[bjrosen]

I took a 200 mile roundtrip to Walpole NH today. There are no major highways on the route so I was able to get an MPG number when driving mostly 35-40 (some 55) in Hold mode. The MPG number came in at 55.5 which had the effect of moving the guess-o-meter's gas range estimate from 406 miles when I started the trip to 407 miles when I was 50 miles into the trip. Strangely the battery range came in at the normal 53 miles today, a couple of weeks ago I got 70 miles on the battery on my trip to the Berkshires.

 

[alfon]

Just came back from fishing down in Tillamook Oregon, via Highway 101 with our 2016 Volt. Temps mid 60's and mostly dry, no rain for a change. Total miles 136.3 miles/ electric miles, 68.5 with 14.1 KWH used/ gas miles 67.9 - gal's used 1.29 - 52.5 mpg.

Speed varied from 55-58 mph on highway to 25-45 through towns, and 35-45 mph on secondary roads. The total trip cost less money than our 2010 Prius even considering the cost of electricity, $1.80 for a full charge. Elevation ranged from sea level at home to 600 feet or so.

The 2016-17 Volt, even when not using the battery, is still a mpg champ that rivals most of the eco cars out there.

 

[BAZINGA]

I'll have to check this out one of these days. So far since I bought our 2017 Volt 9 months ago I have driven our Volt over 99% all electric.

 

[Jmaj]

Here's a comparison.
I test drove a 2017 Cruze diesel automatic the other day.
Conditions: 50F, light headwind, tires at 38 psi, freeway light traffic, cruise control set at 75 mph. Negligible elevation changes. I punched the accelerator a couple times to get a feel for how much passing power was there.
MPG meter stabilized at 45 mpg.
There's a youtube video of a freeway loop at a lower speed (68 mph) with a manual transmission version. 59 mpg.
Note: the Cruze diesel has the Goodyear Assurance tires - and a spare tire.

 

[rmay635703]

Here's a comparison.
I test drove a 2017 Cruze diesel automatic the other day.
Conditions: 50F, light headwind, tires at 38 psi, freeway light traffic, cruise control set at 75 mph. Negligible elevation changes. I punched the accelerator a couple times to get a feel for how much passing power was there.
MPG meter stabilized at 45 mpg.
There's a youtube video of a freeway loop at a lower speed (68 mph) with a manual transmission version. 59 mpg.
Note: the Cruze diesel has the Goodyear Assurance tires - and a spare tire.

I had always hoped the volt would have come with a NA 2 liter diesel as an option, ah well

 

[alfon]

I know there are a few cars, perhaps very few at that, out there that may rival the mpg's of the 2016-17 Volt, but none have the ability to operate on 100% electric from 40 miles (winter) to nearly 70 miles(summer) on a full charge of electricity. Also most of those cars get poor mpg's in the city compared to the Volt which still EPA's at 42 mpg.

I remember a few years ago on this forum for a 50-50 Volt. A new version that would deliver 50 miles of electric range and 50 mpg on the gas engine / generator. Looks like that was achieved in this case. The 2011-15 Volt never delivered the electric range or gas mpg (premium gas required) as the 2016-17 Volt, as we had a 2014 Volt we traded for our current 2016 Volt.

 

[bjrosen]

I had always hoped the volt would have come with a NA 2 liter diesel as an option, ah well

You would never put a diesel into a "Green" car, even if their new diesel is clean (which I doubt, VW lied, Fiat Chrysler lied) from a marketing point of view diesels are associated with filthy semis. The benefits of a diesel in a Volt would be much smaller than they are for a conventional car. The Volt uses an Atkinson cycle engine rather than a Otto cycle engine. Atkinson cycle engines are more efficient than Otto cycle engines which diminishes the biggest advantage of diesels. The tradeoff on Atkinson cycle vs Otto cycle is power but that doesn't matter to the Volt because it has electric motors which more than make up the difference. Diesels also have more torque than conventional ICEs but they don't have nearly as much as electric motors so in the case of a Volt they provide no advantage in this regard at all. The thing the Volt needs is a bigger battery, a 100 mile EV range would eliminate almost all of the ICE use for local driving and significantly reduce the ICE use for most longer trips. For me a local trip into Boston is now 50/50 electric/gas, a 100 mile battery would make it 100/0. Yesterday's trip to Walpole NH was 200 miles round trip, 25/75 E/Gas, a hundred mile batery would have made it 50/50. I only burned 2.75 gallons on that trip, if you dropped in a diesel I might have saves a pint of gas, BFD, but if the car had a 100 mile electric range I would have saved a gallon (still not all that significant but it would have made the ride more pleasant because it would have been in silent running mode more of the time).

If fuel economy is the goal of diesels than the place to put them is in the monster trucks and SUVs that GM sells, not in a car like the Volt which is already very efficient. Even so I'd much rather see them convert their entire line to Voltec and eventually when batteries get 2X better than they are now, Boltec.

 

[alfon]

You would never put a diesel into a "Green" car, even if their new diesel is clean (which I doubt, VW lied, Fiat Chrysler lied) from a marketing point of view diesels are associated with filthy semis. The benefits of a diesel in a Volt would be much smaller than they are for a conventional car. The Volt uses an Atkinson cycle engine rather than a Otto cycle engine. Atkinson cycle engines are more efficient than Otto cycle engines which diminishes the biggest advantage of diesels. The tradeoff on Atkinson cycle vs Otto cycle is power but that doesn't matter to the Volt because it has electric motors which more than make up the difference. Diesels also have more torque than conventional ICEs but they don't have nearly as much as electric motors so in the case of a Volt they provide no advantage in this regard at all. The thing the Volt needs is a bigger battery, a 100 mile EV range would eliminate almost all of the ICE use for local driving and significantly reduce the ICE use for most longer trips. For me a local trip into Boston is now 50/50 electric/gas, a 100 mile battery would make it 100/0. Yesterday's trip to Walpole NH was 200 miles round trip, 25/75 E/Gas, a hundred mile batery would have made it 50/50. I only burned 2.75 gallons on that trip, if you dropped in a diesel I might have saves a pint of gas, BFD, but if the car had a 100 mile electric range I would have saved a gallon (still not all that significant but it would have made the ride more pleasant because it would have been in silent running mode more of the time).

