Volt Sleeps With the Fishes

[Stew]

Just to point or ounterpoint a few things under 2.

a: this is a good thing as i believe hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are the true future.

b: E85 is a good stopgap, but as far as energy production is really not that great and unfortunatly E85 stations are few and far between, still it is a nice capability to have if you access.

c: I would say GM is doing well with active fuel management, but calling them the leader may be a bit of a stretch. CHysler has been using it in their Hemis since 06, and as far I know Honda is the only one using it with their V6 offerings.

d. THe hybrid large trucks and SUVs were an interesting idea, but while city mileage was good and a huge boon in the city there was basically little or no real advantage in the hwy MPG.

e: Yes, the volt started it, but there are other plug in hybrids here or on the way. There is already a Prius plug in which starts at 32k before tax breaks, mind you the range 15 electric only miles is a lot shorter, but the price is a lot lower. by the ender of the year we will also have others including the 13 Fusion Plug in hybrid.

f. Eassist really needs to be improved from it's current form. It performs like a 4 cyclinder, not a v6 sorry. Acceleration is smashed by any competing mid size V6 cars. Fuel mileage isn't that great either. While the 13 Malibu Eco can get 37 on the highway, a stock basic 4 cylinder Camry will get 35 and the Camry hybrid and Fusion are into the 40s.....

f. Love the cruze Eco, IMHO cars like the Cruze eco, Elantra, Focus SFE and even the upcoming 40 MPG dart and the biggest dtracters from all hybrids. you don't lose much in the way of mileage and save thousands.

Not meaning to argue, just putting some counter points out there for you as someone outside looking in.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by fbodfather

then you and I will (I guess) agree to disagree.

Is it a bad business decision? When does that 'decision' get made, ultimately?

Again - if you read my comments, I talk about many different 'disciplines' in terms of powertrains. If gas goes to $5 a gallon or above, is it a bad decision? (remember - in most places of the country - recharging a Volt at night costs less than $2.00 to travel up to 40 miles......) Based on a cost analysis, the Cruze Eco is a much better buy than a Prius. Does that mean that Toyota was wrong for making the Prius?

(....and also don't discount the picture that Tom Henry posted.....)

As the old adage goes: "The opera ain't over 'til the fat lady sings" - I don't think she's even in her outfit yet - let alone ready to sing.......

How is it cheaper with a cost Analysis then a Prius? They are rated at like 50 MPG combine and start at less than 24k before any tax breaks. That IS a huge difference and realistically the time it would take to make up the difference in purchase price (and additional interest if you took out a loan for it) is far longer that anyone will probably kep one of these throw away appliances. Cruze to prius, the price difference IS MUCH closer , within what 3k compared to 17k? Not a good point for the Volt.........

[Lou_Dorchen]

Originally Posted by fbodfather

Is it a bad business decision? When does that 'decision' get made, ultimately?

Based on a cost analysis, the Cruze Eco is a much better buy than a Prius. Does that mean that Toyota was wrong for making the Prius?

Of course it's been nothing but a bad business decision so far. When you have to send the workers who manufacture it home for 5 weeks because of low sales, what else would you call it? I compare it somewhat to the Pontiak Aztek. The moment I saw it I knew it would flop. GM predicted it would sell 75k per year. It's first year it only sold 27k, and about half of those were fleet sales. It lasted 5 years before cancellation, and never sold over 27k units per year. Just because the Volt is still being made doesn't mean it will eventually sell.

GM was right for making the Cruze Eco and Toyota was right for making the Prius. Both vehicles sell very well and both produce profits, so I'm not sure what your point is.

[Brokinarrow]

Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen

Of course it's been nothing but a bad business decision so far. When you have to send the workers who manufacture it home for 5 weeks because of low sales, what else would you call it? I compare it somewhat to the Pontiak Aztek. The moment I saw it I knew it would flop. GM predicted it would sell 75k per year. It's first year it only sold 27k, and about half of those were fleet sales. It lasted 5 years before cancellation, and never sold over 27k units per year. Just because the Volt is still being made doesn't mean it will eventually sell.

GM was right for making the Cruze Eco and Toyota was right for making the Prius. Both vehicles sell very well and both produce profits, so I'm not sure what your point is.

I believe his point is that developing this tech now is a necessary step to the cheaper, more reliable tech that will come from it in the future.

[liquidsmoke]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Here's a news flash....

Batteries do not produce energy. I think you probably already knew that. The energy in batteries has to come from some source and get transferred to the battery and then transferred out of the battery. This process is INCREDIBLY wasteful. I prefer to drive a vehicle that is the PRIMARY energy producer and not using 2nd or 3rd generation energy that most of which has been wasted.

