The Chevy Volt concept was first unveiled in January 2007 to much fanfare and great national enthusiasm. Soon after, the typically outspoken GM vice chairman Bob Lutz told the world he expected the Volt to be sold for under $30,000. This further stoked the enthusiasm.
Later, he had to take those words back. In a newly published interview, he explains why.
It turns out he figured GM could use off-the-shelf components for everything but the battery.
“When I said I hope to sell it in the 20s, I just thought, well, if a conventional car of that size with a conventional four-cylinder engine, we can sell it for $15,000 or $16,000, then let’s notionally add $8,000 for the battery and we’re at $25,000,” said Lutz. “That’s the way my brain worked on that one.”
It was determined during development that the Volt would need many specialized and custom components including an expensive drivetrain, microprocessor controllers, and electrified AC compressor and brakes. Parts like these were not easy to find or cheap in the supplier market.
“You have to go to suppliers that you think have the experience, the capability and the manufacturing scale to do this,” said GM VP Jon Lauckner, co-creator of the Volt. “In many cases, it’s less than the number of fingers on your hand, with some fingers to spare.”
Another major cost factor for the car is guaranteeing the brand new high-tech battery pack for 10 years, 150,000 miles that is required by CARB. Lutz noted that if warranty costs don’t reach projected values, “the car is OK almost from day one.”
The author if this report claims to know the Volt’s battery pack will be $8000, and that the car will retail for $40,000, with GM selling them to dealers at a loss, in the mid to upper 30s. The average transaction price including tax and destination charges with thus be about $43,000.
It was also mentioned that the $1 billion development cost for the car almost killed the program as that is the same cost to develop three conventional cars. It was the tremendous public pressure, which I daresay this site had a lot to do with, that kept the program alive.
Experts expect the battery pack cost to be cut in half in 5 to 10 years at that point allowing the car to sell for under $30,000. For those future versions, Lutz expects GM to keep the same 40 mile range, using the reductions in battery price instead to lower the vehicle’s cost to consumers.
“I think it’s all going to head in the direction of a smaller, lighter battery at much lower cost delivering the same range,” said Lutz.
Though costs could also be reduced by spreading Voltec into multiple vehicles, like the Orlando we just mentioned, or the Cadillac Converj, these cars remain in limbo. Lutz said he expects GM to move slowly on these, stating “vehicle price is going to be a big issue for a long time to come.”
Source (AdAge)
This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 4th, 2009 at 6:09 am and is filed under Financial. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+11
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:19 am)First versions of all new things cost more. That is what “early adopters” are willing to pay.
+8
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:21 am)Once supply chains ramp up production of custom components, or other suppliers are found, prices will fall; its inevitable. 40k is a bit pricey for the average consumer, but with such a limited number going into production, GM will have no trouble selling the first round of cars.
+11
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:24 am)I’m still daring to hope GM will surprise the automotive world (and delight first adopters like us) by offering the Volt at a base price (before any rebate) of ~$35,000. There’s no reason they can’t keep the MSRP quiet until just before dealers have the first cars.
-61
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:34 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:35 am)The Volt looks pretty slick in black. How about photochromic (photo-gray) glass all around. Will tint darker in increased UV. Corning is the manufacturer.
More American jobs… yes we can?
=D~
-8
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:39 am)“When I said I hope to sell it in the 20s, I just thought, well, if a conventional car of that size with a conventional four-cylinder engine, we can sell it for $15,000 or $16,000, then let’s notionally add $8,000 for the battery and we’re at $25,000,” said Lutz. “That’s the way my brain worked on that one.”
————————–
RUFKM?
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:49 am)I guess he figured two high powered, high performance motors, power electronics module, charger, control software, display software, etc were $3-4k. So, does this mean a reasonably equipped Cruze will be $16K. I guess he “forgot” that was more like $19k.
LJGTVWOTR!
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:50 am)If this reporter is correct (about $43K each), the Volt is now priced out of my range even with the Federal incentive. That doesn’t make me too happy.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:51 am)So is that $40K price for the base model of the fully optioned LTZ model? If that is the price for a stripped down Tag or Capt Jack model, then the Volt program will have some problems.
I can handle $40K, but it has to be fully equipped to get this one past the wife. We would be having some long and probably very loud “discussions” to even think of us buying a $50K car……….
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:52 am)“The author if this report claims to know the Volt’s battery pack will be $8000, and that the car will retail for $40,000, with GM selling them to dealers at a loss, in the mid to upper 30s. The average transaction price including tax and destination charges with thus be about $43,000.”
—————–
I must say I am a bit disappointed, as I wanted to be one of those early adopters, but at that price point it won’t happen. Even with the 7500 rebate, we are still looking at an average price of 35,500! I was planning on the 30,000 max price.
I will continue to patiently wait for that initial release of the Volt, but my instincts are telling me I may have to wait for the 2nd or possibly the 3rd generation.
-8
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:59 am)Guess Maximum Bob sat down to some real serious cypherin’ before he decided to leapfrog the competition.
Maybe we should start calling him Maximum Jethro.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:00 am)“…with GM selling them to dealers at a loss, in the mid to upper 30s.”
=======================================================
This is a real problem. GM needs positive cash flow NOW!
You don’t keep your company afloat, by handing out free money. So, how long will it be before GM can actually make a SUBSTANTIAL profit with the Volt? They need to be making more than a couple hundred bucks a copy, otherwise, guess who gets to come in and give them another hand(out).
So, at $43,000, with the temporary $7,500 govt handout, your at $35,000 (yikes!). But worse yet, is when GM manages to cut the battery pack in half, and Uncle Sam is not handing out anymore rebates, your now talking $39,000!
So, somehow GM needs to really get the cost of all the OTHER things that come along with the EREV. Even if the battery were free, the Volt would still sell for $35,000, after the govt’ rebates end.
This is one advantage the BEV will always have over the EREV, and that is it does not add in all the various ICE components, and the price will track the price of batteries. And GM believes the cost of next gen batteries reduces by 1/2.
/coffee breaks over, back on your heads…
+6
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:21 am)Personally, I think any talk about pricing is smoke and mirrors at this time. The competition needs to believe that the price is $40k or more, so that is the standard story.
The base car at $16k, plus $8k for the battery is $24k. Where is the other $16K being spent? Battery warranty?
I’m with you, Nasaman, I expect a well-equipped Volt (leather, sunroof, GT package, no Nav/DVD) to list for about $35K.
We’ve already seen that GM is building a battery pack assembly plant that can manufacture at least 100,000 battery packs per year, so they must be anticipating higher volumes, which equates to lower production costs.
And to get the sales volume started, you need good pricing.
If the volume is high enough, >50,000 cars per year, GM can sell Volts at $35k and still make money IMO.
+5
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:48 am)Price is an entirely different thing from cost. At first one says well price really is cost plus 10%, or some such. But it isn’t, as is obvious if one thinks about superbowl tickets, or about yard sales.
So I agree with BillR’s statement that “to get sales volume started, you need good pricing.” GM has some volume of sales in mind, they will plan to make that number, and they are going to pick a price that they believe will allow that volume to be sold. They might be wrong, but that is how they are going to set the price. It has nothing to do with costs.
If $40K is the price, then that is chosen as the price GM thinks is right to sell the first 10,000. It seems reasonable to me. After that, we’ll see what the price is for the next 50,000 Volts or whatever size that next group is.
+11
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:51 am)It’s not going to look like a failure, it’s going to look like a rare and special car. It will have the aura of something that is hard to find and hard to get. The other side of that mystique is the price tag.
I thought the interesting hard information in this post was about all the non-standard components. In part that’s bad (harder to get parts to fix when broken). But in part it is very good, really a new look at how to do some standard things like AC in a much better way.
+7
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:55 am)/friggin Bob Lutz
Didn’t know the concept was a brick in the wind tunnel.
Didn’t know they would have to use model specific parts.
Didn’t know what kind of warranty they were legally required to give.
Didn’t know what the R&D would be to develop it.
/but he can rock the hell out of a pink tie
Nothing new here…but always fun to look back.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:58 am)Right Lane Cruiser
Nearly 10% more may put it beyond my reach as well.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:00 am)AHAHAHAH…There you go.
You’ve been waiting to post that again for some time now…hehe!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:04 am)Another major cost factor for the car is guaranteeing the brand new high-tech battery pack for 10 years, 150,000 miles that is required by CARB. Lutz noted that if warranty costs don’t reach projected values, “the car is OK almost from day one.”
=====================================================
This is the big gotcha – The warranty. Everything we have heard is that the battery is working great. But GM is will only have 2 years of battery testing to prove the batterys will last 10 years – 150,000 miles. The accountants have upped the price to cover their A***, and still think they might lose money. I believe the car will make money for GM in the short term, but it may all be sucked back out when the warranty claims start to hit.
If this car is as reliable as I and other on this blog hope it will be. GM may make money on this car. Lutz was quoted on saying this sometime back on gm-volt.com. But we wont know for 10 years.
I would be willing to let them pro-rate the battery after the first 100,00 miles if it would reduce the initial purchase price by thousands of dollars.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:06 am)“It was determined during development that the Volt would need many specialized and custom components including an expensive drivetrain, microprocessor controllers, and electrified AC compressor and brakes.”
—–
How can this be an excuse? It isn’t like this is GM’s first electric car, in fact GM had a plug in hybrid concept back in 1969. Add with the EV-1, all the demo EVs, and all the fuel cell cars they have built they had to be well aware of what it would take to go into production with an EREV. I also find in hard to believe that they didn’t know of the problems Toyota had getting the price down within the supply base for the Prius.
So maybe we can just blame Bob Lutz for speaking about something he didn’t (but should have) known anything about. But I really wonder how disciplined GM’s preliminary design team is. I really worry that in the critical early design phases, they are poorly estimating cost and anticipating the primary engineering challenges. Bob Lutz makes it appear that they go through the same steps in the design process that they have been going through for years and then in the end after they’ve far outspent their development budget finally figure out what the car actually costs them to build.
+4
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:09 am)The costs of the electric power steering, the electric power brakes, and the electric air conditioning and heater will also drop. So will the electric motor and generator. All of these things are new to the Volt but the normal economies of scale will apply to them.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:10 am)When the predicted price gradually (or precipitously) rose to the 40K range, we had an understandable surge of rage here and I believe we even lost some posters, BUT there are still a good group of us here and I think the general public’s reaction will parallel the response here.
The bright side is that if the suppliers are so specialized, they’ll be hiring folks and/or expanding their hardware as the Volt becomes the hit we know it will be.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:13 am)Nasaman said:
“I’m still daring to hope GM will surprise the automotive world (and delight first adopters like us) by offering the Volt at a base price (before any rebate) of ~$35,000. There’s no reason they can’t keep the MSRP quiet until just before dealers have the first cars”
—–
It would be nice to see something like this, from a car buyer prospective (not so much from we’d like GM to stick around for awhile perspecitive, lol).
I think even $37,499 would be a fine number for decent volume (and give GM as much revenue as they can for the buck to achieve it). At $37,499 they can cross promote the $7,500 rebate and let people do the math themselves.
I think many posters here are right, that true volume numbers come when the perceived starting price is a ’2′ That being said, and if this article is right (and our thinking as well is right), that GM loses money at $40,000 a pop…GM may in fact not want to sell the Volt in any volume right out of the gate at a loss like that.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:14 am)It is true…I cannot lie.
-15
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:14 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:24 am)If the cost of the batteries are so high, how can GM competitors get around the high price of an all electric car? I take it that the extra amount of batteries used in these all electric cars would cost more than the ICE used in the Volt…..so how can the competitors be selling their all electric cars cheaper? To me the logic is not there, unless the competitors batteries are much cheaper. I doubt if that is the case. Or maybe, GM is going to surprise us by under-promising and over delivering although they do not have a history of doing that. Maybe Lutz original estimate was correct and GM, for once, wants to surprise the world when all the specs are release.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:26 am)Meanwhile the Nissan Leaf starts selling for $15k plus another $10k for the battery that you can either lease or purchase.. and some enterprising company starts offering a genset on a trailer for $3k, and in a few years the Uhaul starts to rent the genset out.
+6
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:28 am)Count your blessings. If Bob and the rest had know how difficult it would be from the beginning they might have just scrapped the whole project. Without rose colored glasses and a sense of optimism a lot less would get done.
+17
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:28 am)I have to agree with RB about it being perceived as a failure. The price may not be what it shoud be, and the car may not look like what it is intended, but just the fact that it exists will be a feather in GM’s cap.
Sometimes just the ‘green halo’ is enough to declare mission accomplished…and if they can get it out on time, hitting the benchmarks while performing reliably, I think that is the case here for GM.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:36 am)http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1035/Revealed-2011-Nissan-Leaf-Electric-Car
“To the degree that price matters, Nissan’s also got a big edge in the EV world. Pricing hasn’t been announced, but the company insists the Leaf will be “affordable” with pricing equivalent to a well-equipped C-class (compact) car.
That’s a European compact, though, and they’re a lot better equipped, and more costly, than compacts in the U.S. so figure $28,000 to as much as $35,000..
Nissan officials say pricing was held down in part by developing the entire powertrain, including the laminated lithium-manganese battery pack — arguably the most expensive single component on the car at around $10,000 — in-house with an eye toward affordability.
But the real trick is that the batteries won’t be part of the selling price: Nissan’s global approach will be to sell the car, but lease the battery pack.
The argument for leasing is that if you buy a gasoline car, the gasoline isn’t part of the deal, and the battery pack in an EV (plus the electricity that it stores) can be likened to the gas needed to make a conventional car go.
The approach in the U.S, where consumers might be leery of buying a car, but having to lease an essential part of its powertrain, may be to simply lease the entire package, said Andy Palmer, Nissan’s senior vice president and head of product planning…”
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:36 am)Too rich for my blood (whatever that means). I’m out.
+7
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:38 am)Let’s wait for GM to officially give out the price.Until then it’s all speculation.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:43 am)Even if Volt fails, there will be another, namely Hyundai using LG’s 2nd gen PHEV battery pack in Blu-WILL, delivering Volt like capability for around $30,000 by the end of 2012.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:44 am)Good post JEC, and that is the problem with the price to the consumer being subsidized on a limited time basis from the government. Basically, the rebate builds in the savings they will achieve down the road, so the odds of the price to the consumer coming down 3-4 years from now isn’t so great.
GM HAS to get at least $7,500 out of the price in the first 3 years just to make up for the loss of the rebate (at 200,000 units sold). So while the economics of scale, and the price of packs coming down is great, for GM it is tempered by the loss of the rebate.
+7
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:47 am)Statik,
Well put as always. And there’s always a CHANCE that it’ll be less than the 40K. Why tell the competition a year ahead of time.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:51 am)The electric power steering has been on a lot of the Malibus since 2004.. so I would assume that the cost for this is already down and is available “off the shelf”
+4
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:52 am)But Wayne, driving that prissy around will get you laughed at ! If you are interested in a low-cost sled that looks great, buy a Camaro that gets 29 mpg and starts in the low 20′s ….if you really want to minimize your gas consumption, however, you gotta pay the piper !
Be the first on your block !
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:52 am)Sort of off topic, but it applies to the picture above.
Note that in the front of the Volt there is a grey colored “spoiler” or air diverter at the bottom. Also, in the same color you see side skirts under the doors.
We know a lot of work went into the aerodynamic design of the Volt, and that to achieve stellar Cd values, you must not only examine the upper portion of the car, but also the way in which air flows underneath.
What I am wondering is whether this/these parts make up a underbody panel that is used to smooth the air flow underneath the car.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:52 am)Bob Lutz said the thing some of us have been saying for some time. Vehicle cost will be a big factor in determining the Volt’s future. It will be the biggest factor in continuing the slow adoption of it in the marketplace. It will be a hard sell after the first year’s hype is over. That first year’s production will sell as fast as the dealers can get them in. Even a large percentage of the second year’s production will sell fairly fast. Unless fuel cost rise at or above last year’s levels the remaining 2012 model year production and the years after will be harder to sell because people will have more options to chose from and the price will be a drag on the vehicle.
This is my opinion. It may conflict with everything most of you believe and hope will happen. Heck, it conflicts with what I want to believe and it most certainly conflicts with what I had hoped would happen. But facts are hard to get around. Logic demands we look at the facts. I don’t want to see really high fuel cost just so I can breath easier about the success of the Volt, but I do want the Volt to be successful. This is just me staring at reality.
For the Volt to be successful GM must get cost savings into the production stream as fast as possible. The battery is where most of the savings can be realized, but can they do it in the first 5 years? They need to do it sooner because 5 years selling at a loss will doom the technology to the back burner.
One bright spot does appear from nearly the beginning. Europe will need a car like the Volt and Ampera and they should sell well there until the competition tries to match or exceed them. Europe may be the saving of the Voltec technology. Maybe.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:55 am)Don’t be a stick-in-the-mud, statik – remember, Maximum Bob is going to feed you a big slice of humble pie in about 15 months ( or sooner …. !)!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:57 am)Statik,
Given the bailout money, won’t that offset the billion spent in R&D and let them turn a profit sooner? You’re the numbers guru.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+5
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:57 am)ThombDBhomb
Me too, but I was out at anything above $30k, but I still like sitting at the table and watching/listening, to all the pro’s and con’s.
