Despite the plethora of automakers aiming to build EVs over the next few years, Honda continues to uphold its stance against it.
In a recent interview with Automotive news, Honda R&D chief Masaaki Kato says Honda has no plans to produce an electric car.
Honda made recent press about an announcement for a sub-$20,000 revamped Insight parallel hybrid. But that’s apparently as far as it goes for now.
Kato feels the energy of lithium-ion batteries is “still too poor for cars,” and only predicts EVs will make up 1% of the vehicle fleet by 2015.
He claims EVs will only be useful as neighborhood runabouts but that to get the performance of an Accord, the car would have to carry 2 tons of battery, a weight he says that is “no good.”
Source (Automotive News, subscription)
Expanding this premise is an article in the GlobeandMail by Jeremey Cato. Cato contends that he is leaning to Honda’s simple approach versus what he calls the Volt, GM’s moonshot. He argues that Honda’s forthcoming low-cost, high-volume hybrid Insight is more likely to be a long-term success for the company than the riskier Volt will be for GM.
Source (GlobeAndMail)
So the argument is: Go with something simple and proven and reduce its price, or take the risk and go for new bold technology that might be more expensive at first?
This entry was posted on Thursday, September 11th, 2008 at 6:13 am and is filed under Competitors, E-REV, Hybrid. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:22 am)Both. He is correct about the 1% in 2015 number and I would guess that he is correct about the success of inexpensive cars that get great gas mileage. I think (I hope!) GM is also correct about the Volt in the same way that Toyota was correct about the Prius 10 years ago. He also points out the same uncertainty that GM does: Will the batteries be good enough. That’s the question.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:24 am)“to get the performance of an Accord, the car would have to carry 2 tons of battery”
I thought you just needed a hampster and a wheel for that.
We don’t need another hybrid. The US needs (among other things) ways off oil. EREV is the better choice even if it is more expensive. In my eyes there is a large hidden value if less money pumped out of this country.
Also, no one should complain about the Volt’s looks when compared to the Insight. Talk about a turd.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:26 am)In a way, they are both right. Honda has always felt that efficiency was paramount. For that, I salute them. But sometimes, you have to take a gamble in order to move forward. GM has been trying to build cars that rival Honda/Toyota in efficiency, only to fall short every time. It’s almost like someone at GM is an inside man for the imports. As soon as GM does something, secretly Honda hears about it and develops something more efficient at the same time. I’m not a conspiracy theorist but what the hell? Yes, the Volt is a moonshot. I may be a little biased in GM’s favor but the last time I heard anything about a moonshot, we were actually the first country to put a man on the moon. So if Honda calls the Volt a moonshot, I would consider that a compliment considering that by our past accomplishments this will be our country’s second moonshot.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:27 am)Why ignore the elephant in the room?
Volt – not here yet.
Honda – not here yet (but sooner than the Volt).
Prius – Available today, selling 180K in the US per year. Toyota is well along the road to making real money.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN0518895920080905?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10216&sp=true
Okamoto recently offered remark’s similar to Kato’s. Toyota thinks the economics of a large-battery vehicle are poor.
Considering that Toyota can deliver a car, profitably, in the neighborhood of $20K and the idea of the car business is to make money…
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:29 am)In the short run, the Honda and its lower price point could do very well. But that does not negate the fact that sooner or later, our days of powering personal vehicles with oil will come to an end.
I should think that GM, having invested in all-electric technology, is better positioned for the long run.
The raises the question of whether GM and its anemic balance sheet can survive to the long run. However, should the company go under, the technology it is developing will be inherited by whoever picks up the pieces.
As an aside, Honda seems to be in denial right now, similar to the way Toyota originally was about plug-in hybrids.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:32 am)Honda is one of the best run car companies. They were the first to bring production hybrids to market. The two seater Insight. Dont forget they have more than 100 FCX running, which are fuel cell vehicles. i.e, they are basically electric vehicles with a small battery and they use fuel cell to charge the battery and run the motor.
So, they have experience making production electric vehicular. All they got to do is remove the fuel cell, replace it with a ICE to charge the battery and put in a bigger battery and put in a plug, they have a plug in hybrid.
I surely hope they will do so.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:32 am)P.S.
Honda’s only saying that to put negative perceptions of the Volt to future consumers…probably pissed off that they didn’t think of it first. And if they think that an electric Li-Ion tech car is too expensive, call Honda and ask them how much it would cost to repair a damaged FCX Clarity. Better yet, if it’s so much better, why can’t everyone buy one (hell, the people that got them can’t even buy one!)
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:40 am)What is correct? Anything that achieves our energy independence quickly and economically so the masses can afford it.
At this point, where battery technology still needs a lot of help, many options can work. Personally, I prefer the EREV option at the moment.
Because I can use gas or not. I like the “not” part the most.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:41 am)I will still go with the “Volt” over the Honda. However, I’m still very upset about the possible styling of the production version of this long awaited car.
Everytime I look at the posted PICS it upsets me knowing what we started out with (Concept). Why does this car have to look so…!!!??!!! GM has the right tech that makes sence for now and into the future. This is a great sagway to an all electric car in the future when the battery technology is available to make it practical. Plus I like the fact I’ll have a possible 100mpg + with the thing. Take that ESSO, Shell, OPEX and who ever else. But for goodness sake man, fix the car’s lines…!!!!
Someone asked what is the drag like on a Corvette…??? I have to ask the same question. The Corvette has no problem moving through the air and it looks damn good moving and standing still. What happened to the Volt while it was in the wind tunnel…??? I mean, it has turned into a silver-gray bean with Bridgestone tires.
Why can’t it be great technology and sexy too…??? Please answer that question Mr. Lutz..!!! Why did you allow this tragedy…!!!??!!! Plus your asking me to fork over $40K for this thing…, please. I would think that styling is the easy part. Someone at GM please respond…!?! Mr. Lutz…!?!
-1
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:42 am)Lyle, thank you for putting the Honda and GM next to each other.
I like the looks of the Volt better.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:43 am)Well commerically I think Honda’s approach is better:
Less risks, a lower price, and it will be available earlier. With current fuel prices the difference between $20000 and $30000 or even $40000 is simply too big.
Of course GM’s approach is more ambitious, and could help to reduce the West’s dependency on imported oil. But with GM’s recent financial problems in mind, let’s hope it is not _too_ ambitious.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:48 am)If GM sticks with it, they will win the argument. It will take a long, long, long time, and they need to be profitable as soon as possible.
Only then will they have the money needed to amp up development.
I have a feeling this is the car GM will take the most development risks with.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:49 am)I think as far as body style and design they both look the same. The difference between them is basically the front bumper. Which goes to my point of how ho-hum the Volt looks.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:52 am)Norman D. Robinson Says:
September 11th, 2008 at 6:41 am
I will still go with the “Volt” over the Honda. However, I’m still very upset about the possible styling of the production version of this long awaited car.
Everytime I look at the posted PICS it upsets me knowing what we started out with (Concept). Why does this car have to look so…!!!??!!! GM has the right tech that makes sence for now and into the future. This is a great sagway to an all electric car in the future when the battery technology is available to make it practical. Plus I like the fact I’ll have a possible 100mpg + with the thing. Take that ESSO, Shell, OPEX and who ever else. But for goodness sake man, fix the car’s lines…!!!!
Someone asked what is the drag like on a Corvette…??? I have to ask the same question. The Corvette has no problem moving through the air and it looks damn good moving and standing still. What happened to the Volt while it was in the wind tunnel…??? I mean, it has turned into a silver-gray bean with Bridgestone tires.
Why can’t it be great technology and sexy too…??? Please answer that question Mr. Lutz..!!! Why did you allow this tragedy…!!!??!!! Plus your asking me to fork over $40K for this thing…, please. I would think that styling is the easy part. Someone at GM please respond…!?! Mr. Lutz…!?!
———————————————————————
A Corvette starts at about $45,000 and seats two. It also gets less than half as much MPG as the Volt with the range extender.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:53 am)Actually, public acceptance will determine how much less imported energy we will require as a nation. The number of energy saving units on the road which can replace fuel guzzling vehicles is the primary mechanism by which we will be able to declare our energy independence. The Honda approach, due in large part to its low price, legendary quality and exceptional fuel efficiency, will likely be adopted in massive quantities and therefore make a massive difference. The low volume Volt, even though it will use even less petroleum, will not be as significant. The new Honda Insight makes it more clear than ever how much the Volt program looks like a “hail mary” pass!
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:53 am)This proves what I’ve been saying all along. Japanese car makers don’t make revolutionary new cars. They evolve cars that they have been making, and wait for other car makers to pave the way with new designs. So what you end up with from Honda is something like a Prius, only smaller and cheaper.
As for Honda’s statement that EVs “would have to carry 2 tons of battery, a weight he says that is “no good.””, this corresponds to a pure EV with 200 miles of range using NiMH batteries. Li/Ion batteries weigh half as much, and the Volt only has 40 miles of electric range, so the result is 0.2 tons, or 400 pounds.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:12 am)Honda seems to be happy to just continually tinker with the gasoline ICE’s making small improvements here and there. They haven’t been extremely successful with their hybrid offerings in the recent past which may play into their attitude at times. The Civic hybrid has been their only success in the hybrid arena, and even that has been quite the laggard when compared to the Prius and its sales success. The original Insight was a sales failure as well as the subsequent Accord hybrid.
Honda has been consistently resistant to the idea of EV’s–so has Toyota. Nissan’s Carlos Ghosn has been the only one Japan’s big 3 that has openly embraced EV’s, (see Project Better Place). This is hard to understand, at least for me. Honda usually is so forward thinking and big picture. Looking at their Clarity Fuel Cell vehicle, it’s wonderful technoology and a huge leap forward, yet it runs on a fuel that is very difficult and expensive to obtain. Then they turn around and practically ridicule GM for making an EV that runs on a fuel (electricity and gas for range extension) that is available everywhere.
IMO, GM is on the better path of the two with the E-flex idea. GM needs to saty focused and stick to their guns on this.
-1
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:13 am)All of this lamenting about the demise of the concept Volt and how disappointing the production version looks is becoming very tedious – it’s worse than the fuel cell debate. I know it has only been a couple of weeks since we first saw the production Volt, but enough already. Let’s all get on board with the reality of the new Volt and move on to something else.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:17 am)#18 hermant Says: “The low volume Volt, even though it will use even less petroleum, will not be as significant.”
————————————————————————————–
Who said the Volt will be low volume?
The Volt will cost $30K to $32K after tax credits. Over the life of the car, the gasoline savings of a Volt will offset the price difference over a Honda Civic.
Yes, GM will only sell 10,000 Volts in the first year. This is about what Toyota sold for the first year of the Prius. But as people begin to understand how the Volt works, and as GM reduces the manufacturing cost, sales will ramp much more quickly than the Prius.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:21 am)John #17 “Corvette has no problem moving through the air and it looks damn good moving and standing still.”
Don’t forget that the Corvette has a between 438 and 505 H/P (depending on the model) to push it through the air!!!! Put 500 H/P in a mini van and it will go……………
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:22 am)In the short term, Toyota has it right.
In the longer term, GM has the better strategy. (2011+)
The big question is, can Honda fit into the short/medium term mix? At a sub $20K price, I would think so.
I know I seem weird saying this with the price of WTI bouncing around $100/barrel, but, the fundamentals all point to a substantial rise in the near future and expensive fuel is the Volt’s friend.
LJGTVWOTR
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:22 am)John Says:
GM sticks with it, they will win the argument. It will take a long, long, long time, and they need to be profitable as soon as possible.
Only then will they have the money needed to amp up development.
I have a feeling this is the car GM will take the most development risks with.
——————————————————————————
I really hope for GM success on this car too. More so that it will show other car companies that this kind of car is finically doable. Plus, if the Volt is successful GM will put this tech in more and more vehicles. (Personally I would love a EREV Vue, I know the 2 mode plug in is coming) But as to your comment John: They will have plenty of cash available. I truly believe that this has been part of GM’s plan to receive federal loans at a cheap rate. So you and I will be paying for the volts development and re-tooling cost. Don’t get me wrong I won’t be that upset if $500 million of our tax dollars went to a good cause for a change and anything that will help us from giving billions of dollars to people that want to see us all dead, makes me happy!!!!
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:23 am)At 50 mpg and $3.50 per gallon gas, it still costs 7 cents per mile for energy in a hybrid.
At 5 miles per kWh, and 10 cents per kWh (average US rate), its only 2 cents per mile for energy for the Volt.
Although these numbers don’t justify a large price premium today, if war breaks out in the Middle East and gasoline goes to $10 per gallon, then hybrids will become the new “gas-guzzlers” and E-REV will be the drivetrain of choice.
I agree with #6 JME III, and further comment that denial is not a river in Egypt.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:30 am)I’m sure that Honda is working on EVs that are not publicized. Since they already have a better image than GM they can focus on affordability and profit, while GM seems to be looking for something that will give their image a makeover. Honda probably doesn’t see a lot of sales for a $40k car the size of a Civic, but you can bet that the minute the tech becomes cheap enough to make a profit, they will unveil the EV that they have been working on all along.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:33 am)I think the E-Flex is a courageous path for GM to begin. I think the Volt styling is just horrible. I never thought I would say it but the Prius and especially the Insight look much cooler. Still they could be better. Just give me a nice organic non forced design like a VW Golf 6 with an e-flex drive.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:33 am)The Volt and the Insight do look a lot alike, don’t they. I guess there aren’t may ways to reduce drag. Stick a car in the wind tunnel, Shave a little here, round it a little there and stop when you get the numbers you want. Ta Da! You get the same shape as every body else who tried to do the same thing. It turns out that “styling” is a major hit in the efficiency. Remember that every extra MPC that you get by modifying the shape is free.
Adding more battery or more energy density per unit volume or weight costs real $ that goes straight to the bottom line. The “out the door” price of the Volt jumped over $10,000 during development. I believe that they would have been thrilled to make a mid-$20K car but the technology just isn’t there yet.
Since you can’t make a $20K electric car, Honda is probably right. The masses won’t be able to afford a Volt. When (note that I say when not if.) the price of Li/Ion batteries drops to less than $3000, than the E-flex technology is really going to take off. GM is going to sell a lot more E-flex Cobolt type cars than they will ever sell Volts.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:43 am)John Says:
September 11th, 2008 at 6:52 am
A Corvette starts at about $45,000 and seats two. It also gets less than half as much MPG as the Volt with the range extender.
———————————–
Granted John.., I’m referencing the wrong model car (Corvette). Why can’t it at least look as good as an “Lincoln MKS”…??? It is going for under $40K and the styling is spot on for a four (4) door 5 seater that has alot of style going for itself.
Mind you, I really want this car to be a success for GM and the US. GM has the right technology going for it. It is a very practical and forward thinking measure. Yes, a moonshot that will hit its mark just as JFK asked of America and it was made so. NASA followed JFK’s request and they were sexy while doing it.
I mean lets be real about this, “gas stinks and electricity is oderless”.
It is just a clean car (Volt) in every way compared to the Honda or the Toyota but I want to look good in it too. You catch me…??!!??
Maybe the PICs are not doing the car justice. I have seen cars in person and have been very impressed. Sometimes the press make a mess of the PICs. I have the funds for the car set aside now. Hopefully in the showroom the car just jumps out and grabs my wallet.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:46 am)The problem wth the question is that it depends upon the time frame.
Are you talking now, or 3 to 5 years from now, when battery prices will certainly be significantly lower. How much lower? Over 50%, according to A123 System execs. Regardless of price, if you goal is to use as little liquid fuel as possible, then the Honda is simply not competitive – it will consume roughly 8 to 9 times more fuel as a commuter and probably roughly the same doing non-commuting duties. Figure something like $1200 to $1300 per year fuel savings with the Volt over the Insight, based on 12,000 mile per year driving rate.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:57 am)#22, Dave G, writes: “The Volt will cost $30K to $32K after tax credits. Over the life of the car, the gasoline savings of a Volt will offset the price difference over a Honda Civic.”