People who drive electric cars WASTE energy. My SS is a primary producer. I save the planet. The volt is wrecking our planet!

If the goal is to make energy somewhere and then store it in the car (battery) and use it later, why bother with expensive batteries and junk. Why not just put a couple of inexpensive compressed air tanks in the car and use the energy in the compressed air to power the car. It's the same as a battery, but costs a lot less.

Gas engines aren't very efficient either you know. From a full tank of gas, only about 30% is actually used to move your car, the rest is wasted. I havnt seen any figures of how much energy it takes to charge a car bat, vs how much energy you get out of it. But I'm pretty certain it's better than gas.

I do have to agree with I guess both sides of the argument though.

The volt cost too much, and the whole point is to use less gas. But on the same note, all hybrid/ electric whatever cars cost too much to anyone who is really trying to save money on gas. And not for political or environmental reasons, but because they can't afford to pay high gas prices and a car that drinks it like a fish.

The volt, while is the most attractive hybrid in its price range (which isn't hard to do at all), it's still not really all that to look at. The concept looked way better To be and production version, exterior wise seems way too watered down. But does send a message that electric cars don't have to be butt ass ugly like the leaf, and Prius.

The cars are not a bad idea though, and at some point the prices will go down as more and more people buy them. It's the same with virtually any new piece of technology. Just will take some time since cars are pretty expensive to begin with, even cheap ones and new models only get built every 5 years or longer.
The plan isn't to save everyone from high gas prices this summer. It's more long term, like 20 years from now. And there will be some growing pains.

I'd rather GM, Toyota and Nissan make these cars and push the industry forward than not. So in all, it's a very good idea. Just will take some time to become a very good value, and hopefully better looks.


Oh, and I think GM should eat the cost to keep those workers from going without paychecks for 5 weeks. Not like it's going to really hurt GM the slightest, but the workers, not so much.

[Tom Henry Racing]

Originally Posted by Brokinarrow

I believe his point is that developing this tech now is a necessary step to the cheaper, more reliable tech that will come from it in the future.

HA....a beacon of light!!!!

[ShnOmac]

Originally Posted by Brokinarrow

I believe his point is that developing this tech now is a necessary step to the cheaper, more reliable tech that will come from it in the future.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by fbodfather

I've not had the time to read thru this entire thread - but I would like to give you some thoughts.

first - courtesy of our Legal Department: These are MY opinions and not necessarily those of the company for whom i work.....


1. Plasma and LCD TVs used to cost upwards of 6K when I started buying them for Autoshows. The same sized Plasma and LCD now costs around $500. the first generation of most things 'technical' will always cost more. As such - the next generations of Volt Technology will likely drop in price - and become more affordable.........

2. There is not one 'magic bullet' that will solve America's energy problems. If you google my name (mis-spelled in most cases) you'll hear me talk about GM's various energy solutions. What's true: If you are an auto manufacturer that's going to address all 'needs segmentations' of the car and truck industry, you will need more than one type of powertrain.

a) GM is a leader in Automotive Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technology. We have well over 100 Equini

(that's plural for Equinox)

(as Malibi is for Malibu....)

....in service that we loan to families in the D.C./LA/NY area -- allowing them to exerience driving a fuel-cell vehicle -- and allowing us feedback which is so important as we move forward......

b. GM is a leader in E-85 Flex Fuel - Chevy alone has over 3 million cars and trucks on the road today that will allow you to use regular gas or E-85. yes, E-85 is controversial - (isn't everything these days???) -- and the reality is that it IS a renewable resource -it can be created from industrial and household waste (which in my opinion needs to happen versus corn derived...) -- and as gasoline continues to rise, makes more and more sense......

c. GM is a leader in Active Fuel Management (Cylinder deactivation) - as much as some of you may not like it, it's one way for us to offer high-performance cars -- because like it or not, every manufacturer needs to hit CAFE standards......

d. GM is a leader in 2-mode Hybrid Technology. Further, GM started at 'the top' of the food chain, so to speak - by applying Hybrid Technology to the largest vehicles first......meaning inner-city transport buses....then working its way down to full-sized SUVs and pickups. (Not sure about 2012 - but in 2011 -- an Escalade/Tahoe/Yukon Hybrid got better city fuel economy than a Toyota Camry ....) Perhaps starting from the top is a better idea in terms of the impact on the planet?????

e. GM is a leader in electric vehicles. The Volt does something that no other Electric vehicle can do: You can drive it across the country without having to stop and plug it in. You cannot do that with a leaf......


f. "E-assist" will continue to be a part of our product plans - allowing 4 cylinders to provide the performance of many V6s - while returning superior fuel economy.

g. someone mentioned the Cruze ECO - it's rated at 42mpg and we have owners exceeding that figure. Go compare that with a Mini or a "SmartCar" (an oxymoron in my opinion - sorry - I'll go stand in the corner for a few minutes - but remember - MY opinion, not that of the company for whom I work....) The Cruze ECO provides "Hybrid" fuel economy without the 'Hybrid' price....... BUT - it's targeted for a buyer that's different than a Volt buyer........will people cross-shop? Sure - but there are some that want what the Volt can offer........

h. -- Chevy was a leader in CNG back in the late 70s and early 80s - we're going to offer it again - but it isn't the 'magic bullet' that will answer everyones' needs.....