“I like to watch…”
All the news on the Volt and other EV’s helps me in understanding where I need to be in a few years. I am now trying to make my best guess on what the future of EV’s are and how I can fit into the equation.
I want to be ready to go “All In”, when the moment is right.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:57 am)I guess I choose to look back at it like this:
When GM saw the car had teh aero of a brick…
When GM realized all new specific parts would be required…
When GM realized the warranty for this kind of car would be so extensive…
When GM realized the cost of R&D….
When GM realized they were going to go to Bankruptcy court…
GM kept at it despite all of these revelations, and for that I’m thankful.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:57 am)Look for the electric accessories to make their way into non-Volt cars. The absence of today’s belt-driven add-ons would yield much greater freedom in engine-compartment layout (and provides less of a servicing headache for the owner).
Several cars are already sold with electric steering.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:00 am)I’ve been out for awhile, but still have hopes for Gen II.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:03 am)Yep. I guess that is why this site exists.
If we waited for the official announcement on everything, then what the heck would we talk about? Price of tea in China comes to mind, but I really do not drink tea.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:07 am)If this prediction is correct, $40k may not seem so bad.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&tkr=BA%3AUS&sid=aabdwFGiKH1E
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:10 am)BTW: Has anyone got a dollar figure on those motors? I believe motors in the 53KW (70 hp) range, for an inverter rated duty would cost at least $1000, and the Volt needs two of these. These would be OTS, but what would the cost of the custom motors rated to run in the harsh environment of a vehicle run?
I think someone answered this LONG ago, but I cannot find the info.
-2
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:10 am)Things are already starting to look pretty bleak, and the no-name troll doesn’t show up for another 50 minutes.
He might be something of a relief, today.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:13 am)“GM HAS to get at least $7,500 out of the price in the first 3 years just to make up for the loss of the rebate (at 200,000 units sold). So while the economics of scale, and the price of packs coming down is great, for GM it is tempered by the loss of the rebate.”
Thanks loads, statik.
Looks like I could be down for the count.
I think you’re whistling past the graveyard, nasaman. When it comes to costing, the news is seldom good; especially these days.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:17 am)I’m not trying to be argumentative, but what competitors are you speaking of that are producing and selling a cheaper EV than GM? To my knowledge, there is none.
Tesla Roadster is the only available EV out there and that’s around $92,000. All of the others that come to mind are still in developement, and until they sit in a dealership with a window sticker, we can’t account for them.
+6
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:17 am)If Volt fails, look for timescales of similar projects to slip. Volt has put much of the haste, if not the overall impetus, into many of these other projects, IMO.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:21 am)I have long believed that the end of oil will be the best thing that has ever happened to the US and other energy hungry countries.
We will not go back to the stone age. Our lives will actually improve, as the need for people to once again depend upon themselves and their neighbors, instead of the Wal-Mart;s and Home Depot’s of the world. People will adjust, and for the better. It is an evolution that I hope occurs in my lifetime.
/The future looks bright, get me some sunglassses (made of non-Hydrocarbon based material)
+14
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:25 am)Wayne, you’re not paying attention. Ask yourself, what can the Volt do that the Prius cannot? When you learn the way the Volt operates, you will see that it is much more than a Prius and therefore not at all in competition with the Prius. The Prius is a gasoline powered car that gets good mileage. Now describe the Volt.
It’s like comparing a Apple iPhone with a Motarola Razr. Both are phones, but one costs a lot more than the other. Does that mean the iPhone is a failure? Did Apple make a bad business decision by producing a phone that initially cost almost $500 when other phones could be had for $100 and less?
Should GM just copy whatever Toyota does or innovate? That is debatable at this point. Personally I believe that GM’s only hope for a future is to innovate beyond Toyota rather than just be a second rate Toyota wannabe. We already have Honda, Nissan and Hyundai for that. The Volt is an opportunity to show that GM can think for itself, pioneer and successfully engineer new technologies and has it’s eyes on the road ahead instead of just somebody else’s taillights.
-2
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:28 am)What a bunch of children , you keep saying that the price will come down . When is the last time you saw the price of a car come down ?
Sure the cost of the battery will come down as production goes up (a little )but you seem to overlook the fact that the companies are put together to do two things , make a product and make a profit for the shareholders . The shareholders sure will be pissed if the president of the company doesn’t make any money for them .
You as an owner of a car would be very upset if you were to discover that if you had waited for another 60 days that it would have cost you 5,000 dollars less . It just isn’t going to happen , remember the screaming and hollering with the Apple when the price was lowered . Get real people stop living in a dream world of pretend .
This car is way over priced and you all know it .
The technology is great , probably the most important technology of the 21 century , but it sure isn’t worth any more than 35,000 dollars no matter how you slice it .
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:29 am)JEC,
“OTS stands for…?
Thanks.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:29 am)The 1 Billion in development costs was covered by the taxpayers in the form of a bailout. That sounds like a lot, but it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of billions given to the banks, and we still have nothing to show for that.
By comparison, investing taxpayer dollars in better technology in the long run will be the better investment.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:30 am)Edit to self (I missed this when I originally wrote it, but after re-reading my own post I realized how this could be misunderstood)
When I said end of oil, I really meant the end of cheap oil. Oil will be available for along time.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:30 am)If what he said is true, he was using the correct logic. He did not realize the car would require so much new hardware that no one had available for automotive purposes. I would have come to the same conclusion and many of us have over the past two and a half years.
+8
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:31 am)Considering they’re only making 10,000 of them the first year–I don’t think they’ll have a problem selling them.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:32 am)Tag, that is exactly what I was thinking.
With the economy being as bad as it is, and with my employer taking advantage of it, I don’t know how much longer I will be employed. If I lose my job, there will be no Volt for me at $40K.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:33 am)There is the old joke about the sales guy who expects to lose money on every unit but make it up in volume. But that’s a joke. If you lose money on every unit there isn’t any “profit” to apply to retire the R&D costs.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:34 am)Joe and JEC,
Agreed. I think the Volt will be priced at $33,999 (g). I hope I’m wrong, because if it is they’ll be sold so fast that we won’t have much hope of getting one the first year (or longer). Unless, of course, dealers (or GM) start to actually start their own waiting lists – and take deposits.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:37 am)Rashiid,
Really sorry to hear about your job concerns. I hang onto the green shoots that say that things are turning around even as we speak.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:38 am)The BEV has no real advantage over the Volt. The specialty equipment that is driving up the cost of the Volt is also required in a BEV. The cost of the very cheap old technology of the ICE is probably around $3000 tops. The additional battery capacity to get the BEV up to an acceptable and marginally salable range is probably another $5000-$8000. I see no advantage and only disadvantage with the BEV in the mainstream automotive market.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:40 am)DonC,
There is also a saying that “You’ll never go broke making a profit” (even a small one).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:42 am)Now we can see why Nissan decided to lease the battery pack. We also see the thinking behind the Better Place model of spreading out the pain of buying the battery pack (mobile phone model).
Hopefully the government subsidy will put the car close enough for early adopters to jump in. Once we get those volumes up the prices will drop fast, especially with cheaper batteries coming out every year.
If the Volt works anywhere close to how good it looks then this vehicle deserves a helping hand to get going. A true masterpiece that needs to see the light of day. Pull out your checkbooks, fellas.
+4
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:43 am)Now you understand why I keep telling statik that quoting Bob Lutz on technical issues is not a terribly good idea. (When for example he waves his arms and says “I really don’t know” and then gives a number — guess what — take him at his word that he doesn’t really know). He’s actually decent at SWAGS, and really good at marketing SWAGS, but though he knows all kinds of things about cars and selling cars, technical details are not his forte.
But no one is good at everything. Plus he’s from the sales and marketing side and he WANTS the car to be priced at $30K. Optimism can always color your perception. For example, Tag keeps hoping for a July 4th 2010 release and nasaman keeps hoping for a lower price. Doesn’t seem either of those are likely.
Let’s see what he can do with the advertising before we coin a new nickname for him.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:45 am)“GM may in fact not want to sell the Volt in any volume right out of the gate at a loss like that.”
I think you’re right on that one. GM needs a grand slam home run that generates a 2-year wait list. Early adopters, aka Hollywood types, will get to smugly show how environmentally green they are, while the General has time to get the costs down for the ’13 and ’14 model years. Then they’ll introduce the EREV Cruze and Orlando.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:46 am)Friggin Bob Lutz
Builds cars that are exciting and build enthusiasm.
Is the only bright spot at GM.
Should never have let us watch the development of the Volt or made any comments about it, just like Toyota does so as to avoid the wrath of internet pundits.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:48 am)Offer To Sell, IE available off the shelf…..?
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:51 am)Zel,
Thanks!
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:52 am)Geez, Static, you have gone totally native on us. Where’s the old “cup is always half empty” curmudgeon that use to get us all pissed off?
As for the post, I will be sorely disapponted if it takes five to 10 year for batter pack prices to drop. I’ve counting on a much faster decline so that someday I may actually be able to affrod a Volt, or one of its descendents.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:54 am)Who is selling their EVs cheaper? Please don’t say Nissan, as they are now at the stage where GM was a year go telling us the Volt was going to be under $30k. Expect to see their price go way up and/or be a battery leasing scheme. Mitsubishi, $47,000. Tesla, $50,000 Aptera doesn’t count. Not a car or even comparable.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:56 am)The problem with a $43,000 price tag is it puts the Tesla Model S at a $50,000 price tag as a serious competitor.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:58 am)This it the Apple Lisa of the electric auto world.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:03 am)FME III
Jeepers, re Statik be careful what you wish for! (lol). I’ll give you credit for mentioning it though. I think a lot of us have noticed the same thing. I have a lot of hypotheses as to why the shift may be occurring but most aren’t publishable (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:05 am)If I’m not mistaken, I’ve seen it somewhere that there will be a full-underbody pan to stabilize airflow underneath the car.
On a sorta-related side note, is it just me, or are the gray panels actually colored BLACK on the black IVERs? I wonder when the above photo was taken, and how it jives with the IVER’s look.
Specifically, I refer to this photo: http://www.gm-volt.com/q/vpo2.jpg
On the other hand, this blue Volt, of unknown classification, does appear to have the gray plastic: http://www.gm-volt.com/p/bluevolt.jpg
Ehhh… who knows. I guess it’s all just speculation ’til we see one on the showroom floor, anyway.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:06 am)LauraM,
Yep. Darn it.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+5
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:08 am)“What a bunch of children , you keep saying that the price will come down . When is the last time you saw the price of a car come down ?”
The VOLT is not ‘over priced’. It is what it is. There are many potential buyers for the VOLT who can easily afford a $40,000 car. Most of them currently shop at Lexus, BMW, and Mercedes.
Those who are complaining here that $40,000 is too high are used to buying $25,000 cars (or less) and probably always have in their adult life. I am one of them.
I would like to buy my next car for about the same price as my last car, and have the benefit of using little or no gas from now on. The fact that I am now SAVING money justifies the purchase. But if I have to ‘step up’ to get that savings on gas, well that changes things, doesn’t it.
This site should actually change to “GM- VOLTEC.com”. It’s not so much about the VOLT any more. It’s more about the technology that will eventually save us all money at the pump.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:08 am)texas re checkbooks
Amen! I wish they’d start taking deposits or some way to “claim” one. I know it’s unlikely, especially if they do a very narrow regional release, but I can hope.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:08 am)Good point Laura… just hope there is a way to test drive one before they are sold to the few.
=D~
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:09 am)Yeah, you guys are getting pretty chummy. I think that going through all of these comments every day somehow tends to “Get your mind right”, as the warden said to Cool Hand Luke.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:11 am)The most important issue is, can it take the electric car mainstream?
Right now, EV’s tend to either be show-offs like the Tesla Roadster, much zip, but very expensive and not terribly practical, or NEV’s like the G-Wiz and other cars with limited speed and/or range.
The EV1 and RAV-4 are rarities, and even they had issues in climates that the Volt should be able to handle without a problem.
I’m hoping it’s perceived as the first practical electric car.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:13 am)Noel,
So who gets to be the Warden? I’m thinking it’d be best if it was Moi (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:14 am)JEC … dollar figure on those motors?
I did a net search and was coming up with $2000 each. When I posted this figure, someone here with an electrical background said that GM should be able to get these for $500-$600 (in volume).
=D~
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:15 am)Corvette guy,
They already HAVE a 2 year waiting list. It’s here. I know it’s unofficial but it’s got to portend SOMETHING – IMHO.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:15 am)I can understand why they’d want to wait on the EREV Cruze and Orlando. But why not build the Converj? They can probably get $80,000 for it since Tesla’s getting over 100k. That way they can start making a profit from Voltec right away.
And it will help them with cafe standards. And increase the volume on some of those components. (Although admittedly not by very much.)
+5
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:16 am)I wonder just how many of us have enough time to actually read through these comments. Lately it seems there are more and more comments than before. Maybe it is due to the new system Lyle is employing that lets us reply directly to each comment. Most days I make it through one reading before refreshing my browser page then I find out you guys have submitted another hundred comments. Of course finding those new comments is not as easy as it used to be when you could pick up where you read the last comment. You have to go back through the complete list and look at each and every one to determine if this comment is new to you. It is a hard read at times. I like the new method and I don’t like it. Know what I mean?
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:18 am)The Lisa led directly to the development of the Mac, these things happen in stages.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:18 am)But what I think Lutz was saying is that they’re going to lose money based on marginal costs. I think they are already discounting the R&D and product development costs.That means the more they make and sell, the more money they lose.
Translation, they’ll probably make as many as they need for cafe. Period. At least until they get the costs down.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:20 am)Folks with 40K to spend on a car have lots of options. And they probably can afford to gas up a nice 3 series BMW. So, do they want to make a statement by driving an electric car, or do they want to just drive a real nice 40K car? I don’t know. But at 40K, I will probably stick with a nice conventional ride and buy the gas. I was in at 25K. Then it made sense to drive a car like this. But to fork out 40K and be a guinea pig for their numerous recalls on the first model? Nope. Not this guy. 40K buys some nice bullet proof cars. Sure they drink gas, but they are proven technology and alot of fun to drive. C class, 3 series, etc.. I want to flip off the gas stations as much as the next guy. But I don’t want to throw out 40K on unproven technology just to save some money on gas. I am a firm believer in this technology. But you have to get the cars on the road first. Competing with entry level European sports sedans is not the way to do it. My opinion… But I am sure they will sell their first run.
Just my 2 cents.
Ken
-3
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:20 am)New question:
If the Volt has a “fob” key that automatically activates the car, will the Hollywood types have to “fumble around” to find it for valet parking? Not a problem for most of us (lol). Our hospital just started valet parking though. It seems kinda out of place.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:22 am)My confidence level went down substantially when I heared that they had resurrected (exhumed?) Lutz. How may cars has GM launched behind his “rose colored glasses”, and how many of them have now disappeared? And how many billions of dollars did it all cost?
Not good.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:23 am)I just asked about the R&D being covered by the bailout (and the answer was “probably”), so I respectfully hope that you are dead wrong.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:24 am)Dav8or,
Very well said. No matter what you, I and others may say about not comparing the Volt and the Prius it is being compared. Right now the Prius is the only other vehicle that comes close to what the Volt can offer the buying public. Not offer the same thing, mind you, but offer some of the same advantages. Later as more companies start offering some real Volt-like vehicles the comparisons will change from Volt versus Prius to Volt EREV versus xyz brand EREV. Even when starts offering the Prius with a Plug the comparisons will be made, but will still be unfair. So, that’s life.
Thanks for you comments. Again, you said it all very well.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:28 am)With so much criticism in regards to the Volt being too expensive and predictions everybody will buy a Prius instead…
…well, who in their right mind would buy a Mini when they could just buy a similarly-sized Yaris at half the price instead.
It’s all in the marketing, people.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:29 am)As I read all of this stuff, I remember that we paid $24K + destination fee, tax, etc., for our Impala in 1995. I wonder what that is in 2009 dollars?
It was a lot of money for us, but the car was so cool, and held out so much promise (mostly unrealized, alas) for the future of Chevrolet, that we just bit the bullet and did it. It still has the highest cool factor of any modern era Chevy on the road in SoCal, aside from the Corvette of course.
That’s what has to happen here. I sure hope it does. Otherwise, it’s going to be pretty easy to resist if it’s over 40K out the door.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:29 am)I know its just a blog!
….must…refrain….from….comments….on….bad…grammer…use
Sorry for this, Thomas Gilling sir…your homework today is to look up and understand the proper use of the following word
—- “their”
as you were.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:29 am)Yes, LauraM, they will “fly off the dealer’s showrooms” as fast as they appear. The real test comes when the initial demand is met. Will it continue to sell as easily or will it become a “hard” sell? If GM does introduce the Volt into Europe in 2011 or early 2012 that will help “sell” that year’s production numbers and probably keep them scarce here at home. Keeping them less available will help to keep the price of the vehicle higher even while GM applies some cost savings to increase the profitability of the line. We will just have to wait and see how all of it comes about. It will prove interesting, if nothing else.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:30 am)DonC,
I think your post was spot on – except that I’m also hoping for the lower price too!