First, you’re assuming tax credits that don’t exist yet and who-know-what for a price. Second, people rarely put up a lot of cash for a payback that takes more than three years. Improving one’s home insulation and furnace usually offers a pretty good payback… and it’s rarely done. Depending on how you measure it, the payback for a Volt over a $22K Prius is somewhere between 10 years and never.
Dave G continues, “Yes, GM will only sell 10,000 Volts in the first year. This is about what Toyota sold for the first year of the Prius. But as people begin to understand how the Volt works, and as GM reduces the manufacturing cost, sales will ramp much more quickly than the Prius.”
And your evidence for this ramp is…? GM projects only 60K in 2012 and it’s not a given that they’ll make that. They’ve never ramped production of their current hybrids. And your example that the Prius sold in low volume… that was here in the US in 2001. Add in the volume sold in JDM and the Prius volume is much more significant. And that was 10 years before the Volt hits the road. Hybrids are commonplace. The time for respecting the pioneers has long past… this is mainstream, now. GM must offer volume quickly. The 10K the first year is pretty close to a joke.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:58 am)I viewed the Insight pictures earlier today on another site and was thinking it was one sharp looking car. And at 70 mpg (est), less than $20k, I might consider it in 2 years. But on this anniversary of 9/11, I am still extremely pissed at the animals that attacked the USA, and to those who still harbor them behind the veil of “religion”. The sooner I can stop sending money to the middle east the better. The Volt will make that happen. I will find a way to afford it.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:00 am)Being the number one ICE manufacturer in the world, Honda will say what they need to. When the Volt changes the rules of the game, look for Honda to buy a battery company or retool to make electric motors.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:01 am)The Volt’s contribution to reducing oil dependence is negligible for the foreseeable future. The impact of a 50-60mpg Insight selling 100K/year or the million Priuses already on the road and the ramp up of the Prius to 300K+ per year in 2009 will have a more dramatic effect than the first few years of Volt production even before the first 10K Volts hit the street in 2011.
A highly fuel-efficient car available NOW is more important than one available in 2 years.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:05 am)How much extra do I want to pay for the Volt (which is cooler than the Honda for many reasons; 50:50 weight, low CG, electric torque, cool interface, Electric cool factor in general, uses less gas and oil, not made in Japan…)
This is the question that will be asked by many (This is the question I will be asking anyway). And not just for the Volt vs. Honda but also for the Volt vs. Cruze (very similar cars on same platform).
Ignoring the future value of money (This is a blog, not a spreadsheet)
Assuming…
Honda gets 50 mpg and you get it on the road for $20K
Volt gets 150 mpg and you get it on the road for $35K
(based on my daily commute and no plug at work)
Drive 15K miles per year/ gas is $5 per gallon
Honda would use 300 gallons per year
Volt uses 100 per year and needs 250 charges at $1
After 10 years and 150K miles, Volt costs an extra $7500
Actually more if you apply future value of money and/or gas were less. Your mileage may differ and all other caveats.
So now I have to think, over the life of my car, do I want to spend an additional $7,500 or more to have the volt over the Honda (actually the cruze in my case).
I would sit down and add it up.
I would credit some of the following
Performance and handling +$1500
Cool Electric Factor $+2000 ( I would easily spend that much extra)
Nice interface $+500 (an assumption it will be better)
So using less gas and trying to send less money to the oil market (read between the lines – nutcases in the middle east and Venezuala) will cost me $3500 (plus future value of money) over the 10 year life of the car.
I will definitely be considering it. The test drive better be good.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:09 am)#28
In 3 to 5 years, banking the savings that you would have from buying the $18,500 Honda Insight, you would be over $22,000 ahead of the first Volt, financially speaking. At $1300 per year in fuels savings and assuming a zero percent interest rate, it would only take SEVENTEEN YEARS of Volt ownership to break even.
The problem with the Volt versus the Insight question is that almost no one among the masses thinks like an eco-geek who will do almost anything to avoid imported oil. Most folks among the masses think with their pocketbooks and will not even consider the Volt given its current parameters.
The right question to be asking yourself is how long do you think it will take before Volt technology is as cost effective as the Honda Insight’s technology. That is when the masses will choose the Volt approach and that’s just about when Honda will introduce their first plug-in hybrid.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:13 am)Who has it right? Time will tell. Both to some degree. Anytime a new tech tries to invade and displace old established technology it has resistance to overcome and when it is much more expensive the resistance is huge.
So basically Honda is taking the smart safe sure thing route and GM is taking the all out full speed ahead damn the torpedos approach.
In these type of situations often half of the people trumpeting the advantages of the new tech end up buying the low tech option due to cost. They want the new tech but just can’t see forking over the money when it comes right down to it.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:14 am)I think the answer is “both.” In the long term, gas-electric hybrids may be an interim step on the road to ending dependence on oil, but there’s no value in bashing them today. Even if the Volt “only” costs around $35K, it will be beyond the means of many, many consumers. A $20K Honda Insight will be more affordable for their budgets. Let’s discuss – or even disagree – on such topics by respecting one another’s opinions.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:19 am)GM needs this car.
They need to redeem themselves from the EV1 albatross.
They need to convince people they can make cars that address the energy crisis.
They need to give their employees a rallying point after so much recent turmoil.
Once it accomplishes this first milestone, GM should slowly build on its success. I don’t think trying to do anything except build the volt is warranted. Do it on time, make it a good product, and win back some of the goodwill lost.
Battery technology will come. I liken it to the introduction of the PC and 8086 processor. It was an important first step, but by no measure a reflection of WHAT IS POSSIBLE. Let’s revisit this thread in 10 years. With any luck, we’ll be able to buy electric vehicles with 400 mile ranges, in various sizes and shapes
, at a cost effective price. GM is doing the right thing.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:21 am)I’m not a car designer, but I must say painting the doors black just below the windows is a poor attempt to replicate the concept Volts glass door tops. The other design queue that’s missing is the slant of the door openings. I don’t think the door slant affects CFD numbers, but does give a sportier look to the car. The lines on the production Volt just don’t follow through as they do on the concept. I guess version one of any new car need to leave room for improvement in version two. Regardless I still want a version one Volt.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:22 am)Just some things I have to clear up:
1) I was promised a sporty-LOOKING car, not a sports car, by the pictures of the Volt concept. Then, I was victimized by GM’s bait-and-switch, and the car I fell in love with is dead, gone, history.
2) It is clear to me that the majority of the posters HERE AND ONLY HERE prefer the production Volt, solely because they hate buying gasoline. Looks are unimportant to these posters.
3) The production Volt fans appear to be deathly afraid of anti-production Volt comments. My best guess – they are afraid a redesign would delay the Volt even longer than November 2010.
4) Would you PLEASE stop saying LJGTVWOTR ? No matter how many times you post this, it’s NOT going to speed up the Volt’s launch date – 26 months to go is still 26 months to go, no matter how many times to say LJGTVWOTR.
5) #61 biodieseiljeep (from the previous article) has a point – how many people outside of the GM-Volt.com fanboys here, who make enough to afford a Volt, really hate buying gasoline enough to buy a plain looking Volt ? If you can afford a $40,000 car, chances are good you might buy a Lexus hybrid before buying a Volt. Most people outside of GM-Volt.com who CAN afford a $40,000 car are not part of the “never buy a drop of oil again” crowd. They aren’t hurting for gas money, and style IS important to them. It would be interesting to see an independent national poll on the Volt, instead of Lyle’s famous “disappearing” poll. (Sorry Lyle, but you left no doubt what side of the Volt style issue you’re on).
6) If the posters here really hate gasoline so much, CNG is a wonderful, clean, USA produced fuel. CNG is easier to handle than hydrogen, and could be in every filling station in a year if Congress would simply mandate it. BTW, your Volt’s CNG would NEVER go bad, unlike gasoline. Go, T. Boone !
PS – I want the Volt to succeed. I just believe that having a boring looking Volt is NOT a good way to increase sales. My God, it looks almost exactly like the Honda (above). But the wind tunnel has spoken – and the concept Volt is history.
It’s going to take me a while to get over GM’s betrayal of the fans of the concept Volt. I’m still in the greiving process – I’ve worked my way through disbelief, working on anger now, and eventually grief will pass, and I will reach acceptance (hopefully) in the 26 months until the Volt launch. In the meantime, there’s always the Honda Fit, comfortably under $20,000. It will keep me mobile until November 2010.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:25 am)I actually like the Honda Insight’s front end design better than the Volt’s. It’s bold and highly distinctive, yet it looks quite a bit like Honda’s most advanced (and most expensive) high-tech hydrogen car, the FCX Clarity —darned good marketing! See the photo here….
http://www.thetorquereport.com/la_auto_show_honda_fcx_clarity_image001.jpg
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:27 am)Reply to MMCC
“The sooner I can stop sending money to the middle east the better. The Volt will make that happen. I will find a way to afford it.”
I say AMEN BROTHER!!
I live for the day when I no longer have to send tens of thousands of dollars anually to people whom I despise.
I think Honda & Toyota don’t realize what GM does. The growing resentment of US consumers being screwed everytime they fill up.
9-11 isn’t forgotten, I hope it never is!
BDP
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:27 am)GM seems wedded to 40 miles per battery charge.
What about 20 miles per charge and half the battery pack, allowing for reduced cost? I drive 20 miles round trip to work and back home, so it would work for me.
What about 10 miles per charge, making it even less costly and still allowing for local errands before the charger kicks in?
wgc
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:28 am)Wow…it’s amazing how much the Honda insight and Volt look so similar.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:33 am)A side note. I showed my highschool aged daughter the concept Volt vs production volt photos. She clearly liked the production model. She thought the concept looked stupid. It was a no brainer for her.
Just making the point that GM is not totally crazy. They are selling to the population at large and not just to guys who hang out on a websited devoted to the Volt concept car.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:33 am)The smart approach is the right product for the right time. There is no reason that Honda can’t have a sub 20K Insight out in the next 1/2 year and a cost-effective electric car when the time is right.
Honda’s approach is based on 30 years of leading all automakers in dedication and effectiveness of efficiency. GM’s approach is based on GM missing the boat for hybrids and trying to make up for it by forcing electric cars too soon. This is GM forcing the Volt to be a “moon shot” because GM is forcing it too soon for the price and effectiveness of batteries.
Honda’s (and Toyota’s) approach will lead to millions of hybrids on the road (and saving gas) by the time GM hits a small fraction of that. In that way the Volt actually uses more gas than Honda/Toyota’s hybrids.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:36 am)Further to my post #21 Gustav and Ike are not helping. Emphasis mine.
Summary of Weekly Petroleum Data for the Week Ending September 5, 2008
U.S. crude oil refinery inputs averaged nearly 13.5 million barrels per day
during the week ending September 5, down about 1.8 million barrels per day from the previous week’s average. Refineries operated at 78.3 percent of their operable capacity last week. Gasoline production fell last week, averaging about 8.4 million barrels per day. Distillate fuel production decreased last week, averaging 3.9 million barrels per day.
U.S. crude oil imports averaged nearly 8.6 million barrels per day last week, down 1.2 million barrels per day from the previous week. Over the last four weeks, crude oil imports have averaged 9.8 million barrels per day, 470 thousand barrels per day below the same four-week period last year. Total motor gasoline imports (including both finished gasoline and gasoline blending components) last week averaged 1.1 million barrels per day. Distillate fuel imports averaged 117 thousand barrels per day last week.
U.S. commercial crude oil inventories (excluding those in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve) decreased by 5.9 million barrels from the previous week. At 298.0 million barrels, U.S. crude oil inventories are in the lower half of the average range for this time of year. Total motor gasoline inventories decreased by 6.5 million barrels last week, and are below the lower boundary of the average range. Both finished gasoline inventories and gasoline blending components inventories decreased last week. Distillate fuel inventories decreased by 1.2 million barrels, and are in the middle of the average range for this time of year. Propane/propylene inventories increased by 1.6 million barrels last week but remain below the lower limit of the average range. Total commercial petroleum inventories decreased by 15.2 million barrels last week, and are in the lower half of the average range for this time of year.
Source:http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/weekly_petroleum_status_report/current/txt/wpsr.txt
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:38 am)“to get the performance of an Accord, the car would have to carry 2 tons of battery”
This guy obviously has never heard of theTesla Roadster…
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:39 am)The the questions are:
Who’s Got it Right, GM or Honda?
So the argument is: Go with something simple and proven and reduce its price, or take the risk and go for new bold technology that might be more expensive at first?
—————
It would be tough for this question to be more leading? ‘simple and proven’ or ‘new and bold’ It practically says, ‘How could any moron go with Honda?’
I didn’t realize that making a car that gets 60MPG, priced at $18,500, that looks like the Volt’s cousin and is available in 6 months was ‘simple and proven’. GM must have several of these ‘simple/proven’ models in their lineup then? Here is GM’s lineup, go ahead, pick the car to compare to it:
http://www.gm.com/vehicles/?evar10=homepage_vehicles_link
I find it ironic that we have had like a ton of articles here on the Cruze at 40+MPG and how fantastic it is, ushering in the “new GM”
The fact that a 18K Honda is even being put up against a 40K Volt, shows that Honda is right.
Honda NA sales were off 7% in August, but still up 1% for the year. They have 11 consecutive years of sales increases. They saw what the market was doing and where it was trending, and reacted with the perfect product–a hybrid without hybrid premiums. 100K (of 200K production) of these out in NA, which would give them a 6.5% year over year increase on just this model ALONE. They are to be faulted for this?
All we get from GM is Wagoner getting interviewed by CNN sitting beside a Cobalt line throwing his hands up saying, “No one expected it (except for Toyota, Honda and Nissan), so our incompetance is acceptable. We think it might be levelling off and we hope it comes back in 2009 or we are out of money. We have some really great products that might be coming out late 2010…and we are planning to sell 100,000 Volts in 2013.
If you think when battery tech is readily available and viable (think 2013ish) that Honda won’t be a player, your are wrong. There is no loyalty in the auto business, no ‘I win’ sticker for being first…and they have a market cap of 120 billion, and made 6 billion last year. They have deep pockets, they don’t need assistance, they can be to market at their whim.
All they are saying is battery tech is still too far off to make electric cars a mass saleable/profitable product, if others want to take bullets thats fine with thim…while they sell the tar out of least expensive 60MPG hybrid of all time.
They are right too, there is no infrastructure for any automaker to get more than 10K out by the end of 2011 and no one is going to make any money on them during that time either.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:46 am)Separated at birth.
You could basically SWAP the glass on these cars, that’s how close they are.
Though similar, if I had to choose on looks, the Insight wins.
You want a aerodynamic car that is small and looks good? Try a VW Jetta from 99-04. Girl car? sure. But still geeko-agressive-sexy.
I don’t need the concept. I just need a car that looks interesting. Heck, a Mini is interesting. A Smart is interesting. Volt is a yawn-fest.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:47 am)I suppose that it is appropriate to discuss 2 major automakers attempting to become more successful in the hybrid market, but one automaker has been more successful than all others combined…Toyota.
The question is…EV or not to EV? GM loves the comment…”We make vehicles people want.” Sounds like a good strategy, but it seems to me that large percentage of their models should be “vehicles people NEED”. It is tough convincing people that they need a new vehicle…especially if a slightly used one costs thousands less.
- Do people need a $40K+ EREV or $20K hybrid that gets 50mpg? Affordable price points for vehicles and fuel are a need.
- People need a vehicle with low depreciation (Honda is successful at this one).
- People need a reliable vehicle.
- People need a “home appliance” vehicle (aka low cost to use and maintain).