Now - the Volt has become a political punching bag. It upsets the heck out of me - because I truly believe that had Toyota produced the Volt, we would be getting different remarks from a host of people - and our "Hollywood Elite" couldn't buy 'em fast enough! (again - MY opinion - which along with $2.50 will buy you a cup of designer coffee...)

A quick review: The "fire" occurred more than two weeks AFTER the crash test. The battery was NOT discharged as was instructed. (NHTSA was well aware of this requirement..but for whatever reason, evidently chose to ignore it - or perhaps unwittingly didn't do it for whatever reason...) Further - the fire happened on a weekend - with no one around.......(things that make you say "Hmmmmmm"....)

Once the fire occurred, another round of 'tests' ( read: Torture ) were performed....the battery and vehicle were put thru unbelievable torture that would have had most 'conventional' cars exploding due to fuel leakage.......but hey, why confuse us with facts? (MY opinion.......etcetcetc)

So - we'll continue to have Volt bashers. :(

I just don't understand why Americans and Canadians aren't proud of the fact that an AMERICAN/CANADIAN company is making inroads in so many areas - I guess I'll never understand some people.........

Lastly: for those who want to refrain with 'GM took the money!' - remember that in return for the 'money' (which no one could borrow at the time.....) -- Stock was given in return. You (the taxpayer) now own part of GM. That's not a bad thing. In fact, long term, it could be a great investment. (....everyone in unison: "my opinion...etcetcetc...." ) And NO - Mr. Obama is not 'calling the shots' -- trust me!

now - let me get myself comfortable in the corner..............

There you go being all articulate and explantory using facts, logic and common sense.

Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen

Once again, it's not about bashing the Volt, it's about being critical of bad business decisions.

I'm glad GM came back. And as a taxpayer/GM investor I want them to succeed. The Camaro exceeded sales projections. The Cruze is selling like crazy, as are Silverados, and alot of other GM models make money. Producing vehicles that make the company money is good, while producing vehicles that lose the company money is bad. As someone posted earlier, this has happened before and it cost GM a ton of money. The electric car has never been embraced by Americans, and anyone with a room temperature IQ could predict this one would fail as well. You cant simply force people to buy products they dont want. When the Gov't actually pays people to buy a product and it still doesn't sell, I dont see how anyone can argue that product has been anything but a huge failure.

Never has doesn't mean never will.

And making the argument is actually quite easy.

Originally Posted by fbodfather

then you and I will (I guess) agree to disagree.

Is it a bad business decision? When does that 'decision' get made, ultimately?

Again - if you read my comments, I talk about many different 'disciplines' in terms of powertrains. If gas goes to $5 a gallon or above, is it a bad decision? (remember - in most places of the country - recharging a Volt at night costs less than $2.00 to travel up to 40 miles......) Based on a cost analysis, the Cruze Eco is a much better buy than a Prius. Does that mean that Toyota was wrong for making the Prius?

(....and also don't discount the picture that Tom Henry posted.....)

As the old adage goes: "The opera ain't over 'til the fat lady sings" - I don't think she's even in her outfit yet - let alone ready to sing.......

LOL..................she's not even fat yet

Originally Posted by Stew

Just to point or ounterpoint a few things under 2.

a: this is a good thing as i believe hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are the true future.

Maybe THE future, just not ours. It's far too expensive for the Fuel Cells and getting the hydrogen. You'll see some more in the next 10 years, but they'll make the Volt look cheap.

Imagine an EV but now add a $100,000 or more device that uses hydrogen to power the car and charge the battery rather than simply plugging in an using coal.

b: E85 is a good stopgap, but as far as energy production is really not that great and unfortunatly E85 stations are few and far between, still it is a nice capability to have if you access.

E85 was fine as long as it was subsidized. That just ended. Now let's see what happens.

c: I would say GM is doing well with active fuel management, but calling them the leader may be a bit of a stretch. CHysler has been using it in their Hemis since 06, and as far I know Honda is the only one using it with their V6 offerings.

