way instead".

I have 5 close relatives that were or are engineers (my grandfather was the lead engineer for NCR for 20 years). They all hate it. Their knowledge is squandered into the realm of what "doesn't cost money to do" no matter HOW much it would make the company in the future.


----------



## Astronomer (Aug 7, 2008)

> GM know's how to get 60 miles + .


I have no doubt that's true. However, if it turns out that the production Volt can get 60+ electric miles per charge, GM will take out some batteries until it gets only 40 electric miles per charge. 

The reason for this is that 40 miles still meets the needs of enough people to define a large market segment, but any more would not be worth the extra cost. GM isn't trying to get as much electric range as possible out of the Volt. They're shooting for 40 electric miles, and they have no intention of overshooting that target, because doing so would make the car more expensive than it needs to be. If a 40-E-mile range suits you 90% of the time, would you pay $10K more for an extra 10 electric miles per charge that you won't use most of the time? Most people would reasonably conclude that they would be better off buying another carmaker's high-mileage car, and spending the savings of the purchase on gasoline. That last 10 electric miles per charge is very expensive.

GM's thinking is that it is better to sell a 40-E-mile range PHEV for $30K than it is to sell a 60-E-Mile PHEV for $40K. And I agree with them.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

Astronomer said:


> GM's thinking is that it is better to sell a 40-E-mile range PHEV for $30K than it is to sell a 60-E-Mile PHEV for $40K. And I agree with them.


though if GM simply changed their production lines to allow something besides just stamped steel parts they could make a 80mile EV for 12k...

In fact I know precisely how it can be done for sub $2000 in parts range.


----------



## ClintK (Apr 27, 2008)

Technologic said:


> You seriously have no idea how much research budgets are wasted into nothingness... ask any REAL engineer about it... it's all a joke. If you offered anything revolutionary they'd laugh at you and say "we don't have the machines to do that... so think this way instead".
> 
> I have 5 close relatives that were or are engineers (my grandfather was the lead engineer for NCR for 20 years). They all hate it. Their knowledge is squandered into the realm of what "doesn't cost money to do" no matter HOW much it would make the company in the future.


Slightly off topic but I have to throw this in... the most frustrating is by far military research organizations. They can develop a solution that far exceeds what industry has produced for a fraction of the cost (I have too many personal examples), but the tools can't be used because then the government would be "competing with industry".

Given this is an industry's research department, but I would not be surprised if "GM Product Development" considered "GM Research" as a waste of money that doesn't produce anything that could actually be built/marketed (whether or not it's true is up for debate).


----------



## Evan (Feb 20, 2008)

ClintK - I like your point. I have seen that too. Sad to see the way it is going now.
http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/47153-1.html
"NASA patents to be auctioned"
Nice way for a few rich companies to profit exclusively off of government research.

The government can do things that the free market can't. Mainly invest in technology currently seen as impractical, financially unpractical, or targeted at an undeserved population. I am not saying all work should be government driven but some should so that we all can benefit. Think of all the small businesses that started up around NASA/DARPA developed technology each company trying to find a place for the same basic idea in the market or a different use for it. Ideas are more likely to employ more people in a wider variety of markets. Further because more companies are trying to advance them competition in the free market will drive prices down.

On a more on topic note I think the title of this story will not be true until the car is in a forum where we can see it run on a real road and then pop the hood and see some batteries or something other than just an ICE engine. I want to see ether government or other outside product tests of millage.


----------



## The Flying Dutchman (Aug 15, 2008)

Ofcourse, I think many people know government, and research programs ''aren't for real'' , or, ''aren't ment to be for the public''

Wars bring technology -available- .

But I think this time things are gonna change, government has alot of technology hidden, I think many people know, and agree with this.
Technology just sitting there to be used.

The list goes on and on and people will, have, find out.

Economy got nuked, people arent moving forward anymore for the last 8years orso.
Things stay the same, people are sick of it.

Pressure on government is incredibly high now to release some of the technology so people can move on with their live's.

People are ready to get forward, they all know there is -far- better advanced technology then their 1.6 station car.
Technology to make things cheaper, and better.

Government has to give at some point, and I think that point has been recheatch (sorry for that word it it is in-correct    )

I thing technology is really going to boost in the next few years.