BTW although the production release probably won’t be on time for 7/4/2010, there WILL be dozens of PRE release Volts on the road by then. That was stated in one of the chats.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:33 am)Noel,
Yep, uncontested.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:33 am)There is a lot of room for cost reduction after the first couple of years. And there’s a strong chance that congress will extend the subsidies into gen two. And, if you live in a liberal state, it’s entirely possible that they’ll increase the subsidy. So I wouldn’t give up just yet.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:35 am)You know, I have thought a lot about how the “buying public” is going to get to test drive the Volt. I am not too sure if they will for the first year or maybe more. As I see it, every Volt sold to a dealer will already have a buyer at the dealership waiting for it to come in. Papers will be signed, money will have passed hands and a schedule will have been established. When that shiny new Volt arrives at the dealership the dealer has no right to let some future potential Volt customer take the vehicle out for a test spin. If I were the customer who put up “up front money” and I found the dealer letting every Tom, Dick and Harry drive my Volt I would be highly pissed. To see the least.
So, just how will us late comers who want a Volt test drive be able to get one? I don’t have a good answer. I am not sure anyone does.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:36 am)And yet… Bob Lutz was also responsible for ramming the project through the usually byzantine approval process that cars have to go through at GM, making sure it had the engineering team(s) and resources to fast-track the development of the car.
I’m still not getting why all the hate for Lutz– the guy’s history is one successful automobile after another, and he’s bringing an EREV to market, even when people are telling GM (incorrectly) that it’s a stupid idea.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:36 am)This is exactly the mindset I am in. I have about 35-40K to spend and I am about to buy a 1 or 2 year old Porsche Cayman right now. With depreciation you can get an awesome 1 or 2 year old car right now. I was planning to wait for a Volt or maybe Tesla, but I decided to pull the trigger. Sure it takes gas and I really wanted to get away from that, but the excitement I feel when slipping behind the wheel of the Cayman can’t be duplicated.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:36 am)I feel you Rashiid…I’m probably in a similar boat…my job will probably be OK, problem is for us…. its the entire company that is in flat out survival mode.
I’ve got that and a couple other reasons why I’m no longer considering becoming an ‘early adopter’….
still excited to see how this all plays out
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:38 am)I talked about the genset on a trailer a long time ago, but I have come to believe that it is an oversold concept. It would end up having to meet emissions regulations for starters. I assume that it would take some sort of pretty sophisticated control system to make it interface with the car. How would it know when to shut down because the batteries were charged, or start up when they went down to whatever SOC, for example? Or would one just let it run all the time, thus wasting fuel? Or maybe the driver could just monitor the SOC gauge, and pull over and start the genset when it dropped down, and repeat when it charged up, LOL.
Plus, it would take a pretty stout genset to keep up. Your ordinary 4500 watt Honda isn’t going to get it, IMHO. So there’s a few hundred extra pounds to tow around, thus impacting mileage, AER, and potentially overloading the brakes of the car. But of course you get it all back through regen, right?
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:38 am)I was not aware Nissan had decided to lease the battery pack. It was my understanding the pack would be sold to the customer as part of the vehicle just as GM is doing with the Volt. Where are you getting this information?
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:40 am)By “they” I assume you are speaking of GM and not Nissan.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:41 am)Don’t look now, but I think he just got here.
+4
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:41 am)The bottom line $40K is out of reach to the vast majority of Americans. That’s more than the mean US family annual income. So it will be a niche car for those with disposible income.
It won’t make a huge impact or become a “people’s car” simply based on economics. Plain and simple. If the Nissan comes in around the $20k point I think they have stole GM’s thunder on this one. Especially if they get it out first, with over double the range, at half the price.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:42 am)There aren’t any shareholders, so maybe that makes it a little easier, LOL.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:47 am)Statik
I think GM will want to sell as many as possible. My reasoning is they will have spent a large chunk of the start up money with the first run. Paying the cost for the new Dies, punches, molds, fixturing and programing. All these parts are less costly the second time around. Add to that, the customer demand will be progressive and the additional cost will be spread over a longer time period.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:49 am)If you want to laugh at a guy who drives an efficient, practical, and reliable car, go ahead! While you’re wasting your time laughing, I’ll go get some groceries, stop by the hardware store, and I’ll be back in time to mow the lawn.
Our Prius is the best transportation appliance we’ve ever owned! Between the mileage and the reliability, it has the lowest TCO of any car I’ve maintained — and it has the most versatile interior space of any compact car I’ve ever driven. Three of my relatives also own them, and they’ve all been quite happy with the Prius, too.
OTOH, if you’re overly concerned about appearances, I really can’t help you there.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:49 am)He also meant that if the battery holds up and they are not having to fork out thousands for battery replacement per each Volt sold, the Volt will be profitable sooner because the buyer pays for the battery replacement cost up front. That up front money becomes free to GM as long as they don’t have to replace your Volt’s battery.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:53 am)I am with you on this. GM should be proceeding with the Converj development as soon as possible. I think it should be released in the spring of 2011 to start bringing in some real profit to the corporation. And I agree they could probably get between $65,000 to $75,000 for each one. Maybe not as high as $80,000, but I should not be surprised if they could. The more profit for the Converj and the more units it sells the better for the Volt.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:55 am)Nerd shoes
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:57 am)Agreed — I’d love to be able to do my errands around town without using any foreign oil, or any oil at all! That’s why I want an electric car — beyond the geek-factor, anyway.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:57 am)Maharguitar
I agree with you. Once the method of machining has been perfected it is just a matter of adding aditional machine tools and people or robots to operate them. As production numbers ramp up more and more automation will be intigrated and the cost for components will drop.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:58 am)Or it means “off the shelf”. As in readily available for purchase.
Aug 4th, 2009 (10:59 am)They decided to least the whole car:
http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1033845_2011-nissan-leaf-sales-in-u-s-may-be-limited-to-leasing-only-until-global-launch-in-2012
In the beginning, at least. I hope it doesn’t turn into another EV1-style fiasco for Nissan.
I’m also not thrilled about the OnStar-equivalent service — I want my car to just be a car. But, it looks like a great form-factor, so it might be a good electric car to drive while I’m waiting for the Voltec Orlando to come down in price, or something.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:00 am)No matter what GM says the Volt will list for, you can expect the dealers to add a few more thousand to the final price as long as demand remains greater than supply. Just the nature of the game.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:02 am)GM has a problem with this. Their solution with the Camaro was sending each dealer a “dealer car,” which the dealers then proceeded to sell at a substantial mark-up, which created a lot of bad publicity for GM. They cannot let that happen with the Volt.
Maybe with their new control over the dealers they can retain title to the “dealer cars,” so that the dealers can’t sell them? Does anyone know if that’s possible?
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:03 am)I believe that 50K price tage for the Model S about as much as I did the Volt price tag of under 30k.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:03 am)I’d like to see gm-volt.com revert back to the old way.
The new system makes it much more difficult to come back a few hours later and catch up with what’s been posted.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:05 am)Good questions. I have the same problem even without involving my wife. If I involve her it becomes unworkable completely. She is usually the one that ends up saying “that just cost too much for us”. I usually keep trying to find alternative methods of making a “deal” work. She just looks at the initial cost and makes a decision right off. I might add that she is right more often than I am in these situations. I see something that I want and the price of it is usually the last thing that gets in the way of my getting it. So, I might have to send her off on a small vacation for a few days while I shop around the dealership. When she gets back, I will have a surprise for her. Hehe.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:06 am)Me too.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:07 am)There is the joke about second marriages representing the triumph of hope over experience. The seems like what is happening here. On the experience side we have a lot of information over the last few months that the price would be at or above $40K, and we also know that the Automotive Task Force went into shock when it looked at the costs.
The other piece of evidence we have is that GM is only making 10K copies. That tells you a big something. If GM could profitably sell the car in the mid-30s, then, with the rebates, the price would be in the high 20s. At this price you have to believe they’d be ramping up to make more than 10K units.
Which brings us to the law of supply and demand. The reality is that it doesn’t matter what price GM sets for the car. The MSRP could be $25K or $35K or $45K and if the market price — set by the number of Volts and the demand for those Volt — is $43K then that will be the transaction price. So a $35K MSRP doesn’t really help a potential buyer. The only two things that will bring down the price are more Volts or less demand. Put another way, hoping for a low price for a first gen Volt is really hoping the car will flop. Obviously there is some tension when someone is wearing their consumer hat and when they are wearing their EV proponent hat.
When you look at it this way, $43K for the first generation may be just about right. That’s a lot of money to pay for a Cobalt with an EV powertrain — so many will want to wait for Gen II or pass — but there are probably 10K people out there who will be willing to pay this price. But maybe not a lot more. In this regard, the Mini-E was not terribly oversubscribed, no way could they have leased 10K of them, although the lease price was very high and the one year term very limited.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:07 am)That’s true. And if the battery outperforms their expectations, they could increase production, and lower the price much faster.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:08 am)I hope so too.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:09 am)IMO you would be right if that investment was only for U.S. companys. Giving our tax money to other countrys really jerks my chain.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:09 am)Here is a thought , have the American government send $10,000.00 directly to GM like the Ontario government is going to do in Canada on every Volt sale . Just to help GM get over the bump . After all GM is part ours since we already put billions into the company to keep it afloat and we must protect our investment.
It would just be good business and the other tax payers shouldn’t mind helping out again .
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:13 am)Once the $7500 rebate stops being available, the price will go down by approximately $7500.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:14 am)I dunno man. If I tried that with mine, I would quite likely get shot. Or worse.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:14 am)I tend to agree with you on this. I see no real advantage of the BEV model over the EREV initially. I also agree with JEC about the future cost of the Volt after the government rebate has been terminated. One thing you have to keep in mind when you are dealing with the government. You can not trust the government. That is the only thing about the government that is set in stone and will never change.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:15 am)But at the same time, GM will allegedly be selling the car to dealers for a loss. Doesn’t that sound like stupid business practices? Is the government really going to allow that?
What other company sells their newest most highly anticipated product at a loss? I remember when Blue-Ray players and 1080P HDTV’s and such first came out. They were incredibly expensive. Sure, that’s a little different of a market, but that can also be compared with the construction industry. NEVER EVER would we intentionally sell a product at a loss, especially a new one that required all new engineering.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:16 am)“……he was using the correct logic. He did not realize the car would require so much new hardware……”
—————-
Somebody help me out here.
If you’re an auto company exec., and you’re thinking about launching a whole new type of propulsion system for a car, would you not get a team of at least 6 or 8 engineers to work for several weeks (if not months) on a detailed proposal that involves cost estimates BEFORE you pull the trigger on it (or start flapping your yap on what the vehicle is going to cost )????????
I mean, really . . . how nutty is all this “back of the napkin, that was what was going through my mind at the time” stuff??
What does this say about Lutz?
What does this say about GM’s management in general?
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:16 am)More like the Statik that we have come to know and … Hmm, just what else I can’t say on this blog. LOL.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:18 am)Good points about leasing the battery. I’d agree that leasing the entire car (with battery) would be one solution. However, after the EV1 fiasco many people looking at an EV would want the standard option to buy at the end of the lease term, at which point you’d have the same “buy car lease battery” issue as you have now. Seems like this would postpone rather than solve the problem.
On the cost side, as has been pointed out before, the Leaf will be a BEV so it doesn’t have the warranty issues GM has to deal with for the Volt. Without the warranty problem the Volt would be priced significantly lower.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:19 am)SSR, GTO, G8, hybrid Malibu, hybrid Tahoe, and how many others? Wrong cars at the wrong time. I don’t hate him. I just think he’s past retirement age/mindset.
I’m a car guy through and through, but I don’t presume to understand what 20-30 somethings want in cars. I knew from the day one that no one would buy a Scion, for example. It’s way past time for new blood.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:21 am)Are we to assume that the failure of these cars as you indicated by them disappearing was all due to Bob Lutz or could it be that others in GM took what he suggested, rolled it this way and that way and what came out had no resemblance to what was recommended? How many bean counters does it take to ruin a car’s design and replace “quality” with “sub-par”? I am just not ready to lay all the blame for GM’s failures onto Bob’s shoulders. Some of you here seem ready to make that choice, but not me.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:24 am)Well I answered my own question. According to the little calculator I found on line, $24K in 1995 equals about $33.6K in 2008. That’s all the farther it went, but I don’t think there’s been much inflation this year. So that’s $41.1K before the tax credit. Although I guess the sales tax gets charged before the tax credit comes out, so maybe it’s $40.5K.
I wonder what inflation will do by the time we can get our hands on a Volt?
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:26 am)These two phrases are soo contradicting that it points GM all back to failure….
“I think it’s all going to head in the direction of a smaller, lighter battery at much lower cost delivering the same range,” said Lutz.”
And
“Experts expect the battery pack cost to be cut in half in 5 to 10 years at that point allowing the car to sell for under $30,000.”
It’s obvious they do not intend to increase AER even if batt tech increases PERIOD
This tells me in 5-10 years when a batt pack can get you over 300miles of AER GM will still be building a partially polluting Volt product and the rest of the mfgrs will have full on BEV’s. This sounds more like they will guarantee OPEC is still fed by the US $$$..
“Though costs could also be reduced by spreading Voltec into multiple vehicles, like the Orlando we just mentioned, or the Cadillac Converj, these cars remain in limbo. ”
WTF? I have been in manufacturing R&D and this is soo damn false I don’t know where to start. Once you have a developed a product all costs of R&D have already been spent AND in the BK it should’ve been all wiped out. Now he also states that most if not all (paraphrased a bit) of the parts are propriety to the Voltec design. This was a ground up engineering tastk. The Orlando is not ground up design for Voltec. This means they will have to do more R&D to “Retrofit” the Orlando. Which also means MORE parts that are proprietary to the Orlando that wont fit/work for the Volt which by his definition wil increase cost anyway.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:27 am)Without Bob Lutz ramming the project through we would have a bankrupt GM that would have gone through Chapter 7 and not Chapter 11. There would have been no real sense that GM could turn around and be successful. The vision of the Volt gave us all that belief and that belief was echoed throughout some of the media and the government. Without the Volt, GM would be history. And that would be a shame. Plus jobs would be lost to an untold degree. Not a happy thought.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:27 am)Yeah, if they can pump another $2 billion into
“Cash For Clunkers”, they can sure extend the Volt credit.
Did you hear the US Rep. from Texas on NPR this AM proposing “Cash For Cluckers”. He said that the chicken farmers in his district are going broke, so he wants to pay people to eat chicken.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:32 am)My guess is that if they do price it that way–the dealers will stick on a $10,000 mark-up. Personally, I’d rather GM gets the money.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:35 am)I agree the battery is the great unknown here. But even though GM has only had two years or a little less to test the batteries the testing has been going on 24/7. You and I will not use our Volt battery anywhere nearly as much as the test time accumulated by GM’s testing lab. They are going to be feeling pretty good about the battery and they have stated so several times. If batteries of the first two years production holds up in public use, I believe GM could reduce the Volt’s cost by at least one half of the cost of the replacement battery cost (or about $4,000) built into the Volt’s cost. Maybe more. They will have real world numbers on probably 100,000 Volts on the road to help them decide if they can reduce battery cost or keep it up. We will see. We just may not know why GM is reducing the cost. They may not tell us the exact reason, but more faith in the battery could be a big factor.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:38 am)I understand completely. 40k gets you into the entry level car enthusiast category. They are going to be selling an unproven electric sedan for the same money as a very refined European import thrill ride. If it was a 40K truck, it would be different. But they are jumping right into the middle of a competitive sports sedan category. They need to be in the middle of the ” I just need cheap transportation ” category. But I think there are enough folks with 40K that want to have something different and make a political statement to sell out the first run. But after that, slim pickins for round two.
Ken
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:43 am)The “cool factor” will sell a lot of Volts. After that the sheer technology will slowly convince others.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:44 am)Plus 1 Gary. Well said.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:48 am)“…well, who in their right mind would buy a Mini when they could just buy a similarly-sized Yaris at half the price instead.”
Funny. The Yaris I think outsold the Mini. I could be wrong though.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:48 am)At the rate they plan to be selling Volts the 200K limit doesn’t appear to be a big problem for the first three years. In addition, I believe there is a phase out period, isn’t there? Plus this is just the number at the moment — it can change. Last year at this time the number was 250K for all manufacturers. I mean Cash for Clunkers last week was a $1B program, now it seems likely to turn into a $3B program (which is OK by me, just saying).
But if you think about why Lutz is saying he was wrong — special parts — then it’s not unreasonable to assume that five years into the process GM might get to Lutz’s original SWAG price. The battery costs will come down more slowly because they are based on raw material costs, but the parts are not. They’re more like any consumer electronic part whose costs drop quickly as you move up the learning curve and out with the production numbers. And a $30K Volt with a smaller incentive should sell in larger numbers than a $40K Volt with more incentives.