All that said…EREV is a need, but so is more affordable hybrids.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:50 am)Does the Tesla battery weigh 2 tons? Does it perform worse than an accord? What a fricken joke. That’s the sound of someone saying “Oh crap who’s going to want our cheap knockoff prius (I’ve got a prius and can’t tell the difference) when the volt comes out?” They just spent a lot of money stealing Toyota’s design. Now Toyota is getting a bigger battery in 2010 and making it a plug in and GM is making the volt. Where does that leave Honda? with a 386 at half the price of a pentium 4.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:51 am)#39
“CNG is a wonderful, clean, USA produced fuel”
x2
When house shopping this spring don’t think a natural gas supply won’t be a selling point.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:56 am)Man, the production version of the Volt looks much nicer and more marketable than the concept. I’m not a big fan of the “quasi-futuristic” Speedracer look. Am I the only one to notice that those bold Chrysler models (300, specifically) from 4-5 years ago look a little more dated today? And the Volt looks much nicer than the Honda “doorstop” shown above. Of course, there are those who for some reason will interpret this as some sort of rationalization from a GM fan. Nope, just an honest opinion.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:59 am)#44 nuclearboy – Boy was I wrong! I didn’t realize production Volt had captured the demographic of 15 year old schoolgirls who can afford a $40,000 EREV. The Volt’s success is now assured ! Huzzah !
——————————————-
This is EXACTLY why GM needs to conduct a REAL nationwide poll, run by an independent polling firm, to see exactly who would buy the production Volt. Does the styling of a car affect it’s sales ? Absolutely. We need demographics on who can afford a Volt, and how many of these potential buyers WOULD buy a production Volt. How many people in the Volt sales target demographic actually understand how the Volt works ?
Taking a poll here at GM-Volt.com is like preaching to the faithful. Independent national poll, please !
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:00 am)“[Masaaki Kato ] claims EVs will only be useful as neighborhood runabouts”
If GM can make a 40-mile runabout that has a range extender, at a decent price, I’m all over that “shot.”
GlobeandMail by Jeremey Cato leans to Honda’s simple approach because he says GM’s approach is riskier. Well, high risk can lead to high rewards. IF GM can pull this off, Jeremey Cato should eat his words.
p.s., I haven’t heard about EESTOR in a while.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:07 am)Autobloggreen has an interesting article, claims
quote Forster also told reporters that GM wil start building actual prototype Volts with production intent hardware this month and hopes to have 50 cars completed by the end of the year. unquote
That sounds very good for on time delivery, maybe a small fleet of test cars released to the public in early 2010? One can wish.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/09/11/gm-confirms-plans-to-sell-er-evs-in-europe-in-2011-50-volt-prot/#comments
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:13 am)Both have it right. These are very different cars and each will have a strong market.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:15 am)#54 The Grump
“… We need demographics on who can afford a Volt …”
Yes, we do, but … first we need to know what it’s really going to cost. We’re heard from “Comfortably under $30K” to “In the $40′s”. Gm has made no statement that “The Volt will cost X US Dollars”. Until we know that number (X), we’re all just guessing.
With trade-in and money I’m saving up, I believe I should be able to realistically afford something in the low, to maybe mid $30K’s (with a small loan, not the $800/mo people have been mentioning in the past threads) when the time comes. But in all honesty … I have no idea because I have no idea what it’s really going to cost.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:19 am)mmcc #30 says,
But on this anniversary of 9/11, I am still extremely pissed at the animals that attacked the USA, and to those who still harbor them behind the veil of “religion”. The sooner I can stop sending money to the middle east the better.
—-
You are not alone thinking that way. I could say more, but you did fine with it.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:20 am)Honda is right in the short term. BUT, GM is right in the long term.
Hard to believe an American company with long term views
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:21 am)#54 Grump.
I am just pointing out that the people on this site are not a good representation of what Americans want. My wife for instance, who could buy the Volt tommorow if it were available, also likes the production model too. I would just suggest that the highschool kids are more likely to define what’s cool in our pop culture nowadays and thats why I noted my daughter in the post.
If all I looked at were this site, I would swear that the Prius was a collossal failure. No one would buy this ugly peice car and Toyo could not give them away. The problem is, In Howard County, MD, I am seeing Prius’ everywhere I look. Clearly the views on this site should not be used for marketing.
I also reiterate my point from yesterday. The volt V1.0 is really not a car for the masses. It is a car to lure more people into chevy dealers. They hope to sell you a Cruze or whatever that little model is they sell. Better yet, now that you showed up you can sit in the Malibu or Impalla. You want a tough looking car, here, sit in the Camaro.
The hope is that people will see GM in a different light. The Volt is a great start. Follow through on the Beat, Cruze and equivalents. Get Two-mode hybrids in more cars. The Volt will help bring people into the showroom who may have never considered GM.
Dealers need to pre-order that 175 foot tall inflateable gorilla with the “electric car is here” sign to install outside of the dealership so they can blow it up at the end of 2011.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:21 am)#9 ..
I hear you man. I love the Volt, but I was hoping for the cool looking Chopped style of the prototype. Having said that, I think the Volt is the better option because the Honda does not change America’s dependence on oil, it only defers it to a later date. The Volt doesn’t either, but it has the potential and gets us ALOT closer to that goal.
#33 NuclearBoy.
Your numbers look great and I agree with your assesment completely, but there is one other wild card that makes me like the Volt over a traditional Hybrid. The Volt does not change our dependence on oil at first, but it makes a MUCH BIGGER step in that direction and it is a platform that has the potential to get us damn near completely off gas usage. In 10 yrs, if you have to buy a new battery pack for your Volt do you think it will carry your car 40 miles on a charge..? 50 miles…? Maybe 70 miles..? As the battery technology evolves, your Volt’s range can grow with it. Assuming GM builds a good platform.
If I decide to buy a Volt I do so knowing the risk, but I also have some hope that my Volt can be given to my daughter in 10 yrs as her college car and it will have a new batter pack that takes her WAAAY beyond 40 miles for a charge. 100 miles would be so assume in 10 yrs..
Just for reference my 2 cars are a 1987 Jeep Grand Wagoneer and a 2001 F150,….. so Yes I do keep cars 10 + yrs. My son is taking the truck to college in 5 yrs.. So I need a new car in 2011ish time frame and the Volt is appealing, but price, government tax incentives and my total distain for how America has become a hostage to gas/oil are all factors.
One last small factor. I HATE going to gas stations. I would love to cruise 1500 miles without stopping. And that is statistically what I expect to get per tank with a Volt.
Go Volt
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:36 am)Guys..
Dont get upset about the volt exterior. We havent seen the pics in all the angles. It may look good in flesh than in pics. Please reserve your judgement till you see the VOLT in detail in all the angles.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:38 am)Im sure they tested the concept and were not imppressed with the results.
Just like cylinder deactivation…ford isnt doing it because they say it doesnt work. Chrysler is doing it claiming it works wonderfully.
The truth: A dodge ram pickup doesnt get any better gas mileage than the ford.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:40 am)JB #43 says,
Wow…it’s amazing how much the Honda insight and Volt look so similar.
———–
Funny. I was thinking how much the Insight looks like the Prius.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:41 am)#35, #36, #57
Agree, they both have it right. THere is no one size fits all auto (Model T RIP). GM should be making both…the Volt and something Insight-like with super high MPG and low price. If everyone drove one or the other we’d probably be able to easily survive on domestic oil production.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:43 am)You must all remember, with the Volt we are cutting use of oil but we are also cutting out the foreign car market (perception of course) but the term “Made in America” can stick with the Volt like glue. Since GM, Ford and yes even Chyrsler have improved quility this may become a powerful term again. Toyota and Nissan can’t ever use that term. It still has power to persuade buyers. With the Volt being built in America and getting off the use of oil, GM has a good marketing tool. Now will they capitalize on it?
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:44 am)This is for all who come up with a price tag of $22,000 for a Prius for cost comparision purposes.
That number is published on their website for the base model but is not the reality. Last weekend I was at a local Toyota dealer asking for Prius and he told me the company ships Priuses with some minimum options on them and they have no say over what they get. Since the demand remains so high the customers are waiting in line (8 to 12 months long waitlist in the midewest) to grab whatever they can get after that wait period.
All said and done he said expect to pay between $25,000 and $30,000 when you get your car.
I checked for a used a year or two old Prius with low mileage (first, they are hard to find as no one wants to sell them) and it was the same story – a range of between $25,000 and $30,000.
My point is – coming up with that low price ($22,000) for a Prius skews up the comparision a lot in favor of the Prius.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:46 am)Any parallel hybrid doesn’t cut it for me, you are better off with a compact car.
For me series hybrid or full EV is the way to go and I will embrace any car that can provide that. In the next 2 years, I could afford a Fisker, but the support network isn’t there. So the Volt it is.
Honda’s proposal for a cheap parallel Hybrid is only an excuse to surf on the green wave. You find better compact car outperforming this car (even within Honda offer).
Close 50 mpg from a 100% ICE isn’t that rare these days and more are coming providing a better offer then the current Pruis or that future Honda (The Cruze being one).
So if you really want to the top green car in 2 years, you need a car that provide more then that, the Volt or any series hybrid will beat that by saying… NO MORE GAS for 95% of your need. If you need to go further, the ICE will top off the battery.
Battery will continu to improve (and fast) meaning in 3 to 4 years, series hybrid will be even more attractive, as for parrallel hybrid, they can’t get much more from the ICE, so as for the next Prius, they had a bigger battery and a plug… hell better go all the way and do a series hybrid….
I want it red.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:57 am)Dang! That Honda Insight is one Mugly Other!
The production Volt, while incredibly mommyfied with the redesign, is still a lot better looking than the Insight.
My question is … are they going after the right market? Mommies want minivans and typically don’t spend over $25K for a car, no matterwhat. If they’d kept the edgy look they’d attract all those who will spend extra for a sports car, and although the Volt is not supposed to be a sports car it certainly is priced like one and started out with looks to attract that crowd.
Anyway, serial vs parrallel, I say serial because I hate combustion, and although the serial has an ICE, I’m suspecting it will last forever with very little maintenance compared to a normal car. Besides, I’ll drive less than 40 mi/day almost every day so the Volt makes more sense. I think if you frequently drove long distances the Insight might be better even in the long run. Not for me though.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:58 am)Conventional Japanese philosophy, nothing new to see here. I’m not slamming that by any means; this has served them very well in the past.
If you want a Camry-size vehicle, for 5 people, to perform like the Camry (including range), I think 2 tons is optimistic. But the Honda spokesman clearly does not “get” the all-important Volt premise: Use electric power for the most common type of driving: short range commuting, and use gasoline for the rest.
I don’t think his comments were a slam against the Volt, and GM, as much as they are against Toyota; which has stepped a bit beyond the traditional Asian carmaking wisdom with the plug-in Prius. I think Honda would just love to surpass Toyota as the primo Japanese carmaker; especially by out-Toyota-ing Toyota.
It’s a great big highway out there, there’s room for both approaches, IMO.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:00 am)One thing I noticed in the picture above is that both the Honda and the Volt both are starting to resemble a bullet more. That’s the most aerodynamic shape there is. That’s why the trains in Japan are called bullet trains.
http://www.destination360.com/asia/japan/images/s/japan-train.jpg
I think GM’s designers should get on the computer and look at a lot of different aerodynamic shapes … cars, trains, submarines, jets, fish … whatever. They might just stumble across the perfect design that gets the aerodynamic numbers they’re looking for AND looks good. As cool looking as the Corvette if possible.
Maybe they can use this bullet train as a starting point. They can’t have a pointed nose on the hood for safety reasons though.
http://www.rampantscotland.com/graphics/bullet_train1a.jpg
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:13 am)69 frankyB – Exactly what ICE only car gets 50 MPG ? (I’ll have one of what frankyB is drinking – make it two, shaken, with ice)
————————————————————————-
61 NuclearBoy – What I’m trying to say is this:
GM needs to know how many potential Volt buyers in places like Des Moines, IA – Bangor, ME – Winter Garden, FL – Boise, ID – and Sacramento, CA believe the Volt is only a BEV, and only goes 40 miles – period.
I want the Volt to succeed. There is still a lot of misinformation out there – GM needs to know who the potential Volt customers are, where they are, and how much education is needed to get them into the GM dealership to demand a Volt.
The little polls taken here at the GM-Volt.com site don’t mean much, because we wouldn’t be here if we weren’t interested in the Volt. Only a comprehensive nationwide poll can truly assess if the Volt will succeed wildly, or become a niche car like the original Honda Insight.
The new Insight, at $18,000+, is simply too good to pass up. GM needs to wake up and ask the potential customers what they think about the new Volt. Honda already knows it’s customers – “Build a quality car, build it affordable, with good mileage, and sell it at a reasonable price”. That’s why they succeed.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:14 am)Someone said that the only thing that could kill the electric car was cheap gas.?
http://blogs.moneycentral.msn.com/topstocks/archive/2008/09/11/the-death-of-opec.aspx
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:17 am)They are both correct. GM needs a fantastic Hybrid everyone can afford.
GM also needs the Volt and the technology spread throughout the product lines.
By the way did these guys Honda and GM use the same wind tunnel and software to come up with an aerodynamic shape.
Some one pahleeeze figure out a way to flow air smoothly around muscular wheel wells and wide tires with wheels that have depth and design.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:17 am)Wow, I’m surprised at Honda’s take on EV’s.
This is very unusual indeed; after all, its the American car companies who are notorious for being short-sighted & known for ignoring market demographics, requiring hefty Federal bail-outs to stay solvent.
Sounds to me like Honda is getting a little to top-heavy.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:20 am)If Honda wants to lose market share its their right.
They could always go back to where they started, selling mopeds.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:22 am)#39 TheGrump – We already import significant natural gas (mostly from Canada). If we converted our fleet to CNG we’d soon be right back in the same boat. That said, CNG for fleet vehicles is a great idea and could play a role in reducing oil imports.
#42 Wgc – if you halve the battery pack you halve the power and battery life. 0-60 in 15 seconds and battery replacement at 75k miles doesn’t cut it.
#48 Statik – do you have a link for 60 mpg Insight? Sounds high considering their architecture. Also, has anyone seen Insight dimensions? I’m pretty sure it will be smaller than Civic; a good niche but probably in a completely different class than Prius, Volt, etc. I can’t find any hard numbers, though.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:29 am)EV technology is a crucial technology that needs to start to be development and perfected. GM is on the right path towards developing and implementing the technology.
The problem, however, lies in the notion that the Volt will not make any significant difference in the transportation over the next 10 years or so. Even though GM is trying to be the leader and the innovator they are failing when it comes to capturing the current market. They need a $20,000 hybrid vehicle like the Prius or Insight to capture the current market that wants an affordable car that will cut their fuel usage in half. They don’t currently have that and the Cruze won’t be coming to NA fast enough and likely won’t offer the fuel economy of a Prius or Insight despite offering very good fuel economy.
Looking towards the future is great but you have to start by establishing a good position in the present.
Many people are concerned with oil consumption and lowering the dependance on foreign oil. It’s not going to happen overnight and it not going to happen with any one product or solution. It will be a slow process which encompasses many products and changes. It starts with what we are seeing now. More fuel efficient vehicles, such as hybrids and other high mileage conventional vehicles. It also starts with drivers altering their consumption patterns to use less fuel. These are the easy things to do. Further innovation will get us closer and the need for “backstop” technology is crucial.
The positive in Toyota and Honda’s approach is that they are developing backstop technology, ie. hybrids. GM is involved in these technologies as well but not to the same degree. Honda and Toyota can work concurrently on EV and hybrid technology and slowly build it up and implement it. GM is going strongly into EV technology and should they fail or not implement it well enough I don’t think they have a very supportive safety net.