It has to boost, it's been sitting and waiting.

Yet again, I hope, but I think the technology is already here, only government is holding it. sadly.
Government funded the programs to research and develop it, with OUR MONEY ! , we all have the right to know, and get it.

Also the big LHC is just a big deversion for something if you ask me.
''Look at how great and superior the EU-union is''

Maybe it really is great and the EU government show's all information about it.

But maybe not, I don't believe the government's anymore, they hold to much information behind our back.

And nobody can blame me for not believing them.
They caused it themselve's.
This is going to be their chance to get our feelings and believings back.
Hope they don't waste that chance...
When the EU was formed things are really going to be better on all front's.

right............................ 

And that's just 1 of their big lie's , but it started with that 1.


----------



## Evan (Feb 20, 2008)

Flying Dutchman - The DoD does keep technology hidden but many other government agencies don't. You have made some powerful assertions where are the facts from which you have draw these conclusions? What is this technology that they are sitting on? If government research is as useless as you claim how could it have been developed by that same government in the first place? Which half of your argument are we to believe.

As for the LHC it will solve some of the very important physics problems. I don't think dark matter is real, I just think there is a lot of matter in the universe that remains unaccounted for. The dust between stars for example. I now the LHC is a matter of EU pride to a point but it will solve some problems with the standard model of partical physics among others. In the process new technologies are made possible. It was the construction of rocket guidance systems for NASA that powered the economy of scale for semiconductors. 

You are right the technology is out there for better cars but it isn't government holding it back it is big business not wanting to eat the short term cost of changing. The current steel technology for car construction is holding back EV's which need higher efficiency but car companies like steel because they already have basic designs to alter in minor ways each year and sell as a new thing. They also have plants already setup to work with it. To change we need new companies to start up and take a risk on the new stuff. However, to do that they have a large problem what economists call the "barrier to entry". There is also the problem of breaking into the market where the major car companies are connected to most of the dealerships. To get around these things in the telco industry we have things like peering agreements and government loans or other assistance. There are many studies to the effect that audited properly these advance the entire industry both in technology and into availability of lower income people and communities.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

there is no "hidden" government technologies... revolutionary technologies die in the minds of those that have them (the 0.0001% of people who actually are capable of not thinking in boxes).

If you don't think so you haven't paid any attention to research projects and how they come about (ie. colleges are often full of garbage as well just for grants).


----------



## TX_Dj (Jul 25, 2008)

Technologic said:


> revolutionary technologies die in the minds of those that have them


Thankfully, many people, completely without any communication between each other, think a lot alike, and some of those "dead in the mind" technologies are reborn through unrelated efforts.

Granted, the following example is a poor choice to illustrate that point, but what about powered flight? If you ask the average american "Who built and flew the first self-powered airplane," they will refer you to the Wright Brothers' flight in 1903. If you ask the average French citizen the same, they will refer you to Alberto Santos-Dumont's flight in 1907.... but some might refer you to Clement Ader's 50-foot flight in 1890.

Similarly, in about 1989, my father and I sat down to design something "out of the box"... It would be a complicated device with large hard disk drives inside, with a TV signal modulator/demodulator which would permit you to digitally encode audio/video signals for convenient storage and playback, much like a VCR. After several weeks of brainstorming and throwing ideas around, we decided that it just wasn't feasible, due to the small size of disks at that time, the slow access/transfer speeds of those disks, and the enormous cost of even one 500 MB disk, which we speculated at the time if adequate compression were put in place, could hold "one feature-length movie"... not even to begin to mention the lack of available computational power to drive such a codec in realtime.

Fast-forward 10 years, long after we'd forgotten the concept, and the first "Replay TV" units were preparing to hit the shelves, followed closely by "TiVo", and today the ubiquitous DVR that the cable and satellite companies want to give you for free for signing up a 1-year contract.

Another example- a british inventor designed the iPod in the 1970's. Well ahead of its time. He's currently trying to sue Apple Computer.

"dead in the mind" technologies do tend to have a rebirth, and it could be debatable whether "6 degrees" or even "chaos theory" play into that effect... but alas, a good many ideas ahead of their time simply vanish, never to be seen again.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

TX_Dj said:


> "dead in the mind" technologies do tend to have a rebirth, and it could be debatable whether "6 degrees" or even "chaos theory" play into that effect... but alas, a good many ideas ahead of their time simply vanish, never to be seen again.