As an aside, one thing which is weird in the auto area is the lack of the “pioneer preference.” In the wireless world the FCC frequently grants companies who step up and take the early risks a more permanent advantage. That has proven to be a pretty big carrot. In the auto world they seem to want to give the same incentives to every company, no matter how late they start.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:49 am)I think they said $43,000.00 and you have to add the Dealer markup stuff, Tax License Doc fees and some other crazy shit used to getcho $$$.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:51 am)On Gen I you’re doubtless right. But Gen II may get close to Lutz’s initial SWAG. Gen III will definitely get there.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:53 am)So if they’re selling the cars for $40,000 and still taking a loss if battery prices go down half in 5 – 10 years they actually might start making money on the cars why would they drop the price? I don’t see the price of the car dropping. Not to mention inflation for 5-10 years from now. When have we ever seen a price drop on anything? Everyones talking woulda, coulda, shoulda for 5-10 years from now. What about the first 5 years buying a 4 door standard car for $35,500 ($43,000-$7,500 rebate). I’m 100% possitive they will be very hard to come by the first 6 months for the people that have the money and want to be the first one to own one but just like the Honda Insight after the rush now they’re just sitting on dealers lots. Right now everything just ASSumptions and only time will tell.
+6
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:54 am)Live by the thesaurus, die by the thesaurus. With that said: Dearest Murray – your homework today is to look up and understand the proper use of the following word:
—- “it’s”
I’ll overlook “grammer” as a mere misspelling, not a misuse.
Hehehe.
And yes, I know there is a 99% chance that I made a typo in there somewhere…
+9
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:55 am)Actually, this article is really encouraging to me.
We’ve known for a while that the Volt battery pack costs around $8K, and that a Chevy Cobalt costs around $16K, and that’s the same platform they’re using for the Volt, so it was always a mystery to me why the Volt was costing $40K.
This article says that it’s not so much the battery, but the other specialized components that are costing a lot, like the electric motor, electric A/C, etc.. The article further highlights that these parts are expensive because they are not being produced by mainstream suppliers.
So my interpretation is that the cost of these other types of parts will drop really fast once sales volumes ramp up, and more mainstream type suppliers start making them.
So I see this as really good news. EREVs are not inherently expensive due to battery prices. It’s just that EREVs are not mainstream, so the parts have to come from specialized suppliers. So the cost issue will be solved…
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:55 am)Personally I think Nissan cares less about the dependability of the battery pack than they do about getting the public interested in spending extra money each month on leasing the battery. I believe Nissan already knows or at least figures the battery will be dependable and that they can make a lot more money on leasing than selling. A cautious public can be a real sucker when they don’t know all the facts. And at this point no one knows all the facts. Nissan is just taking advantage of people’s concerns while offering battery security at a price. Smart marketing, yes.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:56 am)You talk about Hybrid pricing remember this is a full electric car. No way to compare pricing.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:56 am)If you want to help out with the program your more then welcome to let the government reach into your pockets but speaking for myself (which is what I like to do) I don’t want the government reaching their hands into my pockets any more then they already do.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:57 am)I sure hope the $1 billion in development cost isn’t being offered as a reason for the Volt’s high cost. My rationale? The way I understand it, there’s this thing called bankruptcy, where you can write off your debt….
-1
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:57 am)Would anyone really want to be pulling around something like that? Wouldn’t that remove most of the “cool factor” of the BEV? I know some people would buy one of these, but not me.
Aug 4th, 2009 (11:58 am)Biofuels would be competitive with gas at $8/gallon gas and in five years might be competitive with $3/gallon gas. Today if you’re willing to pay $8K for a microfueler you can get biofuel for $1/gallon which, after adjusting for energy density, works out to gas at $1.50 per gallon. So at $8/gallon both Volts and Impalas would be popular!
/I wish GM would make more of its fleet E85 capable
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:01 pm)“They are going to be selling an unproven electric sedan for the same money as a very refined European import thrill ride.”
——
Very much a problem for the Volt, when a base price of $44,700 gets you a fuel efficient (real world 35mpg+, my guestimate) very torquey BMW.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-tG4gCXT5Y
For me, It’s one thing to say you’re an enthusiast, but when it comes down to signing the bottom line on $40k +, it better be something that you really enjoy driving. So if on decision day you test drive a Volt in the morning, and then go test drive a 335 d in the afternoon . .. . . .
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:02 pm)Economic reality may just catch up to some of the liberal states and the U.S. government by that time. You have to ask yourself just how can we continue to afford government hand-outs like this? And is it fair to all the people who are unable to take advantage of some of these hand-outs but have to help pay for them in higher taxes? I say no it is not fair. It is even possible you may see a wide spread taxpayer revolt that could side track a lot of government hand-outs. Here’s hoping we see a massive change in elected officials in 2010 and 2012. I am going to be working to see it accomplished.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:02 pm)We’ve already given GM about $50 billion. How much more must we give them before they figure out how to build cars at a profit?
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:04 pm)Agreed.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:05 pm)Let me get this straight; Bob Lutz thought that an electric car could be built almost entirely with off-the shelf components used for ICE cars? Really Bob? How many parts did the EV1 share with the Chevy Corsica? This revelation seals the deal once and for all that Bob Lutz is in no way the “Father of the Volt.” Somewhere in Michigan are some pissed off engineers grumbiling about an executive in a pink tie who thinks he “invents” stuff and then takes credit for it.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:08 pm)Speculation, yes. But isn’t that why we are here each day? I believe the Volt will have a covered front under body that helps channel the air from the engine compartment and the air passing underneath. But who of us really knows and GM is apparently not talking. Ask them, Lyle, if you get the chance. And you will.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:09 pm)One can hope that when cheap batteries are available, that cars like the Volt will be offered with different battery (and price) options. An extended range 100 mile Volt for $38,000 vs a standard 40 mile Volt for $30,000 for example. It would be simple to do just by plopping in the bigger battery and tweaking the battery management software. GM would be crazy to not at least try it to see if it sells. Or make the Caddy version with greater electric range, etc.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:10 pm)I completely agree with your assessment.
No trailer for me.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:11 pm)Well the idea was that you drive on the batteries most of the time, and just hook up the trailer when you go on a longer trip. Maybe you just rent it when you need it.
I’m just saying that it wouldn’t be as easy as it sounds by a long shot.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:13 pm)Amen!
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:15 pm)Amen to that too.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:15 pm)“When I said I hope to sell it in the 20s, I just thought, well, if a conventional car of that size with a conventional four-cylinder engine, we can sell it for $15,000 or $16,000, then let’s notionally add $8,000 for the battery and we’re at $25,000,” said Lutz. “That’s the way my brain worked on that one.”
It has long been painfully obvious that GM didn’t put enough thought into this project before committing to it. It’s nice to get confirmation.
What’s really sad is that this top-down project sucked up resources that could have been put into projects with more benefit to GM, or an EV or ER-EV project that made sense.
But no one at GM can safely stand up to management, so bad projects move forward.
The Volt isn’t GM’s only recent major loss-maker. Look at the GMT-900 hybrid projects. Nobody in their right mind would market a fuel-saving vehicle, for an extra $13K, to people who don’t care about fuel economy. There were certainly plenty of people at GM who realized this was stupid but had to keep their mouths shut to keep their jobs.
Lutz’ Kappa project (Sky and Solstice), that was also a sure money-loser from the get-go. The monthly market for two-seaters in the US is on the order of 3K cars. A two-seater that was developed on the cheap from some existing platform (parts-bin engineering) might be a cost-effective project. Building a car around a dedicated platform with no sharing would never pay off. Yet, that’s just what GM did. And they reportedly lost $10K per car. And now that project is toast. Again, there were certainly people at GM that knew this would not work out but they couldn’t speak up.
The Aura/Malibu hybrid project was another b-a-a-a-a-d plan An extra $4K for a “hybrid” that doesn’t actually save a noticeable amount of fuel? Who dreamed this up? But, GM crapped it out onto the market, just the same. You knew this thing was on its last legs when GM didn’t even give it priority for the new 6-speed transmission.
Of course, the most horrifying aspect of this whole episode is that, although he had announced his retirement and was safely on his way out the door, GM has brought back Lutz to run more projects into the ground.
Brilliant. Just brilliant.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:15 pm)Don’t count on that price to remain at $50,000. Tesla has a history, short as it is, of increasing projected prices with no concern to how its customers or potential customers may view the change. And they don’t reduce prices when they change them.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:18 pm)Me three
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:20 pm)Very understandable position. I can see a lot of people feeling the same way. Last October I decided I would be unable to afford a Volt for the first 3 to 5 years, so I decided to go ahead and buy a nice car to get me to the point where I might want to buy a Volt in 2014 or so. By that time my 2009 will be 5 years old and I will have enjoyed many a drive in it. No real regrets from me, yet. I am sure I will have some pangs of regret when I see my first Volt driving down the street. But, I will get over it. Good luck to you, Ken.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:21 pm)The difference goes well beyond marketing and actually must be based on performance. The only similarity between a Yaris and a Mini is that they are both constructed of ferrous materials. The Mini is a blast to drive; the Yaris is a cheap bucket seat bolted to four small wheels. The Mini commands a higher price because it is quite simply a superior car. If the Volt outperforms the Prius in handling and acceleration, all while providing a unique technological experience and (virtually) gas-free driving, that will go a long way towards justifiying a higher price. But yeah, GM has to market its strengths.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:22 pm)Somehow I don’t see GM offering a “fob” key with a push “start” button like the Prius offers. I would not be surprised to see the standard looking key where you turn it to an “on” position where by you get a light and sound indicating the car was ready to go. But, we will see, won’t we?
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:23 pm)Well, it’s also in the product. I have a lot of respect for the Yaris, but the Mini has to be about 100 times more fun to drive. They each have their niche.
As to the Yaris outselling the Mini, I bet BMW makes a lot more $$ per unit on a MIni that Tojo does on a Yaris though. The Mini just goes to prove that there is a way to make money on small cars, if you can find a way to build in enough pizazz.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:24 pm)If they build the Converj on the same Delta II platform and use basically the same Voltec drivetrain (with upgrade PEM for 120KW), they should be able to sell it for $65-70K with nice profit.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:24 pm)You could very well be right. Unless the cost of gasoline sky rockets and it very well could do so. That would be another matter all together.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:25 pm)Noel Park,
None of those objections are serious and the genset on a trailer concept has actually been used successfully, by Tau-Zero and Rav-EV owners to range-extend their vehicles.
There’s no real problem meeting emissions standards and, unlike the Volt, these things truly are fixed-speed and can be optimized. You don’t get out of the car to start it, you establish a control interface and the trailer has electric start (just like any motorcycle). You could even save a tiny bit of weight by getting the starter motor power from the vehicle.
Programming the charge/discharge is no more complex than doing this for the Volt (since there won’t be any varying engine speed to match what the car is doing, this may be simpler). For Version 1, the driver could decide when to turn it on and off, as you say, by monitoring SOC.
N Riley,
When the EV doesn’t have to carry around a fuel tank, a generator, engine block, radiator and all that other stuff that an ICE needs to operat, the EV can be smaller, lighter and better optimized for EV operation. The EV, stripped of the ICE overhead, costs less and performs better. You simply attach (rent!) the genset for those situations where you need it.
A future AAA service could be to deliver trailer-mounted gensets to EV owners who accidentally wander outside of their EVs range.
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:26 pm)They might be new to the Volt , but they sure as hell are not new to the manufacturers . The manufacturers make these things by the thousands . They can tell you down to the penny how much it will cost for a hundred or ten thousand . They dont buy their parts from a just starting up mom and pop shop working out of their garage in the back yard .
Dont forget they claim to have been making cars for over 100 years .
Dont listen or accept their poor me , I didn’t know rhetoric , ignorance is no excuse here .
There is just too much BS going back and forth here and too many honest good people willing to accept it as the gospel truth .
Sure I would love to have a Volt because I enjoy new technology but I also have been CEO of three manufacturing companies and have sat at the head of a board room table too . I know BS when I see it and hear it . It is like a child talking to an adult . A ton of steel is a ton of steel , it doesn’t make any difference how it is bent it still has the same value when sold to the scrap yard .
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:28 pm)Maybe the government will revive the “Cash For Clunkers” program in 2011? That would be nice for us “early adopter” Volt shoppers. A $7,500 tax credit + $4,500 for trading in your old gas guzzler? THAT would get people in the Chevy showrooms. GM wouldn’t be able to build Volts fast enough to keep up with demand. That would be a nice problem for GM to have these days.
Actually, I think the federal, state, and local governments should ALL be rolling out the red carpet to try to get people to buy the Volt in 2011. Get rid of things that go to the “total cost of ownership” such as fees and vehicle taxes. Free parking maybe. Who knows, maybe even the auto insurance companies will have incentives for Volt buyers … maybe a 20% reduction in premiums.
If GM is designing the Volt to be super reliable like I HOPE they are, the repairs ought to pretty low. The maintenance ought to be dramatically less too since the IC engine will not be running all that often if people simply plug their Volt in every night. If the batteries prove to be ultra durable and maybe last 200,000 miles like some of the Prius batteries have, you could see the depreciation costs each year be pretty low.
Maybe the auto finance companies will have some special deals available for potential Volt owners too. I think a major selling point for the Volt could be “total cost of ownership” …. IF the federal, state, local governments, insurance companies, and finance companies all pitch in to help. They should do it for the sake of “energy independence” and for our military. We spend a freakin fortune in federal taxes for the military to keep that oil flowing from the Middle East you know. There’s a lot of different REASONS why the Volt will be good for America besides the environment and “being green” and all that.
Bottom line, GM needs to try very hard to get the “total cost of ownership” numbers for Volt 1.0 to look good like on this car shopping webpage by Yahoo. There will be PLENTY of “early adopters” for Volt 1.0 if they do.
http://autos.yahoo.com/2009_toyota_prius_touring-price/
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:32 pm)The genset motor is 53KW but the traction motor is 111KW. I’ve seen people put up numbers like $4-5K but that seemed awfully high to me. I would think in qty GM should be able to get them around $1K for the first generation and lower in the long term. This is an admittedly uneducated guess. We would also have to know for sure what type of motors they are actually using.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:40 pm)Yea , OK who are the suppliers of the drive motors and what country are they located in ?
Who are the suppliers of the controllers , and what country are they located in ?
Who are the manufacturers of the power generator , and what country are they made in ?
Don’t assume that they are Made in USA .
GM sells more cars in China than they do in USA . do you think for one second that they import parts from USA or Canada to make Buicks in China ?
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:47 pm)Do you think that these “new” battery manufacturing plants go up for nothing ?
Most if not all other manufacturers are getting their batteries from existing manufacturers who have existing facilities , Oh no , not GM , they have to buy batteries from a company in Korea who will spend millions to build a battery plant here . Who do you think is going to pay for the building . Not the Koreans . These companies are designed to make money , not to give them away at cost .
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:47 pm)I think the evolution should be a gradual increase in batt pack for longer AER while reducing the Genset in size and weight as batt pack increases. That would make waaaaay more sense than to just flat out say 40 AER is it, period, kaput, no more!
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:49 pm)I think it is all a fishing experiment at this point. Letting GM know that prospective pricing is too high for you is the right thing to do. They do read here and do listen (to some degree).If I choose to overpay at $43K, I’ll be pissed in 3-4 years if the price is lowered to $30K. What does that do for resale value?
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:50 pm)I disagree. All they have to do to the comments is to include additional counters for the inside replies. This would give you your place holders to come back to.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:50 pm)I wouldn’t mind paying a little extra especially since gen 1 will be over-engineered in a lot of ways but they have to keep the initial price within reach of where they want it to be long term.
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:57 pm)Touche!
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (12:58 pm)Volt is the best concept in the electrification universe. It will take some time to align the price accordingly. The Volt will be a big success. That $8000 -to $10000 battery cost has to be absorbed somewhere. This is the only car which is conceptually flawless. (You have your cake and eat it too!)
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:02 pm)Ken says But they are jumping right into the middle of a competitive sports sedan category. They need to be in the middle of the ” I just need cheap transportation ” category.
You could be right but that’s not what I’m hearing. Some people think a BMW is still cool (nobody thinks that about a Mercedes — it’s sort of the new Buick) but the people I know who are looking at EVs are currently driving a BMW, Porshe, or Lexus. It’s basically the same group who bought a Prius four or five years ago.
By the time the price drops to $30K then the novelty will have worn off. Till then there will be a market at the higher end, at least for the numbers GM is talking about.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:06 pm)“Now we can see why Nissan decided to lease the battery pack. We also see the thinking behind the Better Place model of spreading out the pain of buying the battery pack (mobile phone model).”
Better Place
I do not see this concept working. People will not accept swapping a fourth of the value of their car four – five times a day on a long trip. Replacing an expensive battery is not the same as filling up with gas. The Volt of course does not require this. This concept may be o.k in a small country (Israel) with minimal driving distance.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:06 pm)A manufacturer could put as much development (like Volt with sophisticated controls and communication) and simple (on/off control) as they want. For me, 30KW genset with on/off user override would be just fine as long as it could function as a whole house emergency backup generator under warranty.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:09 pm)Exactly. Everyone saying price will go down in a few years is really fullash|t. If they are taking a loss at $43,000.00 and battery prices magically drop for these proprietary chem/cell, why the hell would they drop prices for the same car when they just reduced the loss with a cheaper batt pack? Are those saying the “Prices will drop for the Volt in x years” indicating that GM will say “lets sell the Volt for $37,000.00 this year because the batt pack cost less but keep taking the same loss….”