I think both Honda and GM are working on positive solutions but with different approaches and different risk and corporate strategies. It will be interesting to see which venture pays off better.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:33 am)Well, he’s right: electric vehicles are pretty much unsellable. I’ll not buy one, because, frankly, a one-shot handful-of-miles range is very inconvenient and potentially scary. It could be a second commute-only car, but that’s a lot of extra money and space, and just generally lame. Count me out.
But the Volt’s not an EV, and it doesn’t have those problems, while it DOES have an EV’s advantages. So: cool.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:38 am)On Volt Sytling: In 2006 GM made a last-minute decision to launch E-Flex at the 2007 Detroit Show. With no time to build a new car, GM pulled a rolling shell from their concept car pipeline and slapped a cord on it. Originally intended to showcase advanced plastics and such, this impractical schoolboy notebook sketch of a concept was never intended for production. Anyone who thought this design would survive the wind tunnel simply was not paying attention. I said long ago the production Volt would look like a Prius with a couple small styling cues from the concept.
The Volt’s only issue is price. If it really costs $40k+ to build a small, four passenger EREV then Volt and E-Flex are doomed. If $40k is heavily padded (e.g. warranty cost based on 100% battery failure rate) to help get gov’t tax credits, distract competitors, etc. then the Volt’s styling is just fine.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:38 am)I was just curious about the Insight.
If they are selling these in the US in the spring of ’09 as the official website states, why are they showing a concept car at the Paris autoshow in Oct.?
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:41 am)I’m becoming more and more disappointed in Honda. Obviously they know how to make money and they are making advances in EV and fuel cell technology, but why not push this technology to the public rather than swim in ICE profits as long as possible. I am already upset about all of the money they are wasting on the Clarity. I understand that the Clarity earns Honda ZEV credits in CA and gives them green credit, but with the world moving into an energy crisis, why waste money on much more expesive, much less efficient, fuel cell technology when their engineers have to know that EVs are the better solution. Imagine what a company like Tesla Motors could do with all the millions wasted by Honda in leasing their small fleet of Claritys. Anyway, I’ve never owned an American car, but I will now consider GM, even if I can’t afford the Volt, simply because I think they are making the better decision.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:43 am)#33 nuclearboy – Great job of laying out the factors that go into the decision. Just as an aside: The Volt will be way more fun to drive. The Prius and the Insight are\will be somewhat tedious – to make sure the ICE doesn’t kick in immediately during city driving you need a really light foot. Not the end of the world but I’d love to get back to zipping from red lights. LOL
But in the end your decision is not going to have anything to do with what’s in your decision table. The real reason the Volt is going to sell is the tech. In tech the best gets all the attention and the market share, and the Volt will have the cool tech. The financial idea is more like spend $40K and get a cool EV or spend $28K and get yesterday’s battery assist ICE. Lutz has it right — we’re talking desires not needs. For needs a Prius or Insight will do. I want a Volt.
As for numbers, CA is headed for a million homeowners having solar systems on their roofs. These are not cost effective but it’s taking four or five months to get them installed because of the demand. Most things in life are not financially driven.
#68 Vats – Thank you for pointing out the fact that a Prius is $28K. I’m not sure it changes the spread terribly. The Prius at $28K and the Volt at $40K isn’t all that much different than a Prius at $20K and a Volt at $35K. But it’s far more realistic.
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:53 am)Just to clarify…
Honda isn’t losing market share to anyone; they’re taking it away from every other car maker on the planet… including Toyota. And they’re not sitting on their hands either. Honda will introduce a new Fit this Fall, the new hybrid Insight in the Spring, a newly tweaked hybrid Civic is available right about now, a hybrid version of the Fit is coming for 2009, and the sporty CR-Z, possibly in hybrid form, will start production in 2009.
Honda plans to have sales of around 500,000 hybrid units right around the time that Chevy kicks out it’s 10,000th Volt. Now with that many highly efficient Hondas on American roads and so few of the celebrity priced Chevy Volts, who do think will be providing more energy independence to the masses?
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:57 am)Honda ICEs are the best and most efficient. So why in the world would they be gung-ho to give up their core competency and primary competitive advantage, which has taken them over half a century to develop, and go to EVs that don’t use ICEs? Do you really think it’s a surprise that Nissan, which has no obvious competitive advantage producing ICE vehicles, is more willing to go with EVs than Honda or Toyota? Winners don’t like to change the rules. No surprise here.
As for which company is right: I’ll just point out that Toyota, which says EVs are “not ready” for prime time, is scrambling to get battery capacity for EVs. Do you listen to what it says or look at what it does?
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:03 am)#85 hermant
I love Honda. Yes it’s doing great right now because it, alone of all the car makers, stuck to its mission of making fuel efficient cars.
JMO: Things are changing and Honda is in for some rough going. EVs are the future and Honda has no obvious competitive advantage in EVs. If they stick with the ICEs too long they will be in trouble.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:09 am)Saw this on the Autobloggreen site…..
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/09/11/gm-confirms-plans-to-sell-er-evs-in-europe-in-2011-50-volt-prot/
“Forster also told reporters that GM wil start building actual prototype Volts with production intent hardware this month and hopes to have 50 cars completed by the end of the year.”
They better keep these 50 on the test track.
Now, if one was left unlocked, running while an engineer stepped into a Dunkin’ Donuts….(heh, heh, heh…exxcellent….)
Edit: I now see that #56 Ziv beat me to posting this tidbit. Nevermind.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:10 am)Honda has seldom been accused of being innovative. They tend to sit back, allowing others to innovate and then improve upon the work of others. There is nothing wrong with this. It is just a different way of doing business and Honda has been very successful.
GM, on the other hand, really has to take a chance with a “game changer” if they are going to survive beyond the short term.
So, I agree with others. Both companies are right! Time will be the best judge of who had the best game (business) plan. I hope it is GM!
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:11 am)The answer depends on how you look at it…
Engineering wise, I believe GM has it right. I embrace the E-REV powertrain because you have the potential of charging the battery however you want. On-grid electricity, power from your solar panels, ICE, rotary engine, fuel cell, treadmill, wind power, geothermal, etc… And, personally, I like the idea of an all-electric powertrain because of the instant torque and demand. The potential driving experience of this powertrain has yet to be tapped for the average American.
Financially, Honda has it right. Despite public perception, Honda is a very innovative company. They develop their own technology but they don’t use it until they prove the technology is more reliable and less expensive then their counterparts. With the Insight, it looks like they waited until they could produce a cheaper parallel hybrid than the Prius along with better fuel efficiency. Also, Honda doesn’t have to create an expensive advertising public campaign to explain how the parallel hybrids work and try to change the market like GM will have to do with the Volt for the E-REV powertrain. By the time Honda creates their cars, they fully understand the market.
So, time will tell…
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:11 am)Why doesn’t GM just lease the batteries? Renault/Nissan and Diamler are both considering leasing battery packs already. http://www.betterplace.com claims that the Nissan/NEC Li-Ion packs that have 125 mile range in the 5 passenger Renault EV sedans can be leased for about $0.06/mile (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spF618DcWkI&feature=related at about the 3 minute mark). With a 12k miles per year lease, that would only be a $60/month lease for the Nissan battery, and since the Volt pack is smaller, it should be even cheaper. Without including the cost of 2 battery packs in the cost of the Volt, they should be able to undercut the price of the Prius and maybe even the Insight and the gasoline savings alone would more than cover the battery lease price compared to a Prius or Insight. If leasing the batteries allows them to make the car cheaper to own and to operate than current hybrids, then they could really turn the tables.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:13 am)The end is near.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:14 am)Gm is doing three or foursiffernt hybrids or fiver including FCEVs.
Two of those those duplicate the Honda approachs for simple hybrids and FCEVs.
So if Honda is correct, then so is GM. If GM succeeds with its advanced approaches, Honda loses.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:19 am)#14 Norman D. Robinson Says:
September 11th, 2008 at 6:41 am
“I will still go with the “Volt” over the Honda. However, I’m still very upset about the possible styling of the production version of this long awaited car.
Everytime I look at the posted PICS it upsets me knowing what we started out with (Concept). Why does this car have to look so…!!!??!!!”
“Why does this car have to look so…!!!??!!!” Is that a real question or more of a complaint? If you been reading the info on this site you would know that the severe requirements of aero absolutely dictate the current styling. I was thinking that perhaps in the future when the batteries become more robust and there is an abundance of energy in this car, the design can be less focused on aero and more on pure style. But then, maximizing energy use will always be on the table and so these cars will always be (to a greater degree than less) about slicing through the air with the greatest of ease.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:19 am)Honda finally has it right because they are actively pursuing HEVs, particularly the new Insight sedan. GM has it right because they are designing and building the Volt, plus 2 mode hybrids, improved BAS hybrids and more hybrids overall.
We do NEED more hybrids.
We do NEED factory PHEVs.
We do NEED factory EVs, even if the range is only 100-150 miles.
GM, Honda and others have it right because they appear finally committed to building better cars, and by better I mean cars that burn less gas.
There are no panaceas on the horizon, but so what? Do better. Build better. Try harder. Continue to improve. Those are the signs of a company that’s got it right.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:21 am)Good pictures. Now add the Prius and Honda Clarity. Nothing like the Volt concept there. Why? Because the Volt concept is not an intelligent technical design for a car that has the Volt’s objectives. Toyota, Honda and GM all know that the laws of physics yield a limited number of shapes for good aerodynamic performance.
Also, by the way, the Volt is arguably the best looking of the lot. In any case, even if you do not agree (beauty is in the eye …), in the looks department, it competes.
Remember Bill Clinton’s “It’s the economy, stupid”? Well, it’s the battery technology and cost, …
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:31 am)I just spent the morning watching the memorial ceremonies for the 7th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Gob Bless all of the casualties and their families.
TheGrump@39 said in part
“…4) Would you PLEASE stop saying LJGTVWOTR ? No matter how many times you post this, it’s NOT going to speed up the Volt’s launch date – 26 months to go is still 26 months to go, no matter how many times to (SIC) say LJGTVWOTR…”
And this is what bothers you??? Maybe you’d “feel better” at Autobloggreen.com. You won’t have to suffer the heartbreak of seeing LJGTVWOTR.
Regarding hybrids vs the Volt: I still believe that using no gasoline is always better than using some gasoline (let the flames begin – it ain’t going to change that fact).
Be well,
Tag
No plug, no sale. LJGTVWOTR!!
LJGTVWOTR!!
LJGTVWOTR!!
LJGTVWOTR!!
LJGTVWOTR!!
LJGTVWOTR!!
LJGTVWOTR!! (Once for each of the 7 years since 9/11)
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:35 am)Tag, let’s not get our knickers in a bunch, there bud
Instead, LJGTVWOTR. (sorry ’bout that, Grump). A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step — and that step is Volt 1.0. (my apologies to Confucius).
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:37 am)We should each do what we can to help reduce our use of petroleum based products, namely gasoline and diesel. The Volt will not be in volume production until 2013 or later. In the meantime I see no problem with a person buying a Prius or Honda Insight if it enables them to greatly reduce fuel consumption. If those cars are unavailable at the time, buy a high-mileage car to tide you over until the Volt is available to you. Continuing driving a gas guzzler (like I drive) is not going to reduce your consumption of fuel. If we, as a nation and as an individual, are committed to reducing fuel consumption maybe we should start a process where we “junk” our current vehicles in favor of higher mileage vehicles. That would cost money, I understand that. I am going to do just that. I drive a 2000 Nissan Crew Cab pickup that gets 16 mpg. As soon as I can next year, if not sooner, I am going to purchase a car (Chevy, Honda or Toyota) that will be much more fuel efficient. I expect to double my mpg numbers, but it will be more expensive than keeping the pickup on the road and buying fuel for it. But, I am committed to reducing my consumption even to the point of spending money (in the thousands) over what I have to to get to and from work and to travel as I need. Question is, are you?
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:38 am)Who here thinks that when Honda publicly states that they don’t currently find battery technology ready for public transportation use that it means that they don’t PLAN to integrate battery technology when it IS ready? They have been in the right place at the right time too often for any of us to underestimate their strategic vision.
Honda’s business model has never required them to “bleed” money in order to benefit from the “cutting edge” R&D that companies like GM perform. They probably already have a secret name on Lyle’s list to get one of the first Chevy Volts and will immediately take it apart, figure out exactly how it works, and quickly produce a better, more reliable and cheaper version. That’s what they’ve always done!
So the answer to the question about which approach is “right” must be BOTH! GM has the right to lead the costly R&D effort to produce the world’s first E-REV and Honda has the right to profit from it.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:41 am)David @ 94:
Aero restrictions DID NOT dictate the design of this Volt.
The aero performance/design of this specific car was dictated by a single specific functional limitation, namely 40 MPC.
Why 40 MPC was written in stone on a tablet is another question. Someone else needs to answer that.
We need to at least put credit/blame where credit/blame is due.
Sorry for being so difficult. But this argument sticks in my crawl.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:41 am)9 Norman D. Robinson.
Drag on a 500 hp car with a full tank of gas is not even relevant. It could be an antimatter brick (and probably is) and it wouldn’t make a difference.
_____________________________________
47 Mike-Ro
51 Gsned57
Tesla -All aluminum frame
– All carbon fiber body
– 2 seater
900 pound battery pack plus weight of advanced controllers.
___________________________________
54, 73 The Grump.
Good points.
10,000 Volts produced in 2010 initially.
INITIAL DEMOGRAPHICS = ALL SOLD OUT
2011 – 2020 = New models on the e-flex platform and incrementally improved Volts.
_________________________________
56 Ziv
Why do so many folks think they can have a hand built prototype Volt (doesn’t meet FMVSS, not crash tested) that would expose GM to massive lawsuits and public ridicule of their pre-production shortcomings
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:44 am)Interestingly enough, Honda is planning to sell Li-ion motorbikes next year:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/09/report-honda-ya.html#more
#91 Blake – leasing does not change cost. It just changes the timing of the payments.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:48 am)#100 hermant: “Honda’s business model has never required them to “bleed” money in order to benefit from the “cutting edge” R&D that companies like GM perform.”
They’re bleeding plenty on fuel cells. That’s Honda’s moon shot.
Sep 11th, 2008 (11:56 am)Honda has to say that they will never build an electric car. Right up until the day that they build an electric car. Because Honda needs to continue selling Insights while REEV technology gets developed and finds it’s own niche in the market. They don’t want people to get in the “no plug, no sale” mentality of waiting a few years to buy a car. They want to sell you an Insight next year, and then an REEV or pure-EV in 2012+.
When they do finally bring out an REEV, I’m certain they will make a very nice one. Perhaps one that uses one of their ultra-quiet high efficiency portable generator motors that they have already developed.
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:02 pm)Improving car efficiency is good no matter how you do it. However, I think GM and others are heading in the right direction by developing electric cars. I see a wide variety of electric cars in different price ranges coming to market in the next few years. If an affordable commuter is all you need, there will be a variety of 2-seater electric cars available. If you want an electric family sedan, the Volt will be the first and best choice. We also have to remember that breakthrough battery technologies such as EEStor may be on the horizon and will end the debate about battery performance.
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:06 pm)MetrologyFirst @ 101:
I guess I don’t follow you. Are you saying that the 40 MPC was a random choice and with a lower number the design/styling could be different? I thought that the 40 MPC was chosen because that would accommodate 75-80% of daily commuters. And with that goal, the final design had to take that into account.
Help me out with your argument. Thanks.
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:07 pm)Kato doesn’t get it. 16 KWH is a magic number for battery. The power from the overnight wall outlet charge is about this number. So, EREV is the way to go. A pure EV might need special electrical outlet to charge the battery.