There are many levels of revolutionary types of technologies... the truly breathtaking and revolutionary ones (like superconducting levitation) are almost entirely dead currently and will never get serious funding for hundreds of years (even though they could be done now for meager costs).

Material science is even worse... there are materials past diamond in hardness that nobody's even tried to find and produce production quantities of (not that they have diamond either which would be easy to make large quantities of).


----------



## Evan (Feb 20, 2008)

TX_DJ - My father worked for a company that did the whole multimedia computing thing starting in the late 1970's but no one was buying, other than the DoD, because of the high cost. They stuck it out thew the mid 1990's. Computer time shifting of TV predates the 80's, it was just not too costly for the average user before now. The hardware your father had might have even been one of that companies boards. At the time there were only a few companies doing that kind of work. They were called New Media Graphics, the competitors were Creative, Video Toast (for the CBM Amiga), and some other people who I can't recall.

The guy suing apple only had a digital music player. Not an ipod his case is very week to be honest because plenty of people be for him had played with the technology. Now Fairchild owns the MP3 codec but they have a free license at the moment on it for non-commercial use. One day they will step in and make a fortune.

Technologic - Yea a lot of university stuff is junk but it is like the NEA, you don't know what ideas will turn out great and what will be well.... I think TX_Dj has a point though. When Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction he knew he had something but no one knew what to do with it. That took about 100 years before the transformer would prove to have a use. Not to mention the induction motor we all know and love.


----------



## TX_Dj (Jul 25, 2008)

Evan said:


> The hardware your father had might have even been one of that companies boards.


Oh, we had no hardware. We just had an idea.  I think it spawned from one too many times of watching pre-recorded shows on VCR, and not having the ability to pause or rewind live TV. 

It wasn't nearly as advanced in concept as what we know as the DVR today, but the concept was similar. Surely others had thought of it before then, but we knew nothing about it.

My pops was an EE, and came up with all kinds of great ideas that his employers didn't care for, and lacking funds to do it himself, he just forgot about them rather than patent and seek capital. In the early '60s, he envisioned a time when everyone would have wireless phones that fit in their pockets, that worked just about anywhere, etc, as we know cell phones today. In the mid '80s I took that idea to another level, envisioning a time when everyone's phones would basically just hang off their ears, and there'd be no reason to even touch a phone, you'd just say "Call so-n-so" and that person would be in your ear... and today we have bluetooth headsets.

I just have to laugh, because pops and I have brainstormed a lot of neat ideas over the years, undoubtedly years before their time- even if others may have thought of those thing separately from us... but apparently we lack the "millionaire gene" otherwise we would have pursued them further.


----------



## paker (Jun 20, 2008)

KiwiEV said:


> Hybrids like the Volt will still serve a purpose, but they are just stepping stones to the future of personal transport: pure battery electric vehicles.


They also serve the purpose of keeping GM's dealer's parts counter open a bit longer just in case someone needs a new piston, or belt for the Volt's ICE.


----------



## Evan (Feb 20, 2008)

TX_Dj - Yea that is the problem. We all have a lot of ideas the problem is having the time and money to see them threw. Then the ability to fight all the patent lawsuits that inevitably come your way. Look at Farnsworth. 

Employers never get the big ideas. They are looking for technology that continues an already marketed idea. (marketing gets in the way a lot) They call these technologies that really jump out of no were and change the markets "disruptive technologies". I hope that one day EV's will join the list disruptors funny considering the ICE car disrupted it in the first place. 

I think my family lacks that gene too.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I don't think this is intended as a stepping stone to EVs. More of a stepping stone to hydrogen fuel cells is my feeling.


----------



## Evan (Feb 20, 2008)

Parker - Thats funny... and most likely true...

David85 - Hey at least it means they have to stock replacement parts for the Volt. The thing that excites me is this...
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2006/12/05/cobasys-providing-nimh-batteries-for-saturn-aura-hybrid/
I think a few of us might have to order replacement batteries for our "friends" with broken Saturn's.


----------