I don’t think so. What they will do is “sell the Volt for the same price of $43,000.00 and keep the batt pack saving to reduce the loss….”
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:09 pm)Yea , these designers sure are great .
Where do you put the front license plate , on top of the dash maybe ?
http://www.engadget.com/photos/gms-opel-ampera-plug-in-hybrid-hits-the-carpet-in-geneva/1395382/
Sell the Volt for the maximum bucks that GM can get out of it and sell the Ampera for five thousand more in America , after all it is a European car and European cars are better quality and cost more . Right ?
+4
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:10 pm)…”appliance” is the operative word.
When a “hybrid” becomes all of the things you list except an “appliance,” the concept will have come of age; not before.
An appliance washes your clothes. A car (in the US, anyways) has always meant more.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:11 pm)JIMHO, if the prices skyrocket for Gas, and if you couldn’t afford a Volt anyway, what good is it if one can’t afford it?
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:11 pm)I find the best way after refreshing the browser is to scan down the posts and look at the time stamp and a guide.
Actually, the new systems seems to be a little less time consuming…previously I would have to scroll up to a post that someone had just commented on. If the new poster had just arrived to the site, the original post could be way back at the beginning.
I’m just sayin’…
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:12 pm)Agreed. I’m all for helping my brokeazz self but at some time it’s gotta STOP!
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:14 pm)It’s obvious they do not intend to increase AER even if batt tech increases PERIOD. This tells me in 5-10 years when a batt pack can get you over 300miles of AER
GM has been explicity saying that they’re not intending to increase AER since day one. Not sure why this is surprising. As a note, doubling the Volt battery pack would not give you anything close to an AER range of 300 miles. More like 90 miles.
Once you have a developed a product all costs of R&D have already been spent AND in the BK it should’ve been all wiped out. Now he also states that most if not all (paraphrased a bit) of the parts are propriety to the Voltec design.
I don’t think he was talking about the R&D. I think he was talking about the parts needed for the vehicle. If you want to make a vehicle, you need the parts, and the more parts you order the lower the cost per part. The Orlando and Converj would have different sheet metal and interior parts but many or most of the parts for the three vehicles would be shared.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:17 pm)AHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!
Man, you are so friggin right…..
lol…
Immagogetta Beer now.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:20 pm)People who want to save money at the pump dont buy $40’000.00 cars nor do they finance them either it is pay cash or open ended leases .
If a person is concerned about a little cost for fuel then they don’t have enough money to buy a car anyway . Cash for clunkers mean anything ?
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:21 pm)Who do you think owns the battery company , a bunch of elves or Santa Claus ?
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:25 pm)I prefer the new format by a mile. The email re comment feature alone is worth it. I don’t want to miss what’s going on on a thread on which I commented (on). (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:26 pm)GM should use a little of their lobbying capitol to amend CARB PZEV rules for 40AER EREVs to lower or drop the battery warranty requirement. They should be able to reach a compromise since it is in both parties best interests to get these vehicles on the road as quickly as possible. The Volt will not effectively opperate without a properly functioning battery so the conern about battery compromised Volts polluting is not valid.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:28 pm)That seems like a very optimistic “definitely” Don.
Any specific reason for that?
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:28 pm)sparks,
That’s Touche‘, isn’t it? (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:32 pm)GM has been explicity saying that they’re not intending to increase AER since day one. Not sure why this is surprising. As a note, doubling the Volt battery pack would not give you anything close to an AER range of 300 miles. More like 90 miles.
You misunderstood what I typed. I said “in 5-10 years when a batt pack can get you over 300miles “, let me put in a more meaningfull term. In 5-10 years when battery technology advances to a point where a battery pack can get you 300miles AER with obvious technological advancement reducing weight and mass/size….”
Is that better, you’re supposed to read my mind Mr. DonC, cmon man.
don’t think he was talking about the R&D. I think he was talking about the parts needed for the vehicle. If you want to make a vehicle, you need the parts, and the more parts you order the lower the cost per part.
So does that mean the decision was a dumb old GM decision made where one should’ve known that the parts for a ICE vehicle was no where close to compatable with an Electric Series Hybrid vehicle? Old GM or New GM? Same person. Parts are parts. I think for any product no matter how much it is only has a finite of cost reduction in the first 1k to 2k pieces if your lucky 4k to 6k but at apoint, it stops. So if any piece of the Volt is a big hitter in qty pricing, we should see it by at least the 6K mark.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:32 pm)The “Cash-for-Clunkers” program has been working to increase a few car sales, but NOT because anyone wants to go “green”. People are using that freebie to cover the downpayment on a new vehicle because the economy has drained their savings, and they NEED a new car.
I’m working with these people daily. They don’t give a rats about fuel mileage improvements. They just need a new car and have no cash in their pocket to help them buy it.
If Obama had really wanted to stimulate the economy, he should have divided up those 12 TRILLION dollars between every household in the country, instead of throwing it down the “banking system toilet”.
He could have bought a new VOLT for every home in America for less than what he has spent trying to bailout the big three.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:34 pm)“Maybe the government will revive the “Cash For Clunkers” program in 2011? That would be nice for us “early adopter” Volt shoppers. A $7,500 tax credit + $4,500 for trading in your old gas guzzler? THAT would get people in the Chevy showrooms. GM wouldn’t be able to build Volts fast enough to keep up with demand. That would be a nice problem for GM to have these days.
”
When you build a great car at a good price, people line up to buy them. The govt. does not need to take tax payers money to subsidize them. It might get the cars on the road, but sooner or later you have to build a car that people will pay the true price to own . If not, it is just another failed govt. attempt to manipulate the American marketplace. They are big on this right now, so you might get your wish.
Ken
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:37 pm)buck… buck..
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:37 pm)Times are changing…stay tuned, lol.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:38 pm)Totally agree, gas could be $20 a gallon, but if you can’t afford a $40k car, you can’t afford it. Gas prices are irrelevant.
You buy what the paycheck lets you buy, not what you want. Otherwise we’d all be driving Ferarris.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:38 pm)I have heard the theory that many of the early buyers of the Volt will be the Mercedes/Lexus crowd, but I really wonder if this will turn out as predicted.
Once you actually go to the showroom and drive a Volt, and then go back and take a ride in a C-Class Mercedes, will they really pick the Volt? I think it will be a hard sell, especially since the Volt really looks like most other $20,000+ mid-size sedan. Yes, some will plunk down the cash to be first and have electric, but I really believe when it comes down to writing that check, even the more affluent will hesitate.
GM wants the Volt to look & perform like any other mid-size ICE-based, sedan. Unfortunately, this will be what doesn’t set it apart from the rest of the pack.
I am betting few Mercedes owners will make the leap, once they get a look and take a drive.
Purely an opinion. I am now donning my asbestos undies….FLAME AWAY!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:38 pm)I agree with you Ken on this . If these cars are what we all expect them to be then the first 50, 000 should be considered as test beds and GM with the help of the US and Canadian government should get them into the hands of the consumers for $20,000. a copy .
After a year and millions of miles of driving they would have all the data that they would need so that they could make the necessary changes .
Some of those changes could even be running changes in production .
Next year raise the price by $5,000 and continue raising the price on a quarterly annual basis until GM realizes a profit and can pay back the government subsidy on the early produced units .
Let the early adapters get the financial break after all they are the ones who actually put their hard earned money up front to get this car to the market . That should be worth something and recognized .
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:39 pm)LauraM,
I HOPE they can hold the title, or the only hands-on experience that the public would have is to drive their neighbor’s Volt. In business (and life) there is a “Rule of Eights”. If a business (or person) does something right, on average that person will tell 8 people. If they are UNhappy, that person will tell 8 people. The Volt needs to be done RIGHT, coming out of the chute, and I’m sure this is not lost on GM.
Mostly JMO,
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:40 pm)Maybe the government will revive the “Cash For Clunkers” program in 2011?
Aw maaaannn…
I hope so. Looking to trade my piec of sh|t 2002 Ford Explorer For a Volt.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:40 pm)/me four?
For myself personally, I liked the old way better…it was a lot more work for people to have to preface a old statement of mine, give their point of view and then call me a bastard…this way they can just lazily tag under me, lol.
But I can see how this raises the heat and gives more traction/responses and gets more people involved…which is what Lyle is looking for I think.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:44 pm)Maybe an errant memory, but I thought that someone on the team had mentioned the fob.
My bad (maybe),
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:45 pm)I think GM is making a mistake by not taking non-refundable deposits if they really want to sell a lot of these. However, if they don’t want high volumes, (and I’m not convinced they do want this to be high volumes for the first several years), then not so much a mistake.
For a guy like me, the sale is here now, but it is gone as soon as someone opens a pre-order/deposit list with a expected ship date (I’m not paying 5K for car that isn’t made until 2013)
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:46 pm)Jim,
All I’d add is the word “NATIONALLY”.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:47 pm)Noel
That is so funny. I was thinking that maybe in Las Vegas they would help out all the out of work prostitutes. They could call it “Cash for F%$&ERS”
If your going to get screwed by the govt’, you might as well have some fun doing it
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:48 pm)Keith,
I just said jobs for “folks”. Sorry to upset you.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:48 pm)There was a lot of hype on yesterday’s post about which car would be preferred, Nissan’s “all electric car” or the Volt…. and it looked like Nissan won. But, on today’s post, it seems GM is inline with it speculated, start-up price of $40k.
GM knows the EREV is the only way to go for an all around car. With the “all electrics”, I can now imagine the havoc they can cause when they run out of juice on a busy super highway. I’m not saying the electrics don’t have a role, but not on a busy highway. Like I’ve said before, many consumers may initially like the idea of an “all electric”, but when reality sets in, many will shy away from them.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:49 pm)There is a lot of confusion out there right now on it. One site says this, another says something else. Nissan themselves said they would be selling the whole car as a purchase, but then starting talking like it was decided out of the gate.
I guess it is like everything else…hurry up and wait.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:53 pm)I KNEW somebody would nail me on that. The question was just WHO!! (Err, whom?)
Not one to give it a rest, I should point out that my keyboard doesn’t have that French ” e’ ” with the ” ‘ ” properly positioned directly above the “e,” and if I may be so bold, I would point out that Msr. Tag seems to be similarly handicapped.
Soon we will all be paralyzed out of fear of grammatical transgressions, then what will become of the Volt?!!
-1
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:55 pm)To the engineers, the concept of hauling a generator behind the car makes no sense at all! Maybe to tow trucks it does, because many electrics will find them-selves stranded on the roads.
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:55 pm)Sorry I did misunderstand you. But think about it this way: an EREV eliminates the need for a bigger battery pack so why increase the range even if you could get the range so long as to eliminate the ICE.
So does that mean the decision was a dumb old GM decision made where one should’ve known that the parts for a ICE vehicle was no where close to compatable with an Electric Series Hybrid vehicle?
I think Bob Lutz is basically going with an affirmative on that one. Nobody’s perfect!
Aug 4th, 2009 (1:57 pm)OTS: Off-the-shelf.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:03 pm)There have been, and will continue to be, development costs after the bankruptcy.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:04 pm)sparks,
Lol, I knew that I was keyboard challenged, but not keyboard handicapped.
I’ll bet you a Volt that you were toilet trained by 18 months (lol). One of the few things Freud got correct.
Be well and correct,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS!
-2
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:06 pm)I am greatly disapointed that the price of Volt is $40,000. I was looking forward to possibly purchasing one of them, but I can’t afford it on my GM pension. Hmmm…maybe a Toyota Prius hybrid for about $20,000…
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:09 pm)Regarding the Cash For Clunkers, I was just visiting the car showroom today (still unable to pull the trigger on my next new car…my wife hates me for taking so long).
When I talked to the salesman about the CFC program, he mentioned that they are seeing a lot of “good” vehicles being traded in. I mentioned that these must be worth less than th $4500 rebate, but he said that many people will trade in a car that may be worth $6000, but that is retail, and the dealers would pay only $4000. Many owners will not deal with the hassle of selling the car themselves, so they just trade it in using the $4500 CFC rebate.
These cars meet the maximum mileage restriction, but it seems such a shame that they must destroy the engines. What an ecological mess. So, now someone needing to replace an engine cannot use that engine, and now either buys a more expensive replacement or just junks the car (Does this really save our environment?).
Cash For Clunkers is another idea, whose time has passed. This is not doing anything for anyone. The short term sales will be just that. No long term benefit to this program. Kill it now!
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:13 pm)Tag said:
“Statik,
Given the bailout money, won’t that offset the billion spent in R&D and let them turn a profit sooner? You’re the numbers guru.”
—————-
On no.
/seat belts on
Well you could certainly look at it from that point of view, you could take the 16-25 odd billion they wrote off (depending on how you like to calculate the amount of compensation given) and throw all of that on the plus side of the ledger, or rather wipe off all the old costs.
However, I would wager that whatever the entire budget ends up being to bring the Volt to market is, they have only spend maybe a 1/5th of it so far. So if you think the project is a billion to come to market…they maybe have spent 200 million tops. GM was in virtual lockdown on expenses from november to june…everything is back end loaded here.
On the other hand if you are talking about making a ‘profit’ on the Volt and factoring in the expenses, you have to talk interest. GM is going to pick up about 10 billion in loans from the DoE in the fall to build 3 Voltec cars, and pay 5% interest on it from day one…that cost gets put right back on top of the project as well.
You just know GM is not actually going to spend a additional 10 billion on this project, that money will be siphoned off, re-appropriated and expensed on stuff they already have and are committed do, or money they need for other commitments already made…it won’t be put in a big cookie jar labelled, ‘New Voltec Expenses only, please leave all bills for monies taken with the PTFoA before spending’
The interest on 10 billion is 500 million a year…if GM only sells 10,000 cars through 2011, and they get that money in the fall of this year, that means they will already have racked up 2.5 years of interest…thats 1.25 billion. 10,000 cars/1.25 billion = $125,000 interest per car.
How many Volts/Voltecs to they have to sell to just catch up to that payment? Forgetting the huge up fronts cost, going forward, even at full capacity of 60,000 in 2012, that year’s 500 million in interest is still $8,333 a car…and they are supposed to pay these loans back in full on top, plus the old interest that piled up when they sold nothing (not to mention all the other billions the company owes by 2015?)
There is no scenario that GM can pay back the money they owe…even if they sold 60,000 Volts a year from 2012 to 2014 for $125,000 a pop.
Even if they didn’t get/didn’t borrow the 10 billion, and the whole project stil had to put out a billion dollars total, that is $5,263 profit they have to make on top of every single car if they operated at their fulll production capacity by 2015. (190,000 cars).
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:14 pm)How did you know?! Yes, Uncle Sigmund accomplished that training using a taser, which has in fact many thousands of Volts!
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:14 pm)I suspect what is intended is a 40 AER at a lower price point with more options and profits in the high 20K to the low 30K. Then I anticipate an internal target cost for a full BEV follow-on product with it’s own optimised design rather than a Volt hold the ICE product.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:16 pm)rocketscience
Sure if it is something that I just have to have and I am paying a couple or three hundred more just so I can have it now , yea , I will do that and many of us here are the same type of people judging from the comments .
The thing is that we are talking of a price that is at least $10,000.00 more than what it should cost in the first place .
When push comes to shove I think you will find that people are not that foolish to part with their money .
It is easy to separate a fool from his money , but there aren’t too many fools on this site who are willing to prove to others that they are fools .
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:20 pm)Ouch. I had to ask.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS!
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:22 pm)DonC,
Hmmmm, if statik’s fiscal assessment is correct, they could disprove the “profit” rule.
I still think they will pull off the Volt (I just don’t know how).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS!
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:28 pm)There’s a flip side to it as well. Many other cars that barely passed smog or couldn’t and are old 8cyl Vans that got 10mpg, blah blah blah….
But you can also say that even “New” cars qualify for CFC. Everything is a short term sales whatever. Even the $7500 rebate for the Volt, it has a limit. Is that something that should be killed to?
Just askin bro.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:31 pm)Hyw, very way off topic, everyone go to a dealer and ask to go see the cars that were traded in for the Cash 4 Clunkers. I drove past one and they had those cars to the side of the parking lot in the back and maaaannnnnthose were some pretty messed up cars. Of course there were some that could’ve bee parted out but I noticed more ghetto hoopties in there than descent cars. Some were even roadworthy questionable.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:34 pm)I don’t think that is the case. They are only switching one low volume line now, in GM’s world this is being about as cheap as you possibly can be.
Even if demand is there, they will have no way to ramp up much over 60,000 units themselves (let alone suddenly trying to get the extra packs into the pipeline), for likely north of a year. So with a limited run of 10,000 through 2011, then full production in 2012…they might decide to add capacity at the tail end of 2012/early 2013…you are likely talking 2014 before you see that come to actual production.