Leader means leader, not ONLY. GM's volume in FST and SUVs alone is wayyyy above Chrysler Hemis or Honda V6s.

d. THe hybrid large trucks and SUVs were an interesting idea, but while city mileage was good and a huge boon in the city there was basically little or no real advantage in the hwy MPG.

Which was what GM's point was and all hybrids for that matter. Going slow you can use battery power. Going faster you need regular power. It was, like the Volt, expensive and it took a bad mileage vehicle and made it.................less bad.

e: Yes, the volt started it, but there are other plug in hybrids here or on the way. There is already a Prius plug in which starts at 32k before tax breaks, mind you the range 15 electric only miles is a lot shorter, but the price is a lot lower. by the ender of the year we will also have others including the 13 Fusion Plug in hybrid.

Plug in Hybrids can not act as an EV. A Prius Hybrid or PHEV can not acclerate hard or go on the highway or climb grades without the engine. The Volt CAN

f. Eassist really needs to be improved from it's current form. It performs like a 4 cyclinder, not a v6 sorry. Acceleration is smashed by any competing mid size V6 cars. Fuel mileage isn't that great either. While the 13 Malibu Eco can get 37 on the highway, a stock basic 4 cylinder Camry will get 35 and the Camry hybrid and Fusion are into the 40s.....

Now compare the cost of the mild eassist hybrid and those Camry and Fusion Hybrids. Just sayin'. Also check the fuel milage of the 2.5L Malibu when it comes out.

f. Love the cruze Eco, IMHO cars like the Cruze eco, Elantra, Focus SFE and even the upcoming 40 MPG dart and the biggest dtracters from all hybrids. you don't lose much in the way of mileage and save thousands.

Not meaning to argue, just putting some counter points out there for you as someone outside looking in.

Good comments.................and my counters were to your counters.

Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen

Of course it's been nothing but a bad business decision so far. When you have to send the workers who manufacture it home for 5 weeks because of low sales, what else would you call it? I compare it somewhat to the Pontiak Aztek. The moment I saw it I knew it would flop. GM predicted it would sell 75k per year. It's first year it only sold 27k, and about half of those were fleet sales. It lasted 5 years before cancellation, and never sold over 27k units per year. Just because the Volt is still being made doesn't mean it will eventually sell.

GM was right for making the Cruze Eco and Toyota was right for making the Prius. Both vehicles sell very well and both produce profits, so I'm not sure what your point is.

1) Industry fact, Prius was not always profitable but it is now generally (yes, only generally) accepted that it is.

2) Where do you get the idea that the Cruze Eco is profitable? Simply selling a lot of something doesn't make it profitable.

[Brokinarrow]

Originally Posted by Number 3

2) Where do you get the idea that the Cruze Eco is profitable? Simply selling a lot of something doesn't make it profitable.

Ask Microsoft that about the X-box 360. In the end they made money on the games and such, but I do believe the system was actually being sold at a loss...

http://www.gamespot.com/news/microso...ox-360-6140383
Evidently, quite a SUBSTANTIAL loss...

[Captain Awesome]

[QUOTE=Tom Henry Racing;4641453]My 2 cents, random points.
It is helpful to separate politics from the car.
QUOTE]

How are you going to separate the POLITICIANS from the car? People are getting fed up with being told how to run their lives by a bunch of arrogant masterminds who have exhibited below average I.Q. and common sesne.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

I think the eventual purpose of developing battery technology is taking advantage of renewables - can't really waste the wind or sun can you?

Why has there been so much resistance to building hydroelectric plants and groups trying to SHUT DOWN hydro plants? These are a form of solar energy. Why not use it?

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by fbodfather

Lastly: for those who want to refrain with 'GM took the money!' - remember that in return for the 'money' (which no one could borrow at the time.....) -- Stock was given in return. You (the taxpayer) now own part of GM. That's not a bad thing. In fact, long term, it could be a great investment. (....everyone in unison: "my opinion...etcetcetc...." ) And NO - Mr. Obama is not 'calling the shots' -- trust me!

now - let me get myself comfortable in the corner..............

Have the guy calling the shots (whoever that is) please tell the politicians to stop going around taking credit for "saving" the Auto industry. We all know that credit goes to the people working in the industry and they succeeded in SPITE of what the credit hogging masterminds did.

[AZCamaroFan]

So glad to see fbodfather comment on this.

[Brokinarrow]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Why has there been so much resistance to building hydroelectric plants and groups trying to SHUT DOWN hydro plants? These are a form of solar energy. Why not use it?

I think you meant a form of green energy... hydro = water, not solar. And as for the resistance to them, a hydro plant can significantly alter the flow of the river it's installed in if not done properly. This has some obvious environmental concerns, as well as concerns for the availability of water down river for human consumption.