The selling price of Volt would be about $20k after rebate. The battery cost for GM is about $3500. That is based on the $10k battery replacement cost. The battery would cost a dealer $5k and it would cost GM about $3500. Or, $2k is the cost of 300 cells, plus $1500 for the housing. So, Malibu -2.4 L – transmission +1.4L + AC motor + 2x battery -$7k rebate= $20k. Also, from the production Volt picture, it looks like a $20k car.
10000 Volts of the initial production is for birds. CPI makes 40 million cells a month. 7 million cells (half of that is for replacement battery) is one week worth of their production. Also, why would congress write up a bill for only $700 million ($7k rebate x 10000 Volts)? My guess of the initial production will be 50k to 100k.
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:08 pm)how about a volt with a CNG / Gasoline range extender. It couldn’t cost that much more. GM, Ford and Dodge had the option until recently in some cars and trucks. You could store the natrual gas longer in a tank than gas plus it is cheaper and cleaner. According to T Boone Pickens we have a lot of it.
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:10 pm)103 doggydogworld
I always thought it was the impossible dream. Now I realize it’s only a moonshot. GM was attempting to go down this path until they trashed the hydrogen fuel cell and replaced it with a range extender. Wouldn’t seem to be that difficult for Honda to move the same direction and result in an immediate price reduction of about $80,000 in the non FCX Clarity.
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:18 pm)A lot of “negative energy” from Honda. Will they be eating their words as they come out with an EV?
How much does the battery for the Volt weight?
Is there an 800-pound gorilla in the car?
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:18 pm)Pretty amazing, look at the pictures, these two cars could be twins. So much for the Volt being distinctive.
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:20 pm)http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/900444.html
GM exec says company pushing new technology
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:27 pm)#68 vats
This is for all who come up with a price tag of $22,000 for a Prius for cost comparision purposes.
That number is published on their website for the base model but is not the reality. Last weekend I was at a local Toyota dealer asking for Prius and he told me the company ships Priuses with some minimum options on them and they have no say over what they get. Since the demand remains so high the customers are waiting in line (8 to 12 months long waitlist in the midewest) to grab whatever they can get after that wait period.
All said and done he said expect to pay between $25,000 and $30,000 when you get your car.
I checked for a used a year or two old Prius with low mileage (first, they are hard to find as no one wants to sell them) and it was the same story – a range of between $25,000 and $30,000.
My point is – coming up with that low price ($22,000) for a Prius skews up the comparision a lot in favor of the Prius.
——
The 22K price tag doesn’t ‘skew’ it in favor of the Prius, the points tyou brought up actually skew it more in the Prius’ favor.
Let’s say the Volt’s MSRP starts at $40,000. Do you expect to see all kinds of base models available at your dealer?
The backorders on the Prius are currently at 7 months…what do think the backorder is going to be if you stroll into a Chevy dealership in November 2010 with stated production for all of 2011 at 10,000 units? I’d say your waitlist on the Volt is north of 2 years if you don’t get your name on the list immediately.
The ‘premium’ on a Volt will be alot higher than on a Prius. And forget about even seeing a used Volt anywhere for years…other than in charity auctions.
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:41 pm)#78 doggydogworld
#48 Statik – do you have a link for 60 mpg Insight? Sounds high considering their architecture. Also, has anyone seen Insight dimensions? I’m pretty sure it will be smaller than Civic; a good niche but probably in a completely different class than Prius, Volt, etc. I can’t find any hard numbers, though.
———
There is lots of links out there. The 60MPG is the one I keep seeing so I used it. Have to wait for Paris I guess for official statement. (Although it is still rare for a foreign automaker to release US MPG numbers had of the very last moment, as the most of the rest of the world are alot more lax on the calculation…it is probably pegged at 80MPG in Japan, lol).
It very well could come in lower. I would suspect however, that it has to come in decently north of the 48MPG or so for the current gen Prius for sure. If I was a betting man, real world I would put it at 55ish…just because that is where the next gen Prius has been pegged at.
Here is a linky that references it:
http://blog.getitnext.com/automotive/2008/09/2010-honda-insi.html
As for dimensions, tada:
Length: 172
Width: 67
Height: 56
(Practically the same as a Prius..slighty smaller >3 inches)
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:45 pm)This is slightly off topic but could someone explain to me why the Tesla Roadster weighs 2700 lbs and has a 220 mile range? How many volt batteries fit into 220 miles? 5 and a half. How much do the volt batteries weigh? I think it’s in the ballpark of 600 lbs per battery? Is that right? I’m not entirely sure. But at 600, that’s 3300 lbs of ONLY battery in the vehicle. How are Tesla’s battery suppliers appearing to be such worlds ahead of the volt’s battery?
Sep 11th, 2008 (12:55 pm)Being able to buy this car for HALF the price of a VOLT definitely gives one pause. I would much rather have the VOLT, but when I can buy my family TWO Insights for the same price…..well, all you have to do is the math,
Sep 11th, 2008 (1:07 pm)I am voting with my checkbook and I am sorry to say, but Honda won already. I called a local Honda dealer last week and put my name on the Insight waiting list. I was one of the early fans of Chevy Volt, registered as #937 on the waiting list (and I did not register right away). I tried to believe that GM was right saying Volt can be sold to the masses now and Japanese were wrong when they said technology is not ready. Well, the Japanese were right. Volt is not a car for the masses, not at $40k. I said it before and I will say it again – to succeed, Volt needs to be priced in $25k range, roughly $5k more than a comparable gasoline car. The Volt looks like $20k car, not a bad looking $20k car, but you will not mistake it for a luxury car. Add $5k for electric drive and you have a hit on your hands. Sell it for $35k – $40k and you have a niche vehicle that you can brag about but the masses cannot afford. Even $30k will be too much to give it momentum.
So, my prediction is this: Honda will sell 200k Insights a year and make a nice profit in the next few years until battery tech is perfected (read: goes down in price) and GM will sell 10k Volts a year at a loss. When the batteries are perfected, Japanese will be all over the market with better electric cars and make money on them from the get go.
GM will make history, Japanese will make money.
By the way, I just wish that GM made history with a car that looked like a Camaro, not a Corolla, but that’s another story.
Sep 11th, 2008 (1:12 pm)We don’t have good quality images of the Volt yet to realistically compare to other cars angle-to-angle.
We don’t yet know what a Volt will actually cost, with and without any possible government incentive.
Despite these facts, we’re seeing some pretty absolute comments posted, lately. Comments that don’t take into account anything which might be evident only by seeing the cars in person, or driving them. I predict that instant torque from a standing stop is going to be a major turn-on.
Mike D:
Where to start?
The Volt is using only half it’s battery capacity to propel itself, because unlike the Tesla it’s electric drivetrain has to last 10 years or 100K miles. Using it’s full capacity for propulsion would drastically lower it’s life.
As Jeffhre pointed out, the Tesla is made from carbon fiber and aluminum, the Volt from the usual steel and plastic (anyone got better information about the Volt’s construction?)
The Tesla isn’t carrying a four-cylinder engine around along with it’s battery (or gasoline, and two extra passengers).
The Volt is quite a bit less expensive, yet incorporates more leading-edge battery technology.
I’m sure there are more reasons …
Sep 11th, 2008 (1:23 pm)Honda has a lot of knowledge wrapped up in gasoline engines. They’re still cutting their teeth on electric motors. It took them the better part of the decade to realize they could increase the IMA motor power 25% by using oval wire instead of round. Uhhh, that knowledge has been around for decades.
But their argument is basically sound. There’s not going to be enough volume in electric vehicles (given the current economics) to justify all the manufacturers jumping in at once. There’s barely enough volume in hybrids (again, given the current economics) to justify a few jumping in.
Their goal is to make the hybrids cheap enough to make them pay off in a short timeframe, given the current economics. They’ve said it, before, they want to get the hybrid cost down to the point where you will be able to pay for it in gas savings in just a couple years. That is not going to happen with large quantities of batteries with today’s economics.
GM is definitely “out there” on the edge with the \Volt. I don’t think they’d be doing it at all if Tesla hadn’t done something first and they are desperate. Frankly, I think the one EREV is about all the market will absorb at first, given the current economics (yes, there’s that phrase again). But the presence of the \Volt will help drive the economics more favorably. At least that’s the hope. I know it’s my hope.
So far, it’s taken about 10 years worth of hybrid development to get to the point where Honda thinks it can make them actually more cost effective to own than a regular car. It may take that long for the EREV, too. But better we start now than 10 years from now. There should be enough demand to get the ball rolling!
Also, the Accord is not necessarily powered by squirrels. My ’05 V6 Hybrid Accord nearly as quick as my ’96 Eclipse GSX and destroys it on MPG all while using regular 87 octane:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/honda_acura_central/honda_accord_hybrid_road_test
“But the [Hybrid] Accord pushes the envelope to include 0-to-60 in 6.7 seconds in a comfy five-passenger sedan while, according to the EPA, achieving 30 mpg city, 37 highway.”
In no small part is Honda’s experience with the Hybrid Accord, Civic and Insight coloring their view on what direction they should go. Their sales have not been great and the only way they are going to drive sales of IMA is to integrate it into a truly cost-effective (to the consumer) car.
Sep 11th, 2008 (1:35 pm)I think what’s important is that GM is rapidly learning the “tricks of the trade” in how to build a good quality electric drivetrain. They are building up a big, growing “knowledge base”. They already had a pretty good head start on the competition because of the EV-1. They’ll use that knowledge for new revisions of the Volt and other new model E-Flex cars. That “intellectual capital” will be their competitive edge. They should guard that knowledge like it’s Fort Knox gold. Hopefully, the E-Flex powertrain will be unbeatable, world class technology that’ll put GM a few years ahead of everyone else.
Now … if only they can find some genius exterior designers to start with a clean piece of paper and stun the automotive world in the next 5-10 years with their cool looking designs they’ll really make a huge comeback.
As far as Honda goes, I wouldn’t be surprised if they are SAYING they aren’t working on a series hybrid like the Volt publicly and privately working like crazy to build one in their R&D department. A “skunk works” operation. I bet lots of car companies are in “stealth mode” these days with their electrification plans. I’m sure electrical engineers and battery scientists are in high demand these days. Very busy people.
Sep 11th, 2008 (1:36 pm)This is apples & oranges. Honda is doing great right now. They shouldn’t take big risks. GM is doing terrible, they’ve got to take more risk to stay in the game. So I think they’re both right. Honda should pursue more conservative, high volume technology. GM needs a moon landing. And I hope they nail it.
Sep 11th, 2008 (1:37 pm)Please God, take me off the waiting list!!!!!!
Sep 11th, 2008 (1:42 pm)#114 Mike D – “How are Tesla’s battery suppliers appearing to be such worlds ahead of the volt’s battery?”
This is a great and insightful question. The short answer is that they’re not, and that in fact the Volt pack is actually much better and advanced.
The longer answer has to get into EV ranges and charge/recharge cycles. As Jackson has noted, GM is only using half the battery in order to cut down on the number of charge cycles (charging half the battery is half a charge and it happens in the area where the charge/recharge is less stressful). Battery life is based on cycles. The volt has a 90 mile range. If someone drove 15000 miles a year using the battery pack, the battery would have to charge/recharge 167 times (15000/90). Over ten years this would be 1670 charges, which GM is not willing to risk. (Personally I think it will work but it’s easy to bet using other people’s money). To save the pack, GM is only using half of it and forcing people to use the ICE more.
The Tesla is a different story. It’s light and at $100K plus can use a larger pack. Because of this, the Tesla has a 220 mile range. So over 15000 miles that’s 68 cycles (15000/220) or 680 cycles over ten years. No problem on the cycles. (The Tesla battery is based on inferior chemistry so it won’t have a ten year life — that’s a different issue).
The important bit is that if GM can double the energy density of the battery in coming years from say 90 miles to 180 miles, and that seems virtually certain with new developments, then it should be able to approach quadrupling the Volt’s range to something near 180 miles. At that point you really do have an almost true EV vehicle.
Sep 11th, 2008 (1:54 pm)“Some one pahleeeze figure out a way to flow air smoothly around muscular wheel wells and wide tires with wheels that have depth and design.”
Easy. Go to a different universe where there are different physical laws in force………..
Sep 11th, 2008 (2:06 pm)GM …please make a sport version of the Volt that has wide fenders and bigger wheels. I know it will not be able to achieve the same all electric range but I truly believe there is a big market for this. So it only gets 30 mile range. There are a lot of people that commute less than 30 miles a day.
Thanks,
Jimmy
Sep 11th, 2008 (2:14 pm)In response to post #30 Why bother to wait for volt…get a ev conversion kit…do a google online search and for 3-4k you can easily have a 40-50mils ev range ev from home made conversion with proven technology.
Sep 11th, 2008 (2:20 pm)I have been reading a lot of comments like “I can buy a lot of gas and still be ahead.”
To me, that is just such short term thinking.
I guess I could also respond with: If OPEC turns off the oil valves to the USA again, where will you get that gas? And I will still be able to drive every day without using any gas…..
GM has decided to do this project. Someone has to be the early adopters, to prove that the technology works, and pave the way for guture generations of E-REV vehicles. You can’t get to vehicle # 1,000,000 at $20K until you get vehicle #1 available for sale. If it costs $30K or $40K, there will be buyers avaialble. I have no problem being an early adopter, as my personal “tipping point” at gasoline pricing was $2.50 per gallon. That was when I decided that my next car would have a plug for charging. Now the question is: Is GM willing to sell me a Gen-1 Volt in Youngstown, Ohio?
And as far as building a production vehicle that matches the concept? I suppose there are still people that are mad that GM did not build an exact Firebird from this concept:
http://autospeed.com/cms/gallery/article.html?slideshow=0&a=109185&i=3
Sep 11th, 2008 (2:34 pm)Thanks for the dimensions, Statik. A little smaller than Civic and Prius, but no midget. I don’t see anywhere near 60 mpg. Civic Hybrid is 40/45, Insight is a little smaller than Civic but uses a cheaper version of IMA so don’t expect any MPG miracles there. They probably pull some traditional MPG tricks, such as LRR tires and giving away a couple seconds of 0-60 with a downsized engine. I’d guess 47 city/53 highway to hit the magic 50 mpg combined cycle.
Sep 11th, 2008 (2:36 pm)Hybrid technology is a bridge to the next level of technology. I think the future is the Honda FCX Clarity. Jay Leno test drove one a few months ago. It really is an impressive car. When this technology costs come down, this will be the way to go. Uses no gasoline, you can fill up at home from natural gas or solar panels producing hydrogen; and the only exhaust is water. Solves the oil problem and the environment issues of ICE.
See Jay and the FCX Clarity:
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=205246
Sep 11th, 2008 (2:38 pm)This looks like a promising new development in battery technology. I’ve read that the “separator” part of the battery is a very key component.
http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=19172
“Planar’s new PowerBlade line of batteries deliver very high energy under heavy load, and have higher cycle life and stable cell impedance during long term cycling. Unlike the lithium ion battery separators currently used in the market, PowerBlade separator does not show any shrinkage in the battery with time or usage at high temperatures and shuts down the battery when overheated to prevent thermal runaway and battery explosion. These safety features have been verified in customer testing of large size batteries.”
This company is near nasaman’s neck of the woods … the Space Coast in Orlando. Maybe he can help them out. I would love to see the next huge breakthroughs in battery technology come from America. Not from “Big Oil” though. Looks like GM and the other car companies won’t need to rely on Exxon-Mobil’s battery separator film that they are advertising all the time on TV. We won’t need their steanking oil or their steanking separators.
I bet there’s a lot of groundbreaking technologies on the way for electric drivetrains in the next 5 years or so. If GM’s Chief Technology Officer stays on top of things with the battery developments, they should be alright. The risks won’t be as great as people think. Lots of people are working like mad these days to make electric cars a reality.
I think everyone knows that “peak oil” IS coming in the next 10-20 years and we damn well better get ready for it. Things can get ugly with people when there are shortages and high prices for commodities you know. These days, gasoline is a lot like food. You can’t just do without it.