They also have to temper that decision when they have the Cadillac Converj and Buick CUV-whatever the heck coming online with the government’s new bag of money in 2012/2013, how does that affect demand on the Volt? GM has to make the decision on that production in 2013/2014, do they split run the Delta II line in Hamm with the Volts, or start a new one?
They likely do start a second line with all the goverment coin and 3 (or more) Delta II Voltecs out there, but I’m still thinking that is a late 2013/early 2014 move once they are sure they know what they are doing and what the demand really is.
(all just conjecture of course, I’m sure GM themselves have plans but really have no clue what will actually happen)
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:34 pm)I think Bob Lutz is basically going with an affirmative on that one. Nobody’s perfect!
True dat!
I’m not perfect by any means so I’ll flame on someone else to get the heat off me
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:36 pm)Yep. Kill the $7500 rebate, like Batman killed the Joker.
We are not going to spend our way out of this mess. We need true grassroots programs, that have a lasting effect, not a quick flash of cash.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:39 pm)Well, actually the way you explain this, it seems that the clunkers program is even MORE effective in improving overall fuel economy because it destroys the spare parts supply chain for the guzzlers that remain on the road, thereby creating a big enough headache for the owner that they get rid of their guzzler. I’m not saying it’s fun for the people who can’t find the parts, I’m just saying that it sure seems to be one of the most effective government programs I’ve ever seen.
As far as saying that “This is not doing anything for anyone”, I can only say that a quarter of a million people so far disagree with you. This is stimulus in action. I think critics of the program are have a very hard time with this. They really really really want to criticize a program that is actually undeniably effective at achieving its stated goals. You can disagree with the philosophy, but you can’t argue with the results.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:41 pm)Yeah, their bookeeping revealed they undercharrged for the Roadster by I think 20 or 25 thousand $$$. Then asked the rest of the folks in the orderd list to fork up some more $$$. One would think after making such a mistake once means they will never do it again.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:43 pm)Absolutely and that is why they shouldn’t limit the rollout. Word of mouth and first hand experience is excellent (and cheap) advertising. Some people just won’t grasp or accept the Volt until they see it, ride in it, or hear about it from somebody they trust.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:47 pm)Ditto for me too. Are you listening, Lyle? It was nice of you to offer this new method, but it is harder to work with. Too bad there isn’t a hybrid version that takes the best of both methods and combines them. Give you a reply method that carries the comment reference number, the commenter and the first line of the comment into your reply at the end of the discussion comment list. That way you could tell who a person was commenting on and the reference number would let you click on it to go back to that comment or display it in a window or text box. The first line of comment would give you a hint as to what some one was replying to. Other than that I don’t know what else the old system lacked. Other ideas, anyone?
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:47 pm)Zach refers to selling Volts “at a loss”. The term “at a loss” can be a tricky one to define. Presumably Loss = Income – Expense and occurs when the result of the subtraction is negative. Income is fairly straightforward as the total of payments made (by the customer, dealer, government or whoever). The number to put for “expense” is where things really go into the swamp. There are at least 3 main components
(1) The cost of parts and assembly for that particular Volt, money that would be saved if that Volt had not been made.
(2) Other costs associated with Volts in general, such as advertising, or equipment, or whatever is left of development costs post bankruptcy, or provision for later warranty expenses.
(3) General corporate overhead. The salaries for Lutz, Fritz, and all the others, legacy costs, general administration, etc.
Now without a doubt all 3 categories are real costs. But I am certain that GM is not going to be selling Volts at a loss if “expense” is limited only to (1). That is, incrementally it is going to be profitable. When they say “at a loss”, I am assuming that they are including all of (2) and a big part of (3) into “expense”. That is reasonable in an accounting sense, but one has to keep in mind that every Volt is incrementally making the big picture better, not worse.
So GM is not doing the world a favor by “losing money” on Volts, and we need not shed tears for them. They are improving GM’s financial situation in the short term and trying to hit a home run in the long term.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:49 pm)EcoGeek notes that once the rebate is no longer available the price will go down by the same amount.
—————
But of course. The real price will always be determined by supply and demand.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:49 pm)The bail out was loans not an outright gift. The cost to the tax payer is only if GM does not repay the loans. The R&D costs of the Volt was covered by GM with borrowed money. To pay back that money, they have to get some revenue from the investment. That means that the cost of the Volt should reflect the R&D costs as well as the direct costs.
However, companies don’t do their accounting that way. The cost of a product is the direct cost to manufacture that product. This is the cost of the parts and labor to make it. Then the sales price is calculated based on the direct costs plus a markup.
From the markup the company divvies up the money to Sales, Marketing, Administration, R&D and debt service. What is left over is profit.
When Bob Lutz says that the care costs over $40k he means the direct cost.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:51 pm)I like the way you said that .
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:52 pm)If people will buy a bigger AER, and the technology has become cost-effective to offer it, GM would be foolish not to offer it for sale.
When it comes to what people want, logical arguments can come up lacking (SUVs, anyone)?
A lot of what will happen in 5 – 10 years depends on what happens over the next 3 – 8 years (besides the cost of technology). Will GM have to exercise it’s battery warranty:
1) rarely
2) often
3) usually
?
Will more cells lead to an easier (and longer) life for each? More cells will mean more range, most likely.
And then, there’s altogether new technology to consider: if something like eestor (or MIT/A123 “energy channel” batteries) becomes available for use as a buffer, the cost of the rest of the pack can drop because it is no longer providing the maximum power required for burning rubber (or absorbing the regeneration from slamming on the brakes): That job would be handled by the buffer. This could also result from option “3″ in my list, above.
If GM has to “usually” exercise it’s battery warranty, I think they’ll do whatever has to be done to turn that into “rarely” … if they can.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:52 pm)Rashiid
We are on your side. Not that it will do much good, tangibly, but I hope you and your company can hang on and make it to the other side.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:53 pm)Yes. Exactly. That’s why the initial price is critically important. If they can get this in the $20-30K range initially they have a chance as their costs will drop over time dur to battery improvements. If they are still losing money above $40K why build the damn thing?
The whole reason for building an EREV is to solve high battery price issue for reasonable range per charge. Essentially they are trading a pricier portion of a heavier, longer-range battery for a fixed-price, lighter-weight ICE genset.
As their component costs go down for the same performance, the VOLTEC drivetrain can move down-market while the Volt acquires more standard creature comforts and the Cadillac Converj and Buick VOLTEC offering offer a still higher trim package.
Then when the charging infrastructure is in place and battery costs are reduced sufficiently GM will begin to offer longer-range BEVs based off a totally different optimized full-electric platform.
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:55 pm)LauraM said “But what I think Lutz was saying is that they’re going to lose money based on marginal costs. ”
———————————————————–
I don’t think so. They can assemble cars relatively inexpensively and will cover the marginal costs by some thousands. When Lutz says they will lose money, it is with respect to fully allocated costs.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:55 pm)The problem is on the profitability of the business side, not with people acceptance of swapping a battery that they do not own. Everybody comments over and over and over again about how we need EV’s for the masses. They bemoan the Volt at $35+K let alone $40K, the IMiev at $47K, Tesla Models S at $57K. It should be quite clear that EV’s are expensive up front and their first cost will probably never (or at least not for a very long time except for very short range) be on par with low end ICE vehicles. Externalizing the battery cost is the ONLY way to sell a long range BEV affordably. That is just a raw fact of the costs involved.
I’m not saying BPB is a slam dunk and will take the world by storm but is a way (the only currently available way) to make BEVs affordable and practical today. We can always simply dismiss it off-hand and wait for the other “surefire” 10yr out solutions like quick charging, H_______, EESTOR, etc; but, isn’t that what was done with EVs 12 years ago.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (2:57 pm)LauraM asks “But why not build the Converj?”
————————————
I agree and wonder if they are not already underway. After all, “transparency” such as it is was only promised for the Volt.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:00 pm)What it says about Lutz is that his specialty is marketing, not cost analysis.
We have known that all along.
But at marketing he is very good.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:03 pm)“If this reporter is correct (about $43K each), the Volt is now priced out of my range even with the Federal incentive. ”
————————————
Volts are going to be out of most everyone’s range, most likely, for the first 10K built. These are likely going to be allocated as much as sold.
For the larger number in the second year, we have no idea what the price will be, and likely GM doesn’t either.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:03 pm)How the “Cash-for-Clunkers” website doing?
My wife has spent days (literally) trying the upload the required information for only three deals.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:04 pm)Is it that big of a deal for the couple or handful of times per year that it is needed? I think you are underestimating the target audience for this type of tech. Do you think the majority of Prius drivers actually think their ride looks “cool”? The “cool” is in what it does and what it stands for.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:05 pm)If we just had access to that taser now. We could jolt a few of you. hehe.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:05 pm)He was in charge of product development, and sold as some sort of a grand guru thereof. The buck has to stop somewhere.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:07 pm)I agree a car has meant so much more to us here in the U.S., but at the same time I can appreciate Luke’s point of view.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:09 pm)You have a good point. Not everybody likes it or would use it but nothing suited everybody. We need solutions that get EV’s on the road now and can help them be more practical and affordable. The naysayers with no constructive alternatives and no logical argument are just detracting from and delaying the process.
-1
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:10 pm)I see that, once again, there are plenty of folks on the board with strong opinions about subjects they know little to nothing about.
The Volt is an example of vehicle development and the many twists and turns that can occur. GM should obviously never have claimed a $30K price, without knowing what the components would cost to within 5 to 10 percent. That’s just stupid retailing. I’m not really sure even now he will be correct inhis predictions about cost reductions due to longer production runs of components, etc. I also find it weird that GM wouldn’t have a clue about components so important as , apparently, the electric motor, if that’s what he’s referring to by “drivetrain”. I also don’t understand why GM didn’t know how the braking system would price out. I thought the Volt was using pretty standard regen. Some info here from Lutz, but really not enough, nor specific enough to get a good feel for where the increased costs came from. Sort of vague, you know, like Lutz’ original estimates.
I thought German engineers were supposed to be so precise and careful in their work? Maybe Lutz takes after the other side of the family.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:11 pm)I, for one, would like to see GM not limit the roll-out to a measly 10,000 Volts in the first year. I would like to see at least 25,000 the first year followed by at least 100,000 the second year and build on that each year. If the price is not too steep and the cost of fuel rises like most of us believes it will and GM is sending a sizable of the production overseas (which they have to to meet commitments to the overseas markets) the production figures I mentioned would be more realistic. So, what is up with that, GM?
-1
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:16 pm)I think a small percentage of us here would follow along with those same sentiments. I like the idea of a deposit and the time to start that process is in the very early part of next Spring (March – April). They need to have released the sales price first and fleshed out a few other things to make it more appealing for some of us. But that would require GM to either open the marketing for the Volt up to the whole of North America or limit the areas from which it would accept deposits. Probably the latter would be the only course of action they could take.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:19 pm)other than lurkers here…90% of the population do not even know about the volt, and therefore..will no know about the inital price Lutz commented..
moot point IMO
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:20 pm)A lot of “those” owners have leaped for the Prius. Not many KIA buyers became Prius owners. What makes you believe they won’t also leap for a car with 40 miles AER, better, performance, quiter operation, smoother operation, better looks (IMO), etc.?
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:21 pm)I’ve had second thoughts since writing that.
Yes, GM needs to think “appliance” when it comes to economy, flexibility, reliability. These days, people have a lot of things that compete with a car for second place, after where they live.
However, I don’t think GM can, or should trade their “soul of the machine” “emotional purchase” strong points to get it.
People who want to ride down the street in a vacuum cleaner can always go to the Japanese, who first brought us the appliance-mobile, and it’s Asian successors (and GM will never be able to compete with this philosophy).
Finding something as reliable as an appliance which is also somehow fun and special may become the new GM’s most important frontier; even ahead of electrification. I hope they get the chance to find this out quickly.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:25 pm)I like the thinking but it ain’t gonna happen. Maybe if the did a 1000-2000 copy rollout like the Mini-E but not for 10,000+.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:36 pm)… or, when “eventually” gets here, will we find that $40K is the new $30K; and that when GM’s Volt prices didn’t go up, they effectively came down (compared with everything else out by that time)?
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:37 pm)http://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?SearchText=electric+motors+&Country=CN&CatId=5&IndexArea=product_en&ssk=y
If you really want to know the cost of the motor and gen-set generator . Just look it up .
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:38 pm)Well said!
GO EV !!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:41 pm)You’re late, no-name. Your mama needs to whup the tar out of you for sleeping so late.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:41 pm)Hey hey, now give the new guy Bob a chance, please!
He’s got a new calculator / estimator now!
GO EV !!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:42 pm)Well, next time you’ll know to keep your questions to yourself. hehe.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:44 pm)Uncontested. My bad. (g)
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS!
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:47 pm)Then they will take the data analyze the problems, realize the “test bed cars” are too expensive to fix but will expose them to too much risk if the problems are not fixed. Then will will have all drivers return their “test beds” to be crushed…
Yep, I see no problems with this one.
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:53 pm)I dont get upset here , I also don’t assume anything either .
I do get bothered by all the wrong information that is accepted at face value though .
From experience I have found out that if I can’t feel it or see it , then not to trust it either , just a part of developing wisdom . Cheers .
Something like Dan , only in a different way .
Respect to Dan and appreciation for your insight and sharing of your knowledge .
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:53 pm)Although not set in stone, it seems the Volt will cost over $35,000 after dealer prep, taxes, transportation costs and Federal tax credit return. So the buying experience turns into a Camaro over Cobalt issue. There are many cheaper cars available to buy. Some will still want the real deal.
The Prius and the Insight cost less to buy. But, from what I have been reading here, either you love the Prius or you don’t. For those who don’t, I expect a car like the Cruze to fill in the space between initial Volt pricing and mass produced availability pricing. The Prius burns gasoline most of the time. The Prius cost $8000 more.
The final judge of the Volt vs Japanese hybrid matter will take time to decide. As Laura has stated, the first 10,000 Volt will sell quickly. It’s the 24 month period thereafter which is critical to the future of the Voltec program.
=D~
Aug 4th, 2009 (3:54 pm)That’s right. They had to make a lot of changes. I think initially they were going to lose a lot more. Their CEO said the company would be better off just giving each customer a check for $40 K instead of building cars. But that information was from over a year before cars to the public were coming off the line, so they made a lot of changes before regular production also.
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:05 pm)Fortunately for me. I’m on the sales side of it.
Not the “how-do-we-get-the-money-from-uncle-sam” side of it.
I thought the instructions on how to destroy an engine block was pretty cool. Can’t wait for the news reports of bad guys doing that to people’s cars…
+5
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:08 pm)Long time lurker – first time poster. I’ve been following this site for a long time, and I’ve enjoyed it a great deal (thanks Lyle.)
GM is exhibiting the same, short-term thinking that buried them (permanently) in the 70′s – they obviously haven’t learned a thing.
Virtually all Japanese ‘innovation’ originated here in the U.S. – yet they (the Japanese) took over virtually all manufacture of consumer electronics and took control of automobile manufacturing, way back then.
GM has been government subsidized (non-viable) since the 70′s. It’s just been sotto voce, through tax incentives, import tariffs, import/manufacturing/safety rules, government contracts/purchases, etc.
Toyota’s approach to the Prius is a model for how a new paradigm in drive technology can be successfully brought to market with a long-term plan. They are only starting to make serious money on that car, and it has been out for ten years – and they have sold more than a million of them. Guess what? They are in complete control of the hybrid market today, with a car based on technology developed at GM.
The Volt (EREV) potentially represents the next generation in drive technology. If GM had learned anything, they would sell it for $25k – $30k after rebate – period. Do that, spend another couple $Billion introducing EREV into the entire line, and in ten years (five with total commitment -aggressive rollout) GM is in control as they haven’t been since the 60′s.
I think we all know, that’s not going to happen. My money is on the Koreans this time around. The Japanese have gotten soft (to much like us now,) and the Chinese haven’t gotten their act together yet (corruption/poor quality.)
Think about it; for 10,000 units X $10,000 – GM is going to cede leadership of the next generation of drive technology to the Koreans, when for $100,000,000 they could slam the door on them. The development money is a sunk cost (already spent,) now it’s a question of how much value they can extract from it.
Instead, they’re trying to convince themselves that people will forego a proven (market resale value,) fine European or Japanese luxury sports sedan at $40,000 for a CHEVY – and if/when the price does come down, the fact that they ripped off the first generation buyers won’t come back to haunt them.
Yes, they probably could have (should have) come out with the Cadillac (Converj) first for over $50,000/unit – but they took the more aggressive route, and the only way to make that work would have been a major commitment (Volt, Converj, Orlando, Vue/S10) rolled out aggressively at volume over the next couple of years.
All they need to do now to cement their failure (and my disgust) is to use really cheap plastic on the interior of their $40,000 Chevy to save $100/unit.
If they do this, and if the government bails them out again – I’m moving to Colorado before it secedes
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:09 pm)You would think so anyway. Maybe some extra cost for upgraded materials for seats, etc. Caddy owners usually want top grain leather and such. Although I have seen some pretty crappy caddies after a few years. Surprising how tastes can change in car interiors.