That’s why we badly need ALTERNATIVES to this product called gasoline. Diversification of our NEED for the stuff. Neediness is a bad thing. You always do better in the dating world if you aren’t so needy you know. It’s much better to have a half dozen ladies to hang out with on the weekend … and maybe marrying one of them later on if she’s cool.
If GM can supply us with alternatives to gasoline fueled cars when the new kinds of cars are in high demand, they’ll be back on top like they were in the 50s maybe. The harder they work right now, the better off they’ll be down the road in 5-10 years.
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:03 pm)That concept Firebird looks pretty aerodynamic.
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:11 pm)116 Chris N:
Sorry, you missed out on the plug-in VUE then…
GM will have even more electric motor experience than they already have (which is more than all manufacturer’s currently vis a vis allison transmission and GE)
Take a gander at what Toyota and Honda are using for electric motors vs. what the latest (read, last 30 years) technology is.
Your analogy is more like GM will own the market for 20 years while the Japanese try to figure out why the can’t galvanize steel correctly…in essence a small replay of the 60′s and 70′s.
/provided GM doesn’t go bankrupt
//and doesn’t in the next 5-10 years while volumes and production switches over.
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:12 pm)BTW, Honda’s disdain for lithium apparently has limits. I can’t post a link for some reason but GreenCarCongress reports Honda will start selling li-ion electric motorbikes in 2011. Since these only have two wheels I guess the battery will only weigh one ton
The article also says Yamaha will ship electric motorcycles in 2010.
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:20 pm)#131 doggydogworld
Is this the link?
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/09/report-honda-ya.html#more
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:23 pm)They both have it right.
Both have produced designs that significantly increase fuel efficiency.
60mpg , even european, is a significant improvement over existing
petrol engines, and the price looks good.
The Volt is even better at XXX mpg, what ever that will be when we stop arguing about how it should be measured.
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:23 pm)Yeah, right…uh, both GM and Ford are also coming out with new direct-injected turbos which are likely to get around the same performance as many of the hybrids but without the cost of the hybrid systems. If anyone wants to talk about realistic options and profitability, that’d be where its at short-term. Longer term GM is right on with the volt and it’s system.
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:23 pm)Expect to see a firm production date announced at the GM Centennial on the 16th along with the “expected” unveiling of the Volt for the press. I don’t know if the date will be any earlier then 11/2010, we’ll just have to wait for next Tuesday. (a “big” birdie told me this morning)
Question for the group: Many homes are going to Hydro smart meters that have graduated rates based on the time of day, do you think that it would be a good idea for GM to have an option for the owner to choose from 2 charging modes. One mode for charge “now” and a second mode for charge in a pre specified time window – (23:00 to 06:00). The user could select it on the display panel. Basically it would let you plug your vehicle in at 8pm but the car would not begin to use hydro until 23:00 (or when you local rates drop per KW/hr.) or select charge “now” if you intended on using the vehicle again that day.
The alternate solution would we all buy timers to plug the car into to achieve the same result.
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:37 pm)My mother taught us kids “If you can’t say anything nice, just don’t say anything at all”. This Honda scares me so bad I’m just not going to comment.
We’re leaving at “0 dark thirty” tomorrow to head north, and madly loading up today. See you Monday. Hope you all don’t miss me too much, LOL. Have a great weekend all. Blog on!
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:41 pm)Don’t believe Honda. Honda and Yamaha just annouced two electric motorcyces they will brng out in 3 years. One does 100 miles on a charge and the other does 260 to 350 miles on a charge. The EVs cannot be far behind. Cost to charge is $1.00.
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:47 pm)I am a journalist and have been following the Volt developments closely here. Here is my take on the concept Volt vs. production Volt controversy:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/general-motors-deathwatch-197-the-volt-lie/
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:52 pm)This picture of the Volt looks better than the ones shown on the earlier opinion pole article.
I guess it’s the angle and the color or the fact it’s being compared
to the Honda. (ugly)
Sep 11th, 2008 (3:52 pm)# 112 Statik
I concur with you 100% on
1) the rare availability at the local Volt dealer
2) Volt waiting list at the local dealer
3) ‘Premium’ on Volt
4) Won’t find a used Volt for years
I definitely expect those things to happen for the first few years after Volt appears on the market.
My point was to make the comparisions look realistic. Comparing a $22,000 Prius with a $40,000 Volt makes it look like the price difference is around 80% (81.8% to be precise). Whereas, a more realistic comparision of $28,000 Prius with a $40,000 Volt would be a difference of 43% over the price of a Prius. For early Volt buyers this difference could be less depending on what rebates we get from Washington.
A $28,000 Prius is what we can realistically get it for and we are comparing it with $40,000 Volt which is a good two years away.
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:07 pm)Why make the car decide what time, just get a 20 amp timer. No way your house has more than 20 amps in a regular 120 volt plug.
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:07 pm)Someone should tell Mr. Kato and the boys at Honda what electric car manufacturer would want to match the perfromance of the accord. Hasnt this guy heard about the Tesla performance and range, it blows the doors off of any japaneese car period. I for one could care less what Honda comes up with, they shafted me once and never again will I buy any of the junk they make.
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:13 pm)#138 paulin
Nice to see you over here! Although I don’t know if the site can handle both of us, lol.
———
Side note on the Tesla: Actually range is ‘reported’ at just over 240 miles now thanks to the new gearbox, although with atorque bump from 211 to 280.
Official press release and quote (Sept 09, 2008)”
http://www.teslamotors.com/media/press_room.php?id=968
“The new gearbox is designed for the higher peak torque levels of the new Roadster powertrain, which has increased from 286 Newton-meters (211 foot-pounds) to 380 Newton-meters (280 foot-pounds). The new powertrain achieves an EPA combined range of 244 miles on a single charge, up from Tesla’s previously announced EPA range of 221 miles.”
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:24 pm)To most posters, I couldn’t agree with you more. Honda is right that the Volt will be a big risk for any car maker, just as the Prius and the Insight were. Will someone else come out with something a little better before a particular builder can make their profit ? Will it catch on with the public, etc.
Like Toyota is ahead of the curve with the Prius, GM will be ahead of the curve with the Volt.
There’s no sense in GM trying to catch up with old hybrid technology, that battle has been lost. But there is a good chance to get into the small car making game with something revolutionary and that’s what the Volt will be.
Performance wise the Volt will outclass the hybrids and look better doing it and should be cheaper to run and maintain than hybrids.
I think its wishful thinking by Honda that the hybrids will continue to dominate, especially when they have a good one.
The problem for hybrid makers is that they’re starting to run into brick walls for better performance whereas the the Volt has no foreseeable limits with battery technology racing ahead.
The only reason I might buy a hybrid ?, if I couldn’t get a Volt.
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:25 pm)Without risk there is no reward. Gotta’ love the comment about the 2 ton battery. I’d love to have a pure electric vehicle with a 300 AER and quick recharge, but currently that’s not possible.
What is possible is a 40 mile AER and a RE engine that can run E85. Was anyone aware that the 15% of gasoline mixed in E-85 comes from US stocks? The Volt is the most positive step toward energy independence of any planned vehicle.
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:40 pm)#135 GordB – That would be a nice feature. Not strictly necessary. FYI PG&E customers in CA are required to use a special rate plan. I think off peak starts a midnight.
http://www.pge.com/myhome/environment/pge/electricvehicles/fuelrates/index.shtml
#138 pauln – You have a point of view but I don’t think it captures the reality of the target demographic. The Volt is not really going to appeal to the car guys who think a Camaro is a great car. It will appeal to coastal nerds who think the Prius is a good idea. The design of the production car isn’t fine for the former but is for the latter.
There are a couple of us who decided we’d rather have Volts than Teslas. Not because of price — though obviously that’s a factor — but because the Volt is a cooler more practical car, and the idea of driving an EV Chevy is mind bending. I doubt any of the people distraught about the looks of the production car would make that choice.
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:43 pm)Hybrids and EV’s like the Volt are a bridge to the next technological level. At the end of the day cars like the Volt still use petroleum, and still polute the environment. Its an advance from where we are today, but I think cars like this will be extinct in 15 to 20 years.
Honda has it’s sight set on hydrogen. The current FCX Clarity gets about 68 MPG and has a range of about 270 miles. You can fill the clarity at your house with hydrogen produced by solar panels, or natural gas. When the Clarity is running, it’ only exhaust is water. If Honda can get the cost lower, this will be the next generation of automobiles.
Jay Leno did a test drive of the FCX Clarity. Check it out at his website:
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=205246
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:44 pm)There is room in our market for all the hybrids Toyota and Honda can build and sell. There is also plenty of room for the Volt. All GM has to do is get volume up and the sales will be there. They have got to get the cost in line to compete or else risk losing it all the Toyota, Honda and company. I pray to God GM can get it together and be successful.
I am off to Pensacola for the weekend. Hope everyone is safe during the hurricane.
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:44 pm)#143 statik
Speaking of gloom and doom. So far the debt swaps have been a non-event since the debt is still trading near face value. One doomsday scenario missed.
Surprisingly I did catch a small whack on this. I had Wellington and Dodge & Cox funds in a couple of old 401(k)s and those guys were heavily invested in Fannie and Freddie. The things you don’t know …. Ouch!
Sep 11th, 2008 (4:56 pm)#68, #140 Vats,
#112, Statik,
Re Prius pricing….
Right now, there are about 180K units/year of mid-size, purpose built hybrids on the market. Right now, that’s the Prius and its total annual production.
In less than a year, there will be about 500K units/year of mid-size, purpose built hybrids on the market. That will be the Prius (Toyota is bringing a second factory on-line, in Japan, for the 2009 model year) at about 400-450K units/year and the Insight at 100K units/year.
In other words, close to a 3X increase in supply in the coming year. More, if other manufacturers bring something along.
Even if gas holds in the $3.50 to $4.25/gallon range, this should end the Prius waiting list and the dealer markups.
In 2010, Toyota will be adding 200K units/year of Prius capacity in the US. If Honda increases production, we could be looking at 800K mid-size, purpose built hybrids from Toyota and Honda alone by 2010.
The comparisons at list are valid because, by 2011, the Volt will be going up against Insights and Priuses that sell at list and no more.
Possibly less… in the Spring, I took a lighly optioned Prius for a test drive and Toyota was dealin’. The dealer was willing to knock $1K off the vehicle I was driving and would order a stripped model for me, if I liked (no price cut, though… might as well get the Group 2 – worked out to the same price).
(sigh) I wish I’d bought it. I could have turned around and sold it for more a couple months later. But my annual miles are low and I’m not buying a new car until model year 2009.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:11 pm)Well, I’m betting (literally) that GM is doing it right. I bought my GM shares last week at $10.10. Today GM closed at $12.75. I’m hoping that GM’s new-found spirit and attitude of innovation will help them displace Toyota as the “golden boy” of automobiles.
I made the same type of bet on Apple about ten years ago (another innovative company that most analysts had written-off as dead ) and I’ve seen about a 2000% ROI from that. If I’m right on GM, I may just earn enough to pay for my Volt.
I don’t know half as much as Statik about business and finance, but I have noticed you can often make good money by picking a damaged innovative company, then doing the exact opposite of what the stock analysts recommend.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:13 pm)pauln #138
I read your piece and you don’t seem to be a GM fan.
Volt styling is captive to the current battery technology.
As the batteries improve wind resistance may become less of a concern, bolder styling may result for the Volt.
The paramount concern for most Volt fans is getting this car into production as quickly as possible at a reasonable price, not for GM to produce a sports car.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:16 pm)For the $30k price range, IMO 40 miles on a charge just isn’t enough. If it costs about $1 to charge, then the Volt is only capable of saving about $2.20 a day over a much cheaper 50mpg car like a Geo Metro. Unless it somehow gets unbelievable mpg when running on its gas engine, I just don’t see it being economically sensible yet.
It might have the potential to save me about $7.00 a day ($1750 a year on my 100 mile a day r/t commute) over my ’87 Fiero GT 5 speed. It would take 17 years to pay for itself… And sorry, but this production version is no Fiero
The prototype had some character, but the production lines are…. boooooring.
Hopefully they’ll consider a hybrid version of the Solstice or the new Camaro sometime in the future. I love the idea of a sensible fuel efficient commuter car, but it has to have some character to it. Otherwise I’d rather bite the bullet and fork over the money for gas.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:23 pm)DB Cooper #153
Have you ever driven a Metro ? heh heh. This is more than just about gas savings.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:30 pm)Honestly I haven’t ever even sat in a Metro. But the reasoning still stands; a car like a Cruze will probably be just as efficient after the first 40 miles.
I guess I’m just bummed about the change in the styling… For me the perfect car is a smooth balance of handling, comfort, sportiness, and styling. It would take something really exceptional to displace one of the Fieros from my driveway lol. I would have thought in the last 20 years something would have come out that I liked even better, but alas… not yet.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:32 pm)“Toyota thinks the economics of a large-battery vehicle are poor.”
This is true, but GM’s approach is still better. The serial hybrid drivetrain architecture actually has by far the most realistic chance to nuke (pun) our oil dependency. If everyone drove a volt we’d use more than 70% less oil than we do today. There is no other existing technology that can do that realistically (I understand complete market penetration will take a while). Electricity is the most agile form of energy and so is preferred because it can be very efficiently transformed into other forms of energy and because it can be produced in so many ways (though personally I can’t see it ever powering airliners).
Yes the volt is more expensive but it is fundamentally superior. Unfortunately Honda’s exterior design is fundamentally superior. Honda’s design is more volumetrically and aerodynamically efficient this will take a small ~7% bite out of the volt’s enormous 100% drivetrain efficiency advantage (from an oil standpoint). Too bad GM didn’t have the huevos to choose a better shape like that of the Prius (don’t hate me but it is a fact that the prius’ basic shape is superior in all ways to that of the standard car with the arguable exception of aesthetics).
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:36 pm)Ed M #144
“Like Toyota is ahead of the curve with the Prius, GM will be ahead of the curve with the Volt.
There’s no sense in GM trying to catch up with old hybrid technology, that battle has been lost. But there is a good chance to get into the small car making game with something revolutionary and that’s what the Volt will be.”
*** *** ***
I couldn’t agree more. Eventually this technology will move to larger platforms but certainly not for awhile. One of the things about E-REV is that it will be with us for awhile. I think we’ll see continued improvement in batteries and electric motors and recharge time, but I still think we’ve got a long way to go before pure BEVs and super fast recharge time.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:42 pm)#143 Statik:
I hadn’t seen that announcement from Tesla. They’re getting about 10% range improvement from the higher power motor and electronics, not to mention covering the accelration and top speed spread they couldn’t do before without the 2 speed gearbox and the weaker drive system. The improvement to the gearbox just means it won’t break.
Which goes back to what I’m always saying, the \Volt needs a much more powerful drivetrain. It would be much more efficient both in operation and in regeneration. It could probably even haul around the concept’s brick like exterior and still make up the lost range due to it’s increased efficiency and regen (no, haven’t run any numbers, but if the Tesla got 10% from a modest increase, that would be around 4 miles on the \Volt from a similarly modest increase).
While I’m still not a fan of the “chrysler 300″ look of the concept, I will predict that some manufacturer will eventually make something more like that. By that time, the flared fenders and big wheels will probably be holding the 120kW motors under each of them. It’s only a matter of time once the path to the EV has begun. It will be a happy day for me when I walk into a dealership and say, “What? Only 600hp? How am I going to get good AER with that kind of woeful drivetrain!?”
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:43 pm)A LiPo pack is lighter and can be recharged at 1C (1 hour recharge time) if you’ve got the amperage on tap… but that would be one pricey electric vehicle.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:49 pm)DB Cooper
I think you would have to admit that the Volt is more sporty than a lot of EVs and Hybrids.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:52 pm)I drove a electric EV1 in 1999 that would blow the doors of any Accord let alone ride a lot better with much less noise and no shifting…a EV1 without a govener went over 200mph with one moving part in the engine and no transmission!! it’s very easy for a electric to perform better than a Accord with much less than a ton of batteries. The batteries in the volt are half the size and weight of the EV1, put out as much power and last two or three times as long. Honda just better figure out how to put the oil filter away from the exhaust so their cars don’t catch on fire… and Toyota has to figure out how to make a truck frame last longer than 8 years without completely rusting out. But of course I’m sure all they are doing is taking free money from the Japanese taxpayer to buy back those junked 8 year old trucks that our media refuses to talk about… but had they been Chevies it would be all over the news.
Electric is the way to go and hydrogen fuel cells are the future.
Sep 11th, 2008 (5:55 pm)Grizzly #157
“One of the things about E-REV is that it will be with us for awhile.”
for sure !
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:03 pm)Chris # 147
The FCX Clarity is an EV. The fuel cell is an unnecessary and unwieldy and outrageously expensive extra step. That is why GM dropped the fuel cell from the e-flex platform and went with the range extender, which Toyota and Honda said was not possible to do commercially. An inexpensive fuel cell has been seven years away from mass market constantly for the last 30 years. It appears it continue to be for another 15 to 20 years.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:06 pm)Ed, I’m not trashing it; it does look a lot better than a Prius or the Insight in the pic above. But I was primed for something as radical in terms of styling as it is in terms of technology… something to take the edge off the sticker shock
It’s a good start, and I know it will evolve… I’m just impatient.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:06 pm)This is an interesting comparison but it is like comparing Apples and Oranges. Since the Honda’s system is closer to GM’s BAS hybrid system, and GM is updating it for 2010. So it would be good to compare it to the 2010 GM BAS hybrids, I really think the new BAS system will compare very well to it. My Niece had a Honda Hybrid and she said it was no good in the mountains, my Vue hybrid has handled anything I have taken it over.
Honda is also up in the night the FCX Fuel cell is an electric car, and all you would have to do is replace fuel cell with battery or generator. What is going to come down in price first Fuel cells or batteries? Batteries!
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:09 pm)I think that Honda underestimates the desire of many Americans to poke OPEC in the eye and the Volt will do just that. You can run it on E-85 and never buy a drop of foreign oil.
As for the Honda FCX Clarity, the Chevy Equinox fuel cell vehicle is a superior design, has been on the road longer and shares technology with the Volt. So I see a future where the Volt and the Equinox merge to have a E-REV that uses hydrogen to charge the battery.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:09 pm)Toyota can’t keep the Prius in stock, so it makes sense for Honda to create a more economical hybrid NOW.
It’s GM’s turn to re-invent the “plug-in” that gives back what those original EV-1 owners wanted in the first place. A 4 seater, conventional 120 volt plug, On-Star, GPS, extended range and no lease!
http://ev1-club.power.net/wishlist.htm
Ever since viewing “Who Killed the Electric Car” and driving several hybrids on battery power, I’ve wanted an electric car ASAP. But I need the range to drive it across the country occasionally with a quick fill up. Only the VOLT meets those requirements.
An improved “look” can come later with the Pontiac, Cadillac and 2012 Chevrolet models.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:19 pm)Grizzly, #157 says,
Eventually this technology will move to larger platforms but certainly not for awhile. One of the things about E-REV is that it will be with us for awhile. I think we’ll see continued improvement in batteries and electric motors and recharge time, but I still think we’ve got a long way to go before pure BEVs and super fast recharge time.
———-
I completely agree. The batteries aren’t ready yet, but EREVs will be very soon. They may not get all of us away from oil, but they certainly will for some. As batteries improve, we can wean ourselves off a little more, then a little more, and keep going from there.
IMO, the Prius and the Insight are wrong the way they are made.
Those drivers must still use gas. The Volt is the best way today. I really hope it is very successful.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:51 pm)PaulN #138.
That was an interesting article you wrote.
I think you did a good job summing up how many people felt since the production pictures were released. Many were surprised, disappointed, angry, shocked, etc. I count myself in there, but I am over that now. I have had to remind myself that what’s on the inside is what is important. Well that, and my wife ordered me to like the production more than the concept.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:58 pm)Rashiid:
My wife also likes the production version better than the concept. Hopefully, GM will offer a sports version for me and my wife can have the regular production version.
Sep 11th, 2008 (6:59 pm)Jimmy #170.
Agreed. The sports version would be a lot of fun to drive.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:03 pm)DonC and Ed M,
As you’ve observed, the self-described “journalist”, pauln does evidence a less than objective view of the Volt. He and I went over the errors the many errors in his “article” months ago and he seemed to stop posting much thereafter.
He may smell blood in the water, or be related to Statik, or something, but given that Statik leans on facts (however negative the view), pauln just clings to his own negative bias. Although I respect his right to be wrong, I hope others, like yourselves, see through his smoke and don’t swallow his “facts” as gospel.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!!
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:08 pm)I have been following this site since early 2007. I believe the main reason Lyle started the website was to show GM there is a lot of support for the car and to encourage them to build the car. The site has grown fairly popular over the last year and a half. GM has decided to produce the car due to all of the positive feedback. Hopefully all of the negative feedback during the last week has not caused them to change there minds. We should all try to use constructive criticism and not bashing …myself included. I am sure GM listens to constructive criticism and ignores bashing.
P.S. GM can you please make a sports version with flared fenders and bigger wheels?
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:09 pm)Who’s Got it Right, GM or Honda?
This is a trick question. Describe “it”.
Both are doing a great job of getting us closer to being oil fee commuters
Both are providing a quality product.
Both have a somewhat distinct look. (love it/ hate it)
The real distinction is how the “market” will see perceive the “it”.
A lot of gas can be purchased with Honda’s $20k initial price difference.
Chevy ( we assume ) would provide a more comfortable quality of ride, weight ratio, road noise, road to steering wheel vibration, chair comfort for different height people ect….
Honda would make a relatively practical but less expensive version of a vehicle. Honda will provide a less Initial cost of ownership.
The value of the vehicle is perceived differently by consumers. How many times have you heard “ just give me 40 MPC, any ole body and a 5 gallon bucket”. These people may not see the softer side of chevy’s extras that may cost a extra 20K premium.
The most significant difference that takes any common denominator out between the Chevy and Honda and puts to Chevy’s favor is the technology. The series hybrid vs parallel hybrid technology sets the two technologies worlds apart. Chevy will see the most significant gains in efficiencies in battery technology. Japanese automakers have already explained the lack of desire in series hybrid technology. Japanese automakers also think fuel will be too cheap as compared to battery technology gains until at least 2015. The Saudi’s walked out of OPEC recently. Saudi’s do not want to cut production to the levels OPEC wants to. (This will keep gas prices lower making cars that use petroleum less expensive to operate).
The masses will not pay a $20K premium just for saving gas or fighting terror. The process in which the masses will buy anything is the perception they have on the value they receive for themselves (selfishly short term thinking). I think if you could take the VOLT concept and build it to run solely on gas, the car would sell faster than production could keep up despite it is not “green”. Just as we feed the oil producers, we feed the foreign manufacturing machine. Japan (Honda), China (Junk whatever it is but someone will buy it), Korea (Kia) ect…
If “it” is affordability, short term one might say Honda. America should be thinking responsibility.
If “it” is enthusiasm to drive, one might prefer the bells and whistles not to mention the very responsive high torque electric motors that can meet ones daily needs without petroleum.
In my opinion as a 10 year old car owner, I am in “it” for the long haul. Chevy wins hands down.
Chevy, GET-R-DONE…
OPEC-Eat sand and Sux oil !!
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:19 pm)I have to admit that I too am pretty disappointed with the production model.
I will still want one, but for it to have appeal past hardcore enthusiasts like ourselves here it needs to have some styling spark/buzz.
The production model lacks it (at least as seen so far), and therefore it is a terrible missed opportinity. This should have been a no brainer (see Fiskar Karma for example… yes I know it’s an 80g car, but the styling can’t account for too much of that price tag).
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:27 pm)I wonder if someone that knows photoshop could add flared fenders and bigger wheels to the production car.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:35 pm)Tag
In his defense his piece was obviously 100% opinion. And as they say, everyone is entitled to their opinion. The fact he’s a journalist doesn’t add anything for me.
The point I was trying to make is that I think he’s too much a car guy. I’ve been surprised how focused a lot of people have been on the look of the car. Not that looks aren’t important, but this is a revolutionary car. If it comes in a plain brown wrapper it’s still revolutionary. The car guys don’t seem to be able to move to a paradigm where technology rather than horsepower and muscle car looks are the guiding lights.
That said, I subscribe to your maxim that before I make a final decision I need to put a butt in the seat. And I really want it to be reliable. I’ll accept problems with the tech but not the door handles falling off! Looking forward to more photos next week ….
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:41 pm)Lots of people it seems are disappointed with the production model. I still like it because I know it will be built and what it represents and it has to be done. I still think it looks pretty good understanding that few if any concept models become a reality w/o modification. That said, since many don’t believe there are many similarities, I have to wonder how good it could have looked if GM abandoned the concept and aimed for a striking aero design?
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:53 pm)#178 Grizzly
Don’t you think the technology gamble was enough? How much can we expect them to bite off?
There are a lot of practical issues. What would a “striking aero design” be? Everything that fits into that category seems to be more of a two seater. The Volt has to seat at least four and you have to be able to make it for the target price. I think GM did a pretty job with what they had to work with.
You can make up your own mind. Here’s a list of cars and their CdAs. Remembering that the Volt needs to have a better CdA than a Prius, what do you see that would be an improvement over the production car’s styling?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficients
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:55 pm)#149 DonC
#143 statik
Speaking of gloom and doom. So far the debt swaps have been a non-event since the debt is still trading near face value. One doomsday scenario missed.
Surprisingly I did catch a small whack on this. I had Wellington and Dodge & Cox funds in a couple of old 401(k)s and those guys were heavily invested in Fannie and Freddie. The things you don’t know …. Ouch!
——–
I think it has worked out as well as anyone could have hoped for…which is good.
I hadn’t heard too much about Wellington specifically…other than they had doubled their position recently, we had some people that took a good whack with Fidelity though….they have around 55 million shares of Fannie, ouch indeed.
Nice to see the 30 year mortgage fall off almost half a point…got to like getting it under that 6 benchmark.
#151 Paul-R
I won’t poop on your parade today.
The feeling is that GM is getting some ‘bailout’ er, ‘loan’ money…so there is optimism on keeping the wolf from the door longer. That has given you a nice 20% pop if you got it at $10.
Wagoner goes hat in hand tomorrow, should be fun. If you get a hiccup on the 25+25 billion package, ‘you are on the edge of the knife’ If I was you I’d take you profit now.
If GM is truely a innovator and you believe that, get back into it in a caouple months. Just my 2p.
Sep 11th, 2008 (7:57 pm)donC@177
I agree.
Sorry. Trying times.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR
PS Did we lose the ability to subscribe to threads or am I having another “browser issue”? (I CAN edit…)
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:00 pm)______________________________________________________
Answer: Both
Keep in mind that GM will be aggressively doing both. GM plans to manufacture old-school hybrid cars similar to the Insight (at a competitive price point ) in addition to manufacturing the more advanced VOLT.
I’m personally going to purchase the advanced GM VOLT and enjoy saying goodbye to gas.
______________________________________________________
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:03 pm)We paused the subscribe to comments feature due to high server load demands in anticipation of the potential for a large traffic spike next week around the Centennial.
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:08 pm)DonC #179
“#178 Grizzly
Don’t you think the technology gamble was enough? How much can we expect them to bite off? ”
*** *** ***
Don,
I do indeed think they’ve gambled enough and have made this point many times. What I think that most find objectionable about the Volt is the front snoot because they tried to make it like the concept. I don’t think I’m alone in my opinion that the Cruze is a actually a better looking vehicle, at least from the front, even though both are Delta II platform. The point is that much of the magic (for some) of the concept is gone in the production model. If that’s a large amount of people mightn’t they have been better off just delivering a Cruize-E-REV?
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:17 pm)#183 Lyle
We paused the subscribe to comments feature due to high server load demands in anticipation of the potential for a large traffic spike next week around the Centennial.
——–
Oh no! That can only mean more pictures are coming!
Or a new price? Can you imagine the horrific damage that would be done here with subscriptions and gravitars if the price went to 50K?
Sep 11th, 2008 (8:49 pm)To get the most miles per unit of energy, a vehicle must have less mass (weight) and less rolling friction. Smaller cars are the answer, but you are twice as likely to die in an accident in a small car.
I have invented a way to make small cars safer.
My website is http://www.safersmallcars.com
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:11 pm)Lyle,
Thanks for the subscription info.
Statik,
Is there ANY opportunity to take a shot, however arcane, that you’d pass up? Think of the infamy that you’d have missed without this site!
Be well,
Tag
“LJGTVWOTR!!”
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:17 pm)Well…, folk…., it appears the “Volt” should follow the concept path. A new company has delevoped a battery that renders li-ion very out dated. It is called a “Ultracapacitor Power System” or on “Google” as the EEStor Inc. It is half the weight of li-ion, recharges in 5 minutes, and has 2.75 times the energy density. It is solid state and has none of the environmental concerns associated with all other types of batteries….. and Oh yes it is a real product. Have a look for yourselves.
http://www.ohgizmo.com/2006/09/26/eestor-ultracapacitor-5-minutes-to-charge-500-miles-per-charge/
This is the holy grail for EV’s. You all can trust me on this folk. 10 years from now when it cames time to replace the battery in the “Volt” you throw the gas engine out at the same time.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:36 pm)honestly, all the hybrid 4 door cars are really looking similar. There is a reason for that, aerodynamics solve the same exact problems and usually result in the same exact answers.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:40 pm)Norman D. #188
Thanks for posting, but EEstor has been discussed to death on this site. At the moment most feel it’s basically vaporware. Despite the mega hype, they don’t even have a prototype and physicists like our own nasaman have expressed doubt about the “science” behind this company.
Sep 11th, 2008 (9:57 pm)176 Jimmy….. You say, “I wonder if someone that knows photoshop could add flared fenders and bigger wheels to the production car.”
I want to add my request to yours, plus request that the “photoshopper” also black out the grills (but leave a textured-pattern like shown now, if possible).
I sincerely believe blacked-out grills & larger wheels/tires will help the production design look a lot more like the concept Volt, and that these two minor changes would greatly broaden the design’s appeal —to guys like me who love the Concept’s “sport-car pizzazz” as well as to those preferring a more conservative-looking car ….and it might even avoid a few divorces, too, who knows!
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:22 pm)Some good info I found about the shape of cars and their coeficient of drag.
And yes lots of hot looking cars have decent cds.
http://www.madabout-kitcars.com/kitcar/kb.php?aid=327
Sep 11th, 2008 (10:32 pm)#187 Tag
Statik,
Is there ANY opportunity to take a shot, however arcane, that you’d pass up? Think of the infamy that you’d have missed without this site!
———
Well to be fair, I do sleep 5-6 hours a day…so your pretty much safe between 1am and 6am. (=
(I was just being light-heated though…even mirthful if you will.)
Sep 12th, 2008 (1:06 am)Honda is clearly right. First of all, far more gas is saved by switching from a conventional car that gets 25 mpg to a hybrid that gets 50 mpg than is saved by moving from a hybrid that gets 50 mpg to a plug-in that gets 100 mpg. Here’s the math.
Assume 15,000 miles driven per year:
Conventional auto getting 25mpg burns 600 gallons of gas.
Regular hybrid getting 50 mpg burns 300 gallons of gas.
Plug-in hybrid getting 100 mpg burns 150 gallons of gas.