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:10 pm)You people have way too much time on your hands……
Or is it that the release of the Volt in Nov, 2010 just seems so far away?
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:14 pm)True. All just conjecture on our part at this junction. Hopefully GM is better informed of everything except demand. They can only hope that interest like ours is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak, for the potential demand out there in the hinterlands.
Speaking of hinterlands, how is the weather up there in the Great North? Can’t say Great White North because even you guys have summer some of the time. Is it dry up there or do you get a good bit of rain during the warmer months of the year. It can get pretty darn hot and dry down South over the next three months.
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:16 pm)$500 million a year just in interest expenses, eh? Compounding? That means the second year they have an extra $25 million just interest for the interest they owe. Bail out 2.0?
No wonder Nissan only took $1.6 billion. That’s only $80,000,000 a year.
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:18 pm)I don’t care if GM gets the batteries from Hell.
If it breaks the back of OPEC, I’m still a Volt fanboy!
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:23 pm)JEC – “I have long believed that the end of oil will be the best thing that has ever happened to the US and other energy hungry countries.
People will adjust, and for the better. It is an evolution that I hope occurs in my lifetime.”
________________________
Yeah, it’s always nice to be able to kick back and enjoy a lower standard of living than our parents and watch our kids enjoy a lower standard of living than ours.
To watch the diversity of jobs, leisure activities and educational options disappear from lowered demand. For folks to hunker down to menial tasks and fewer life options all sounds nice. Less medical research and specialization, plus growing starvation in many parts of the planet leading to armed guards forcing able bodied workers and families yearning for a better life away from our borders should be cool too.
Cold areas that need heat for workers to be effective in the winter, hot areas needing air conditioning in the summer will all be economically disadvantaged when trying to expand to create jobs or recover from recessions. Deforestation to burn available wood for energy speeding up until there’s no more forests to burn, contributing even more good things to life. Yep, some things to look forward to for sure.
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:25 pm)Me too, except I would rather keep the money in my account. I don’t want to see price gouging by either party. But it happens.
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:29 pm)I never said I had become brave enough (stupid enough?) to try it with mine either. I probably could get by with it one time, but there would be a price to pay. I am not sure I would be willing to pay that price. Not yet, anyway. After I test drive a Volt, she may not be able to hold me back. Who knows!
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:31 pm)Maybe there could be some logistics help with a slightly longer note to carry the Volt. I’m thinking in terms of a six year note (if the interest is below, say, 5%), then, that last bit of expenditure that I think would be necessary is the “bumper to bumper 100,000 mile warranty” (brought up from the 36 month, 36,000 mile warranty for non-powertrain issues), for the $2,000 that was suggested by my local Chevy store.
With a hefty down payment of $12,000, from a “bottom line/turn-key” price of $45,000 including that 100,000 mile extended “bumper to bumper warranty”, (and hopefully a local incentive of $5k) might get the payment somewhere near $525.
The fuel and maintenance savings would kick in substantially as well, which I think would be only several of many more valid reasons that a lowered APR really ought to be made available for Voltec vehicles as a “worldwide banking industry standard” by a full percentage point less than anything else.
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:31 pm)I don’t know how many GM can produce in the first year, whether or not the 10,000 is just a market capacity reality or it is a internal control (I lean towards internal control)…but if they take pre-orders, make them just that.
If I get my order in 12th, I get the 12th car. The guys willing buy sight unseen should get the first cars.
If GM wants, or says they have to give one Volt to each dealer (like they did with the Camaro…which I’ve never seen any such legal requirement that they alluded to), thats fine, just cue up those up first before you start taking names/checks, so if I when I go to order, it shows me as 2,763rd…not 12th with a asterisk and a commitment to getting my car ‘whenever’ the whimsy hits them.
/bad PR averted
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:36 pm)That is true, they would have to have a handle on the rollout out areas first to some degree, although if you are not in the ‘early adopter’ range they could have a disclaimor that your Volt is put in the queue until your region is made available.
As long as they gave a maximum estimate of MSRP that your non-refundable deposit was good up to, I think they could avoid giving out hard pricing…or just make it refundable (not as good for GM, but still better than nothing, lol. That way they could at least get some handle on demand).
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:38 pm)/rookie mistake…he should know better
(=
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:39 pm)Sorry to hear that Rashiid, hopefully things won’t get any worse, and it will blow over for you.
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:42 pm)OK, i’m gonna show my ignorance here. What’s a “fob” key? lol…
Aug 4th, 2009 (4:56 pm)Yea , and he looks like such a good man and a smart one too , go figure .
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:03 pm)Out of the gate the Volt is a success for GM. Look at the offerings of other companies in this range. Many look like upscale golf carts with bolt on body kits… and no E-REV.
Understanding the cost to build it, what it takes to make it happen it’s not a bad price. As Bob said the “well heeled” will buy the first copies. Same with the Z06, ZR1 Vettes. Camaros, Ford GT-40′s going $10K and more over sticker.
Battery breakthroughs will be fast and furious. Prices will come down. Look at Hi Def TV’s and Video players navigation units etc…
GM in the investment and development curve will hopefully stay ahead of the competition that will be watching like a mans eyes on a sexy, well built hi heeled babe walking in the sun while the light illuminates within her skirt.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:06 pm)Well, actually the majority of the orginal bailout loans were gifted, and I think that is what Tag is talking about
…all the money given from the government from november up until about 2 months ago was on the government’s dime…and thus you could say the old work done and R&D spent is technically not ‘on the books’ or a ‘project cost’ because it has been forgiven and/or is part of ‘old GM’
As part of the ‘new GM’ the ‘new deal’ is that the ‘old loans’ are now gifts. Here is the article/statement on it from Reuters when it first dropped:
—-
The government’s plans include giving stakes in the new company to GM’s union and bondholders, although the ownership structure of the company is still being negotiated, said the source who is familiar with the company’s plans.
In addition, the government would extend a credit line to the new company and forgive the bulk of the $15.4 billion in emergency loans that the U.S. has already provided to GM, the source said
http://www.reuters.com/article/mergersNews/idUSN1943363120090519
There is a wicked long PTFoA PDF out there somewhere detailing it too.
But I think you are right, and likely Bob means the direct costs to build/going forward costs and not for R&D/project startup.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:08 pm)Don’t forget the cost of the warranty for the battery… Price two batteries in there per car
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:09 pm)I can’t help but think someone else will come out with a similar car, with fewer bells and whistles, at much less cost within the next year or two. Good lucK GM.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:14 pm)I hope your vision of the future is not reality. But the reality, oil supply is not infinite, but also life does not have to change for the worse, but it does need to change.
Not sure if I communicated my vision, but it had nothing to do with people moving into poverty. People change as needed, and change does not always mean for the worse.
Are you currently stockading oil and other such commodities, to prevent this from happening to your family? If I believed as you, I would likely be preparing immediately for the pending doom.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:15 pm)Sparks WHO? WHOM?
———————————
No, WHO. (smile)
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:17 pm)Koz,
I guess I have not seen any real statistics that Mercedes owners have moved to the Prius, in any significant amount.
I admit I have not really researched it that heavily, but my own experience has not shown this trend to be valid. But, I am only a small sample, so maybe in other parts of the country it could be different.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:18 pm)Ok.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:19 pm)You’re absolutely right, For the $100 million cost they would be the elite, premiere, etc. manufacturer and seller of THE car and THE technology evreybody will want for decades. They’d be the next Google. Name branding they otherwise can’t buy today no matter what they spend on commercials.
+2
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:19 pm)There has been a lot of talk and planning about the power utilities buying used batteries at the end of their lives and using them to store off peak power for times more power is required , ( cheaper than building more power plants and all locally stored )
Here is an idea that could cut the full price of the battery out of the equation completely .
Have the power companies buy the battery from the Volt buyer at the time of purchase , when the battery reaches a set state of degradation the power company takes the battery off the Volt owners hands and installs another one .
The benefits , GM would not have to worry about the warranty of the battery
The Volt owner wouldn’t have to pay for the battery and warranty costs or worry about it either .
The power companies would know how many batteries they would own and be able to plan for their placement in buildings and homes .
The Volt owner would not have to be concerned about future costs or warranty of the battery .
etc , etc .
This would be a win , win , win situation for the Volt buyer , GM and the power companies .
( I think outside of the box )
This sure would solve a great many of the problems associated with cost of the car , battery warranty , and battery replacement .
End result the Volt at a cheap price that everybody who is working or who has an income could afford to buy a Volt .
It could truly become the “peoples car” of the 21st century .
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:20 pm)Ooo, sounds like hokus pocus!!!
Thanks for pointing this out, you beat me to it!
GO EV !!!
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:21 pm)The bottom line is that accountants/numbers lie…well, at least you can make them lie, sit up, do a little dance…whatever. That is until the actually money to turn the lights on is gone…then the jig is up.
(It is similar to all of GM’s little albatross ‘hey we made a profit this quarter’ press releases, just before going banktupt and saying things were hideously impossible…and Ford’s last quarter ‘surprise we made money,’ but please don’t look into how we ‘special itemed’ moved money from Ford Financial to make it happen).
To me GM has to look at it from two stances:
A) The cost and paypack of the whole thing at face value. (Total costs and payback time…and if it payback will ever come, and thus whether we should we ever do something like this again/what can we learn from it)
B) The real costs on the books of the project today. Allowing for what was done, and the costs associated with it under the ‘old GM’ flag are gone/’forgiven,’ so those can be taken out of the calculation and move forward from this point, and only the bills we have accrued under the ‘new GM’ flag, and those bills/expenses we expect to accrue are taken into consideration.
One is to price it right, for the objectives they want to hit…and the other is to know what the ‘all-in’ cost/payback is for future projects, and to greenlight future ones, fix them/modify them before being greenlite, or just not do them again at all…cut their losses.
It is the old ‘two sets of books’ rule. One for the government, and one for youself to actually know what the heck is going on with your business.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:21 pm)Absolutely not mute. Read #42. They’re gonna give away the best market position any car manufacturer could have.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:21 pm)YES! VOLT 2.0/3.0 for 2014!!!!
It’s just around the corner !!!
GO EV !!!
+3
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:23 pm)Warren Buffett reportedly rakes in $1B profits on BYD in less than a year
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/08/04/report-buffett-rakes-in-1b-profits-on-byd-in-less-than-a-year/
Quote:
With all of this in mind, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that Buffett bolstered his investment Sunday night by acquiring an additional 225 million shares of BYD stock.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:24 pm)errr… no. if you have a flop, the car will not be build with economies of scale in mind, and the car will never be any cheaper. If it is a major success, every man and his dog will want to get a piece of the action. You tell your supplier I want 10k parts and you get a bad price. You tell your supplier you want 1 million parts, you get a great price as everyone starts working towards getting the parts produced at a cheaper price to get the supply contracts.
Volume brings down the price and you only have volume when you have a success. Why do you think battery prices are getting better with higher density output? If demand was low, only a few companies would invest and make them with little R&D for improvement, keeping the price high due to limited production capacity and monopolistic practices.
The Volt needs to be very successful due to its nature of being so unique in order for prices to fall.
I do agree with your idea that GM will sell the first 10k with little problem, just as leasing the Mini-E with a high lease cost, as the demand was there simply due to the low volumes and the “i want it now at any price” factor which a given portion of any population will have.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:25 pm)Sooo many options for EVs in 2012 !!!
GO EV !!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:26 pm)Here’s Hoping !!!
GO EV !!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:27 pm)The GTO/G8 was marketed horribly. As the Holden Commodore it’s done well in Australia, and as the Vauxhall Monaro, it’s been raved about by Top Gear– sadly, that was in Europe. The SSR was built between 2003 and 2006– given that Lutz wasn’t working at GM until 2002, I’m not sure how you can blame him for that one.
Hybrid Tahoe is one of GM’s best selling hybrids– sadly. The Malibu and the other mild hybrids just didn’t do enough to justify their price, which is why GM killed the whole “mild hybrid” concept until they can improve it.
Then there’s the BMW 3 series, the Ford Explorer, the Dodge Viper, the Cadillac CTS-V, the Volt… that’s a short list of cars that Bob Lutz definitely helped create. The new SRX, LaCrosse, Cruze, and pretty much any other 2010 or later GM car has his stamp of approval on it… so I’m not convinced he’s doing that badly.
But you can have the Prowler, that one didn’t fly.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:28 pm)Ssssh ! Don’t say that !
GO EV !!!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:29 pm)LOL !!!
GO EV !!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:30 pm)They can’t go ahead with the Converj of the ‘Buick’ Orlando, because it is part of their request for the 10-odd billion out of the DoE. Would look odd/suspicious to greenlight a project, when it is supposed to be contingent on getting those loans.
I’m sure in private the work is full speed ahead and plans are in place.
They know that money is in the bag, the government knows it too. The only hurdle they had left to get the cash was that they were a viable entity and likely to repay the loan…’new GM’ makes that happen. Heck, all we hear about GM out of the government’s mouth is good news now, and how they have a new lease on life and a ‘bright future’ – how could the loans not happen? (Especially with funding round 2 of another 25 billion on tap)
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:34 pm)“Wayne, you’re not paying attention. Ask yourself, what can the Volt do that the Prius cannot?”
It’s a LOT quicker for one thing. Sadly, still not nearly as quick as a 4 cylinder base Civic, however.
(Don’t get me wrong, I am just whining about performance, as usual, not about voltec in general).
This article is pretty interesting. I mean, how often have you heard “if the voltec drivetrain is so efficient, why hasn’t it been done, already?” Well, the simple answer is that there is a very expensive hurdle to overcome to convert the ancillary systems to be compatible with electric drivetrains.
It also makes me very hopeful that any “voting with our checkbooks” as early adopters will truly pave the way (pun intended
to make these kind of cars cheaper for everyone else who buys one later.
I mean, everyone focuses on the cost reduction of the battery, but the article makes it sound like there is a huge potential for reduced costs on those ancillary parts. THAT may very well be where the first cost reductions come from, not from the battery… Lots of hybrids could use electric ancillary systems as well. My honda Accord hybrid uses electric brake boost, electric oil pump, electric A/C compressor, etc.
The more we can drive the ancillary parts electric the cheaper electric cars can become.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:37 pm)To take this thinking farther the same thing could easily be done with other manufacturers of other battery powered cars including Pure Electrics .
The utility companies have already said that they want the used batteries and they have the money to implement this program . I bet they could get additional funding from the government under some existing program too .
Just think about the possibilities , North America could have millions of Electric and Extended Range vehicles in a few short years instead of decades .
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:37 pm)LOL, LOL, and so on!
GO EV !!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:39 pm)Even the GM DEALER in my area said the Hybrid Malibu was a joke and said it wasn’t worth it !!! Talked me out of purchasing it, THX!
That’s not Brilliant, that’s GM BRILLIANT !!!
GO EV !!!
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:45 pm)“I can only say that a quarter of a million people so far disagree with you.
=====================================================
So, lets see. The population of the US is about 300 million, and about .250 million get to enjoy a nice rebate check of $4,500. So, yes .25/300 = 0.00083 * 100 = 0.083% of the population would be just ecstatic!
Meanwhile, the rest of us (99.92%) get to fund this happy little party.
So the guy/gal who made what was believe wise and prudent purchases in the past, by buying more fuel efficient vehicles, gets the shaft, once again.
Rewarding bad behavior seems to be the trend of the last few years. Look at all the bailout money being dolled out to companies that have made poor decisions.
Makes one, really question if the right thing to do, is to do the easy thing.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:47 pm)Actually it has been very mild this summer in the GTA, not a lot of rain (except for the past few days). I’d say for the most part we have been holding steady around 24-27 ºC for a couple months(that would be 75 to 80 for you). We are frequently in the mide 80s,90s for long stretches as well. I’m not sure, but it seems to me like rain fall is about the same every month…and not excessive by any stretch.
The GTA (Greater Toronto Area) is actually part of the ‘golden horseshoe’ and we get a lot of ‘goodness’ from the lake effect (low diurnal range). So additionally, our winters are very moderate as compared to many of our US cousins at the same latitude. Summers are usually fairly humid. (In winter the lake effect can work the other way and make temperature feel ‘really cold’ for short periods of time).
Put it this way, when my wife has finally had enough of her career, I will sell my business and we will spend november to march in the southern US (I lived in the southern US when I went to school and playing baseball), then be back home in the GTA april to october…it is really nice/pleasant (at least to me) in those months. I really like the Toronto/GTA culture/atmosphere, I don’t think I could ever leave it at least not longer than that. (I feel it is quite a unique place in this world, lots of diversity/cool ‘schtuff)
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:49 pm)“The fuel and maintenance savings would kick in substantially”
===============================================
Maintenance savings? The Volt will likely be more maintenance heavy, then any typical ICE on the market. That would be like saying the maintenance on the Space Shuttle will be minor, since they have so much technology and redundant systems.
This will not fly.
Sorry Dan.
Aug 4th, 2009 (5:52 pm)Colorado’s seceding? I thought it was Texas.
All kidding aside. I think you are absolutely 100% correct. They should sell it at the price level, after rebate, that they want to target long term. They should commit full-on to pushing it into other markets that aren’t as price challenged, such as the quality performance sedan and good quality people movers (also offer BEV options of the Voltec models where they make sense). They have the buds of a good concept in Voltec but they need to really “hit it right” with their application of it.
Excellent post BTW. You should wade in more often.
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:01 pm)a lowered APR really ought to be made available for Voltec vehicles as a “worldwide banking industry standard” by a full percentage point less than anything else.
That sounds like a great idea. One bank here I know of is offering something similare but less effective for a loan. So really, instead of GM harping on States/Cities/Counties to develop to be “Plug-in-ready” they should really be pushing banks to do as you suggest.
I have to agree with JEC on the maint bro. In a ICE only car you have the ICE to maint. In a BEV, you have a Batt pack to maint. In a Series Hybrid (EREV) you have an ICE & Generator (additional large movng part) as well as the batt pack to maint.
“might get the payment somewhere near $525.”
And that’s why I won’t be able to afford Gen 1……lol
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:11 pm)I don’t have a problem with limiting volume to 10K. My issue is limiting the markets to only a few “market ready” places. I think limiting the volume is a wise move while they cost reduce and tweak the design.
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:29 pm)The best incentive to buy a Ford Fusion Hybrid or a Toyota Prius is GMs pricing announcements for the Volt.
Keep it up Lutz, the competition loves you.
NPNS!
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:35 pm)I was avoiding the two sets of books road. I’m lucky that my wife handles all the money. She can make a paycheck do a little dance (more like a full ballet) and still have room to breathe. She started the Dave Ramsey envelope system before Dave did and as long as we stick to it, we don’t have to fight the cats for food – so far.
Thanks for the “possibilities” – I know that there are always there.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS!
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:46 pm)Sales don’t indicate which vehicle is “better”. I used quotes because everybody has a different definition on what makes a car better.
Aug 4th, 2009 (6:47 pm)Mind you, a spokesperson from Volva said a few years back that it costs about as much to build an ugly car as it does to build a nice looking one.
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:02 pm)Right.
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:11 pm)Similar car to the Volt at much less cost?
It might even be GM that brings it out (smile)
+1
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:16 pm)30kw is way too big, 10-15kw is fine, as long as you start it at the beginning of your long distance trip. The genset keeps running when you stop for a break.
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:25 pm)GM and the utility companies should be working on this idea now , if they arn’t then I hope that they see your idea. Best idea i have seen.
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:30 pm)Keith , you are briliant , this is a fantastic idea .
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:45 pm)There is one huge difference. They stop at the pump.
Aug 4th, 2009 (7:57 pm)+++Another major cost factor for the car is guaranteeing the brand new high-tech battery pack for 10 years, 150,000 miles that is required by CARB.+++
CARB really needs to drop this requirement. They are shooting themselves in the foot with that requirement . . . it is stunting the growth of EVs.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:14 pm)$40K ,It blows my hopes for a Volt out of the water! Would have a hard time convincing the wife to spend more than 30K for a car like this unless gas is in the $5 range at that time. Seems to me we should outfox the oil rich countries who will price the oil such that they are just always a little lower than plan B over the IC power. We should just keep increasing the tax (did I say that) to make the IC power a little more expensive than the alternatives that come on line in the next few years.
I have 5000 watts of PV cells at my residence which are grid-tied and am ready to fill up the first electric that meets my $ and range requirements.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:33 pm)30KW being too big depends on the size of the car’s battery. 30KW allows one to drive for as long as you like without much performance compromise and the battery can be as small as you want to cover regular local driving. Smaller genset won’t save that much money or gas. The biggest benefits come from moving the components out of the car for day to day driving.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:35 pm)well said!
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:37 pm)Really, and why is that? From an engineering perspective, of course.
Aug 4th, 2009 (8:44 pm)I believe the fortunes of Honda’s new Insight vs the more expensive Prius give good insight (no pun) into this market.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:31 pm)You have to say that to keep people from “waiting till the price drops”.
The battery prices will drop significantly in 24 months.
Aug 4th, 2009 (9:40 pm)Statik and DonC,
*Ignoring* the financial issues (just for a minute, I promise) isn’t it a fact that they’ll likely “just” build/release a relatively small number of vehicles – in case something goes wrong? If there’s a problem the first year, they’ll “only” have a limited spill to clean up. Then they’d have a smidge of a chance to recoup the Volt overall. This brings us back to the idea of selling the first round to the lunatic fringe, er, I mean the core group at this site. We SHOULD be more tolerant and anxious to see the project be a resounding success and I doubt that ANYONE here is shy about providing feedback. Certainly more tolerant than someone who just bought bleeding edge technology with absolutely no wiggle room. Granted, this is all moot if, as expected, the Volt hits the Grand Slam.
Thoughts?
Be well,
Tagamet
PS Why can the car commercials claim that the clunker program trade ins will be recycled, when the vehicle must be rendered a paperweight? I guess scrap is recycled, but all those “good” used parts are just getting squished.
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS!
Aug 5th, 2009 (12:23 am)I can’t believe anyone has enough time to read every comment on every post. I just stick to the longest threads. And find myself using Ctrl+F a lot.
Aug 5th, 2009 (5:00 am)How Would Hitler React to an EV Price Increase? (encore post)
http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/ariel-schwartz/sustainability/how-would-hitler-react-tesla-roadster-price-increase
=D~
Aug 5th, 2009 (8:12 am)I love the idea of not having to carry the GENSET when it is not in use. However, I dislike the change in handling characteristics and safety a trailer introduces.
I’d like the genset to be rolled out and fitted into a bay in the front of the vehicle with something like a cross between an engine hoist and and an emergency gurney from an ambulance. That way when not in use it can be additional storage space. Then program the suspension to respond to the change in weight distribution.
I suspect it would be harder for the user to do than a trailer though.
Aug 5th, 2009 (8:25 am)Me too. The new method doesn’t fit for my time zone. I think most regular posters will think I have died, got my hands on an IV’er, or something. lol.
Aug 5th, 2009 (8:27 am)Touché I think
Aug 5th, 2009 (8:49 am)NZDavid,
You obviously have a superior keyboard. (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS!
Aug 5th, 2009 (9:26 am)No good company would sell a vehicle at a loss for as many years as this will be. They would have sold just as many if it was a Buick with added bling and a higher MSRP. Only the wealthy will buy this.
GM’s mistake.
By then Hydrogen will be on the scene and won’t require scores of new power plants to be built, just service station revamps… just like the Volt. While both systems can work together, hydrogen power will win out in 10 years.
Aug 5th, 2009 (9:28 am)The forecast is for the price of oil will drop over the next year because the never ending recession and huge loss of take home pay is killing demand.
Aug 5th, 2009 (9:43 am)No one will ever read this comment because of the above reasons, but I thought I’d post anyway. I wanted to respond to Statik’s post (because it was hilarious) but the “reply” message is not there. Must be the system limits you to 10 nested replies.
Anyway, I like the pros of the new system more than I dislike the cons. There may be a better solution, like number comments under each reply, or color any new changes differently, I don’t know. Not an easy problem to solve.
Aug 5th, 2009 (12:31 pm)If I were one of the initial purchasers of the Volt, I would actually prefer that the dealer gets one before I do. That way, I have a good response to the dozens of inevitable requests for “friends” and acquaintances to test drive my Volt. Instead of saying “well, maybe I could let you ride with me sometime”, or wondering how much to charge them, I could now say “Just go down to the dealer”.
/who am I kidding though, I’m going to be the stalker friend trying to get a ride on the first Volt I see…
Aug 5th, 2009 (5:40 pm)Extending the “Bumper to bumper” warranty should cut nearly all of the remaining unknown issues out.
Lyle, this would be an outstanding next topic. How much would GM expect scheduled maintenance to cost us?
Actually, publishing right here, the scheduled maintenance pages of Volt would certainly be far too soon, but guys, I am really fairly certain that where we have no tranny, there are no fluid changes. Where the Range Extender engine runs one fourth to one seventh of the hours, all engine fluids will about half that much longer (given the time factor).
The tires might be the issue you are talking about however.
I had not accounted for the tire cost, because I do not know what the cost is.
Cap’n Jack, do you know what the tires cost?
I get about 48,000 out of the Goodyears on the Element.
So, on a per mile basis, if it is fairly equal, I wouldn’t mind. And, tire wear is never anything that is a sudden surprise, you can usually budget way ahead of time.
Another issue is if we need to go to a Goodyear Store and buy the road hazard, etc. for the tires, especially if they are going to be pricey. (They won’t be selling us brake jobs (lol).
Aug 6th, 2009 (1:41 am)No, I’m just gonna let it ride. I’m hoping we can find economical technological replacements or people will be extraordinarily mellow about the changes as you suggest. Folks usually aren’t mellow when they see their family in jeopardy. If cheap energy disappears it will be like having 2010 expectations with an economy moving towards 1700′s a standard of living and 6 billion more mouths to feed.
Energy prices broke the economy in the 70′s and again in ’08 and we’ll see what happens next. Cheap energy has given us a booming ever expanding diversity of options accelerating beginning at the time of Fulton’s engine until the time of landing on the moon. Then boom; energy shocks.
That’s one of the reasons I’m hopeful about electric cars and the Volt. To lessen the oil price shocks moving forward. Economics gets pretty simple with some of the big obvious things. Like if most of the working class spends a lot more, or worse yet most of, their disposable income on energy, then folks can buy and do less things. Less things on a mass scale means less diversity in the economy because the basics of life, commodities-health care-transportation, squeeze out the interesting things people had hoped to do.
Aug 6th, 2009 (1:50 am)“No good company would sell a vehicle at a loss for as many years as this will be.”
____________________________________
Ist Gen.
Toyota Prius?
Aug 6th, 2009 (11:29 pm)Electricity has shown for the past hundred years it’s capable of displacing other forms of energy after technological innovations make it economical. Hopefully it comes through this time, after we get enough of a scare to go green instead of despoiling the planet (or as some say, pooping where we sleep).
+1
Aug 8th, 2009 (6:08 pm)First, they haven’t officially released the retail price: perhaps, like Microsoft, they will “manage expectations” by saying it will be high, then next November announce it at $35,000. (if battery testing suggests the battery warranty costs will be much less than they feared, they might lower the price $5000).
Also, there is the $7500 tax rebate, so that would be $27,500.
Second, yes it is a recession, and oil is *still* at about $70/barrel.
If the world economy starts to pick up in 2012, who knows how oil will go ? That is about when oil production will Peak, and with a pickup in economic demand, you might get your $5/gallon gasoline by 2012 or 2013.
Do you really want to be on a long waiting list for a good electric car when 50 million *other* people decide they need one when gasoline hits $5 ?
GM will be well positioned with the Volt in that event.
Aug 10th, 2009 (3:23 am)Far too often, we make the mistake of conflating what cars allow us to do with what they really are.
I drive a 2001 Ford Taurus, which I lovingly refer to as a “dull-gray mobile”.
It’s not fast, it doesn’t handle well, and it’s not really fun to drive. It’s boring in pretty much every way.
But it lets me go anywhere. Want to head up into the mountains for a picnic? I can do that. Want to go to the drive-in movie theater? I can do that too.
Three years ago, I didn’t have a car. I had a bike and I used public transit. Yes, it gets you there. But even the best public transit is a tremendous pain in the ass compared to just jumping in the car.
That’s what a car is to me, and that’s what it is to most Americans. The three best selling vehicles in the US in 2008 were the F-150, Chevy Silverado, and Toyota Camry. None of those vehicles are particularly sexy. None are known for great handling, performance, or driving fun. They are, however, extremely practical vehicles.
Americans love their cars. There’s no doubt about that. But most of us don’t love the vehicle itself – we love what it represents. We love the freedom of mobility. The independence of choosing our route, destination, and timetable – rather than letting someone else decide.
I have several friends who regularly head to Denver for autocross competitions. They could never stand a Prius – it’s too slow, handles too poorly, and just isn’t that fun to drive. But most people aren’t like my friends. They don’t have an Audi S8. They use their car to get them where they want.
The Prius is an exceptional vehicle for those people. And, despite what you might expect from popular culture, most of the people in the US are like that. They’re driving a Corolla, Civic, Malibu, Spectra, or any one of the hundreds of other boring vehicles that are sold in the millions.
The Prius is cheap to maintain and cheap to fuel. You can pick up a used NHW20 (2004-2009) Prius for $15,000. And you can drive the absolute shit out of the thing. It’s cheap to maintain and cheap to fuel.
Maybe you’re arguing that no one really “wants” to do that. They buy the Prius because they are an eco-head or because they drive a lot and want to save on gas. People choose it because it’s the “smart” choice, even though they really want something else.
The reality is, though, “worse is better”. The best selling vehicles are comparatively slow and handle comparatively poorly. Why is that? Is it because people like crappy vehicles? No. It’s because most people have vastly different priorities than car enthusiasts. They value practicality, comfort, and affordability.
$4/gallon gas last year almost killed what I love most about my car – the ability to go anywhere, anytime. When a 120-mile round-trip to meet some friends in another town for dinner and a movie costs $20 in gas, you start to think twice about whether or not you really want to make the drive. It’s not that you can’t still go where you want, it’s that you’re now constantly thinking about how much it’s going to cost you.
The Prius lets you not worry about gas for a little bit longer. It lets you take the 2000-mile road trip with $4/gallon gas. In a world where gas is cheap, for most people the Prius is never going to make sense. In a world like last summer, people stop caring that it accelerates slowly and has stiff seats.
“Technology always prevails”. Or, at least I hope so. The dream of the Volt is being able to drive without having to worry about how much it costs per mile or what you’re doing to national security or the environment. The first-generation Volt isn’t enough to accomplish that dream, but it’s a big step in the right direction. Imagine a world where cars spend most of their time running on cheap electricity generated by renewable resources. It can happen, and it will happen. Wind power is already far cheaper per Joule than gasoline, even at retail rates and without subsidies. The motors are there, the power electronics are there, and the batteries are quickly getting there.
The Prius is important not only as a fuel-efficient conventional vehicle but as a stepping stone towards a gasoline-free future. The Prius is the first time that modern electric-vehicle technologies (like high-power inverters, crash-safe battery packs, electric A/C, regen braking, and high-power electric motors) were deployed on a large scale. Yes, many of those technologies were pioneered by vehicles like the EV-1 and the RAV4-EV (and by earlier hobbyist and neighborhood electric vehicles). But none of those vehicles were produced in large quantities, sold across the country in hundreds of dealers, and purchased by relatively normal people. The Prius is out there every day proving that EVs can work. It’s proving that every component – except the battery pack – can be mass-produced and sold in a reasonably-priced vehicle. It’s proving that EVs can be safe and reliable.
The Volt will take that one step further. For the first 40 miles, you are driving an EV. You could presumably take the gas motor out altogether and still drive from here to the airport, then charge up and drive back. The Volt is to a conventional vehicle as an SSD is to a hard drive. Is it mainstream? Not yet. But it’s good enough that people are starting to consider the tremendous advantages it has. And as it becomes more popular and the technology improves, the Volt will get cheaper.
+1
Aug 11th, 2009 (8:57 am)Good for GM, two consecutive home runs.
1) Camaro
2) Volt
3) ???
I’d buy a volt if it was under 35K, but 35K is at the very top of my price range. Going over would mean cutting back on the 401 and/ or the 529 and as a middle incomer, that is not an option.
Aug 11th, 2009 (1:32 pm)I have to agree with Scott. 35k is the ceiling on this thing. If they can put it out there for 35k our family will buy 2.
Aug 11th, 2009 (1:49 pm)The cost per mile will be higher than what I spend currently on my car. I understand that I will be spending less in gas but I will make up the difference plus in my electric bill. I guess we have to get these car companies to start showing us cost per mile instead of miles per gallion. Nice concept… good for the enviroment but it doesn’t help my bottom line.
Aug 12th, 2009 (8:48 am)I do like the look of the car, but it is a very nice looking Cobolt. Once this car is at the dealers the dealers will mark it up to whatever they can sell it for. The 1st year is GM has a sticker of 40+ than you will not get on for less than 45 or even 50. Now a 45+ grand for a small cobolt???You can buy a 15000 car that is the same size and burn a life time of gas and still never get to the cost of the volt. That is not even thinking of the service cost and war. Plus once the war. is over in 3 or 4 years NO one will want it and it will be worthless. GM will mess the VOLT up like they do with most of the good ideas they have.
If the volt was a real 30 grand and the honda and toyota hybrids stay in the low 20 than the volt would have a chance. If I am droping 45 + on a car I dont care about gas prices
Aug 12th, 2009 (2:14 pm)It all sounds great, until individual buyers do the math. Then they’ll buy a regular car. Sorry.
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:30 am)I Just did the math, still sounds like a killer deal!
Aug 15th, 2009 (1:59 am)If you can make the numbers work then go for it. I would double check your math first though.
Aug 21st, 2009 (2:43 pm)Very smart. Wish more people would analyze it that way intead of, OK I made 3500 in my new job last month, so I should be able to afford to pay 2500 a month for that new car I want.
Oct 26th, 2009 (9:25 am)Bob Lutz, his reasoning for the miscalculating the price of the car is the type of thinking that got GM where is is today.