The regular hybrid saves 300 gallons of gas per year compared to the conventional auto. The plug-in hybrid only saves 150 gallons of gas per year over the regular hybrid. At $4 per gallon, the plug-in hybrid saves $600 per year compared to the regular hybrid. Further, the electricity required to charge the Volt’s battery would cost about $200 per year, bringing the annual fuel cost savings of the Plug-in hybrid down to about $400 per year. If the Volt costs $40K and the Insight $20K, it will take about 50 years for the modest fuel savings of the Plug-in to offset its additional cost.
And of course, this does not mention that regular hybrids are a proven, reliable technology. Plug-ins are untested over long periods of time. The cost of replacing the Plug-in hybrid’s huge, expensive battery if it fails before 10 years will be huge.
For a long time to come, far more fuel will be saved, at a far lower cost, by simply getting people to switch from standard vehicles to hybrids.
I wish GM well with the Volt. But I would guess that the Insight will outsell the Volt 20-1, and will fuel savings of an even greater magnitude in comparison to the Volt.
Sep 12th, 2008 (6:48 am)Anyone else wish the volt had the sleek looking design of the Honda above it?
The volt looks like a Taurus compared to the Honda above it.
I’ll probably buy one simply because it will enable me to stop buying gasoline, but I sure wish it was more edgier looking like the honda above. Not all soft round, and chubby looking like what we have seen.
Anyone else feel this way?
Sep 12th, 2008 (8:11 am)My Grandmother will love it!!!!
Sep 12th, 2008 (8:23 am)WHy can.t it look more like the TESLA
Sep 12th, 2008 (8:29 am)Statik
Just being light-heated…?
Freudian slip or was it just punnie?
Tag
LJGTVWOTR
Sep 12th, 2008 (10:20 am)All 3, GM, Toyota and Honda are 100% correct. The only difference is that Toyota and Honda are designing for short/medium term while GM is designing for long term. That means higher sales for TH short term while GM will benefit in the long term.
EVs or EREVs won’t be cost effective compared to Prius/Insight type designs until gasoline prices increase even more, like 3x to 6x. However, even before that point there will be supply disruptions which will increase in frequency over time. Today it is Ike hurricane hitting Texas refineries. Tomorrow it will be something else.
Thus other non-economic, rather utility benefits will emerge over time. So when Insights and Prius are grounded due to fuel shortages, then Volts will still go 40 miles. So over time EVs and EREVs will become ever more appealing as they are seen as more reliable and less vulnerable to price jumps and supply disruptions of fuel.
However, for the short term we simply don’t have the battery production capacity for building many EVs and EREVs. That is a fact. So clearly for short term GM is wrong as it simply cannot build high enough volume of Volts to compete with Prius and Insight. How long it takes to build battery capacity *AND* bring down battery production costs is the key question that will determine when Volt starts to lead ahead.
Another huge factor that will become apparent over time is that in the worst case (electricity grid issues) you can even charge your EV from local sources, solar panels and wind turbines. There is no such option for gasoline.
Sep 12th, 2008 (11:51 am)Honda – no EV
What that means is they will satisfy the California ZEV mandate with fuel cell vehicles. Too bad. Puring money down the drain.
Sep 12th, 2008 (12:11 pm)pauln #138 and linked article “The Volt Lie”
The article got the Volt concept completely wrong. The Volt concept is a plug-in electric car with 40 miles AER and a range extender. That’s a lie?
Actually, what’s hard to believe is your statement that you’ve “been following the Volt developments closely here”, and then define the Volt concept as something almost entirely tied to its appearance.
It’s a one sided article. It doesn’t factor out short term emotion. It doesn’t give adequate time to the large number of people contributing to this site who see things differently. Not insightful. Awful journalism, frankly. But then the article is on a site that has “GM-deathwatch” in its title, so it’s reasonable to accuse you of trying to assist your prophesy in the most blatently biased manner.
We all know that the Volt project is risky and could fail. But long term success could benefit us all, and it has a decent shot. It won’t fail due to lack of sex appeal.
Sep 12th, 2008 (1:11 pm)#199, canuck2, “All 3, GM, Toyota and Honda are 100% correct. The only difference is that Toyota and Honda are designing for short/medium term while GM is designing for long term. That means higher sales for TH short term while GM will benefit in the long term.”
That’s only true and a strategic advantage for GM if Toyota and Honda’s current projects preclude Toyota and Honda from doing an E-REV similar to the Volt. Which is certainly not the case for Toyota, for sure. When Toyota thinks Li-Ion is ready, they can swap it for the current battery and get 15-20 miles electric; possibly more. And they have the resources and expertise to do a purpose-built E-REV quickly. The original Prius was done in 2.5 years.
And Toyota now has 10 years experience with modern electric motors and controller in automotive use. That is a significant strategic advantage. Toyota has relevant very long-term test info available today to help them design and refine systems for longevity and durability. GM won’t have access to the same type, quantity and quality of information until 2019 or later.
And strategic advantage can be undermined by price and profitability in the short-term. It does GM no good to make a play that MAY pay off in 2013 if they don’t make it through 2012.
Sep 12th, 2008 (1:42 pm)Worrisome. That is my word when it comes to Volt vs. Honda. Why? Honda is the BEST car company when it comes to engineering. If it was Ford saying what Honda is saying then I’d dismiss it as anti-Volt PR. But it’s not Ford talking.
So it goes back to the “Volt is GM’s moonshot.” True. It IS a huge leap technologically. No one has EVER built a car based on the locomotive model.
So Lyle, how about an article on the Volt’s GENERATOR. Please! There is nothing like it in any car in the world!
Sep 12th, 2008 (2:14 pm)GM has a requirement to meet that Honda and Toyota do not. GM has to change mindshare.
There is a general impression by consumers that GM does not care; that GM cars are not good and that Toyota/Honda are good and do care. In one swoop, Volt, and other cars to be launched hope to answer those questions.
This product is larger than one car. It is an attempt to change the world perception of GM. I hope it works out. One in seven jobs in the US depend on the manufacture of automobiles.
Sep 12th, 2008 (4:52 pm)Eggs-cell-lent, Smithers, eggs-cell-lent.
Sep 12th, 2008 (6:07 pm)In the end, a more electric-biased car makes sense. I like my Prius a lot for the 52 mpg that I realize, though. But, less fuel consumption would be better, imo.
Sep 12th, 2008 (8:19 pm)I remember a year ago (long before the production Volt), how everyone HATED the Volt’s aggressive styling.
How there was post after post, begging Bob Lutz to “tone down” the Volt. “Please Mr Lutz, make the Volt blend it with the other high mileage cars” they said. “My wife will never allow me to buy a car this sexy” they said. “With those fender flares, the aerodynamic drag alone will doom the Volt’s range” they said.
Oh wait….no, I was wrong – NO ONE actually said things like that a year before the production Volt was unveiled. It’s funny what stark, absolute, underwear-staining fear of delaying the new Volt as much as one day will make people say. Especially the ones who were for the concept Volt before they were against it. Hypocrisy ? Denial ? Perhaps the shock of losing the concept Volt made them lose their memory of how much they loved the concept Volt before they hated it.
LJGTCVWOTRBHIKIB (Lets Just Get The Concept Volt’s Wheels On The Road Before Honda’s Insight Kicks Its Behind)
Sep 12th, 2008 (8:28 pm)#202 dagwood55
I basically see it this way. Toyota is cashing in from their previous gamble with the Prius, Honda is playing catchup with the new Insight (since their previous Insight basically flopped). So GM has three options: not do anything in response, play catchup like Honda is, or try to gamble and hopefully be in front of Toyota. It is true Toyota has expertise on electric motors & controllers, but it is not true on the side of li-ion batteries; that is a variable for both Toyota & GM. I also think with their previous work on the EV-1 & hybrids & even hybrid buses, GM probably has the same or better experience with electric motors & controllers than Toyota. The Volt doesn’t have to sell more than the Prius to be a success (initially at least, eventually it should pass the Prius, but probably quite a while later), it just needs to change perceptions of the company, which in turn will drive sales of cars across the whole brand. If Toyota comes out with their own PHEV/E-REV after the Volt, then it will establish that they are following and give more validity to the Volt. I think that is the basic strategy of the Volt. Of course all this rides on the Volt being the first and also the best PHEV/E-REV out there at least for a couple of years.
A lot of people here have already declared the death sentence for the Volt after seeing a bunch of leaked pictures, but I think it’s too soon to judge on the Volt; we need to see the reaction when it actually reaches production and gets into customer hands.
Sep 13th, 2008 (6:53 am)Kato-san thinks it takes a 4-ton battery to match the performance of an Accord? How does the Tesla out-perform the Accord (by a LOT) with a 1/2 ton battery? The Tesla is a smaller car, but what is he going to say when the Whitestar comes out?
What about the iMiEV, which out-performs the top of the line turbocharged gasolene equivlent?
Kato-san also predicts that “only” 1% of the vehicle fleet will be EVs by 2015? That would be 2,000,000 cars here in the US, after only 5 years of production. That would be a much higher adoption rate than gasolene-electric hybrids had in this country. That sounds like a overly optimistic prediction to me. Hybrids will be more cost effective than EVs for a long time, and don’t have range limitations, forcing EVs into a more expensive niche.
GSP
Sep 13th, 2008 (9:12 am)I want to know some exact numbers. How much does each car cost? Also, what it the exact mpg for the new Honda. I’ve heard as much as 78 mpg. I recently heard it will be 40-45 mpg. What is it?
And with the Volt, if I went on a long trip and used the first 40 miles in electric how far will I go with the full tank? What is the true gas mileage of the volt when it is generating electricity from the gas. Remember, to prduce electricity it takes energy.
Has anyone tried those water to hydrogen systems for their gas cars? Do they work and are there any potential problems. If the water to hydrogen systems can be made for under a hundred bucks and get the 30 to 50 percent in MPG they claim, then we should do this and save ourselves huge amounts of money buying new cars that may be a flop.
Sep 14th, 2008 (7:16 am)I am trying an HHO device in a Buick Terraza. It consisted of SS plates in a ball jar. It draws about 20 amps and pumps out a lot of gas.
The bad news is that before I installed it the Terraza got about 17 mpg on a good day which is terrible mileage. After the HHO install I got 11 mpg. The mileage went backwards. BEWARE of these devices in GM cars. The computer senses a mileage cheat and it dumps gas in your engine. Thanks GM.
I also am trying a programmer with a resistance switch to lean the fuel mixture hooked into the computer and got it back to around 17 mpg.
Bottom line is…. The HHO may work in Hondas and Toyotas but not in a Terraza! I can not even sell it now due to the bad gas mileage.
My Honda Civic can get over 40 mpg on the highway and I only paid 17.5K for it.
HONDA GOT IT RIGHT. The car is actually built in Ohio not Mexico.
Sep 14th, 2008 (11:21 am)Although I find the volt design insightful and energizing.
And the look of the insight, revolting.
I feel they can peacefully coexist in one accord.
Sep 14th, 2008 (7:19 pm)The government is push the volt.. GM is getting subsidies they wouldnt be getting if they copied other hybrids.
And for you who dont like the looks, get over it. You can not change physics (aerodynamics). All low CD vehicles with same general interior capacity will look the same!
Sep 15th, 2008 (1:08 am)Agreed. I have finally come to grips with that and do see the Volt as the better of the bunch in style.
Sep 16th, 2008 (12:24 pm)I have never cared for that garish looking boxy tricked out Volt concept car. I think it appeals. as many concept show cars do, to a certain kind of car fan. Nothing wrong with that, everyone has different tastes regarding style. But I am overjoyed GM modified the look. I will have to see the car in person, but at this point I have no problem with the look, and when viewed next to that ugly Honda … but some people here actually like that Honda look. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Regarding the crystal ball – when people start hearing of their neighbors having to hit the petrol station only every 2 months, they will be signing up in droves to purchase a Volt. IF the Volt is reasonably priced. 40 grand range means it will be mainly green aficionados purchasing. Lower price means lots of people will purchase – once they see concrete examples of neighbors doing just fine with the 40 mile battery range. If Volt is a decent price and well built, and petrol costs don’t plunge, the car will in my opinion do much better than Honda and others predict. Pundits are underestimating the real world allure of rarely having to visit a petrol station – owners will feel like it runs for free due to the lower fuel (electric) costs and deferred payment (monthly bill) compared to immediate impact of petrol pump cost. GM just has to get these things in the field at reasonable price.
Sep 16th, 2008 (4:46 pm)Last time I checked both Honda and Toyota were actually making money where GM is loosing boatloads. My belief is that a viable, successful and affordable EV will be more of an evolutionary process rather than a revelation like GM seems to think. Both Honda and Toyota will continue to evolve their hybrids to a point where they will replace current ICE economy cars for the same price. They will then turn to full EV and develop that. They will continue to be profitable companies during this process which will allow them to develop a real world affordable EV much like they did with their current hybrids. I see a lot of folks saying that the ‘Prius’ was a gamble on Toyota’s part. That is ridiculous. It was more of an experiment than anything else. You see, Toyota was never in the midst of a ‘turnaround’ like GM is. Toyota keeps turning a profit which allows it to develop the Prius over time until it is perfected. Honda is doing much the same. As for GM, many seem to think that they need something like the Volt to save the company. That is why the car will fail as it will hastily be brought to market. The fact is that no matter how good this Volt is, it will not outsell the Honda/Toyota hybrid offerings and will not even be close to an economical option. The only hope for GM is that they can survive long enough to perfect an EV before Honda and Toyota do.
Sep 17th, 2008 (5:44 am)to all the folks trying to compare the cost difference between these two cars…… stop it …..your insane……you could never buy a drop of gas or pay for a single charge in your volt and it over a ten year period it will cost you as much as hybrid in battariy replacements. li ion battaries have a life span just like the batt in your cell phone the technology for the battaries is not here yet. When it is we will be reading about honda and toyota evs not gm publicity stunts
Sep 17th, 2008 (11:23 am)I think the Volt is a great concept, however, the price tag will limit the market of buyers ready to shell out 35K, including myself. Perhaps as years pass the technology will make the car more affordable, but for now I will opt for the Insight when it becomes available next year. Based on my commute, the Volt will provide the better mpg than the Insight, but because of the price differential, it will take a lot longer to realize any savings greater than what the Insight will provide in the first 5-8 years of ownership.
Sep 17th, 2008 (3:27 pm)First, if 1% of the fleet was electric (and dominated by the volt) we are talking about 2 million vehicles. If GM were to sell 1 million volts in the first 4 years of production I think they would be estatic.
Secondly, the price tag will not be $35,000. Particularly, if the government funds the develpment with cheap loans. If it is, then GM will look pretty bad and will fail.
Sep 18th, 2008 (5:38 pm)Volt and all electrics, fuel cells, and hydrogen are the future. Battery technologies are accelerating exponentially. Check out this Web Site archives for the last six months “kurzweilAI.net/news/rss” and be amazed. There are batteries in the labs producing ten times plus the power. It can be done if we put the investment in and believe. It’s time to get off hydrocarbons and save up to $700 billion for our economy. GM took the big step, and now, lets make it work…unlike the old EV GM abandoned. Yes, with the U.S. and world economies in trumoil the government may need to help, but sometime that is the price for success…like after the 1929 recession. Lets get on with a better environment and sustainable future.
Truck driver/miner Web Page GOOGLE Keyword “Dr. Warpenstein” or “drwarpenstein.com”
Jan 2nd, 2009 (9:20 am)I don’t believe Honda does not have any plans for an electric. I think they are not telling the truth.
Apr 12th, 2009 (1:46 pm)Shame on GM for taking Honda’s designs. It reminds me of that Chinese automaker that caused a big ruckus by copying BMW’S SUV design. The Chevy Volt concept is very reminiscent of the Honda Civic, let alone the Insight.