If fuel economy is the goal of diesels than the place to put them is in the monster trucks and SUVs that GM sells, not in a car like the Volt which is already very efficient. Even so I'd much rather see them convert their entire line to Voltec and eventually when batteries get 2X better than they are now, Boltec.

Lets not forget that Diesel engines today are required to have Urea injection which is an added cost as the Urea tank needs to be filled and its not free. Also the diesel emission controls today are vastly complexed. Now the 16-17 Volt weighs in empty at over 3,700 lbs, a good 700 lbs or so more than comparable cars of the same size. So the 101 HP Volt's gas engine is really more efficient than most people give it credit for when you consider the additional weight of the Volt.

Final thought is that Diesel fuel is normally more per gallon than regular 87 octane the 16-17 Volt uses. Here in northwestern Oregon diesel at one point was nearly 50 cents a gallon more than regular 87 octane gas. Not much savings, if at all, when you consider all the cost associated with a diesel engine and the 16-17 Volt gas engine which can easily achieve 45 or more mpg on just gasoline.

 

[jupitermoon]

I took a 200 mile roundtrip to Walpole NH today. There are no major highways on the route so I was able to get an MPG number when driving mostly 35-40 (some 55) in Hold mode. The MPG number came in at 55.5 which had the effect of moving the guess-o-meter's gas range estimate from 406 miles when I started the trip to 407 miles when I was 50 miles into the trip. Strangely the battery range came in at the normal 53 miles today, a couple of weeks ago I got 70 miles on the battery on my trip to the Berkshires.

Do you have charging ability at your destination? I assume you charged when you got there if that were the case?

 

[bjrosen]

Do you have charging ability at your destination? I assume you charged when you got there if that were the case?

Destination charging is only useful if you are staying for a long time, and it's also fairly rare outside of big cities. On yesterday's trip to Walpole there was no charger available and besides we were only there for dinner, we were going from dairy farm to dairy farm to get cheese, I also bought a 1/2 gallon of raw milk (cost the same as all of the gasoline that I used on the trip). Curiously mine was not the only 2017 Silver Volt at the restaurant (Burdick's if you are ever passing through Walpole which is on the border with Vermont). Last week we went to an Opera Maine concert (not an opera just a single soprano), it was at the Univ of Southern Maine and there is a single ClipperCreek EVSE that's available and I used it to get a couple of hours of charging. That trip is a highway trip so the EV range was terrible, 44 miles, but the gas MPG was good, 46 MPG on I95. The previous week was the Berkshires, no destination charging available and the longest stop was for dinner so it didn't matter. The Berkshire trip was where I got 70 miles on the battery, I did the Mass Pike portion on Hold and then I was on the battery as we drove around the Berkshires, did a museum and got bread at Berkshire Mountain Bakery (that's the place on the Netflix show Cooked, it really is great bread).

 

[jupitermoon]

Destination charging is only useful if you are staying for a long time, and it's also fairly rare outside of big cities. On yesterday's trip to Walpole there was no charger available and besides we were only there for dinner, we were going from dairy farm to dairy farm to get cheese, I also bought a 1/2 gallon of raw milk (cost the same as all of the gasoline that I used on the trip). Curiously mine was not the only 2017 Silver Volt at the restaurant (Burdick's if you are ever passing through Walpole which is on the border with Vermont). Last week we went to an Opera Maine concert (not an opera just a single soprano), it was at the Univ of Southern Maine and there is a single ClipperCreek EVSE that's available and I used it to get a couple of hours of charging. That trip is a highway trip so the EV range was terrible, 44 miles, but the gas MPG was good, 46 MPG on I95. The previous week was the Berkshires, no destination charging available and the longest stop was for dinner so it didn't matter. The Berkshire trip was where I got 70 miles on the battery, I did the Mass Pike portion on Hold and then I was on the battery as we drove around the Berkshires, did a museum and got bread at Berkshire Mountain Bakery (that's the place on the Netflix show Cooked, it really is great bread).

I assume you were at dinner for at least one hour? I eat slow and take my time so an hour or more would be an average dinner for me. At my charge rate and mi/kWh I'm attaining, I'd have gained about 27 miles of range for an hour and a half of charging. While not a full charge, every bit of recharging would give you a far better overall energy consumption rate than being on fuel I'd imagine.

It's a shame there is no destination charging where you were at. Or for that matter the Volt doesn't have AT LEAST 7.2 kWh charging capability.

Today I charged my i3 with a DCFC...it charged (from 38%) up to 96% in 30 minutes. I charged about 19.5 kWH. What a difference. It's something to actually see your charging % and miles go up every 10-15 seconds.

 

[alfon]

I noticed with our 2016 Volt the cars computer appears to over report the amount of gasoline used. For instance the last trip for 67.9 miles on gas the computer stated 1.29 gal's used. Just filled up at Costco, the same place as last time, nozzle on the first, slow click, then when it shuts off, take the nozzle out and done. Pump read 1.112 gals.

Also the fillup before that, same place, Costco, same method as above, 5.894 gal's pumped, computer read out from car and Volt Stats as well, 6.093. I know it doesn't seem like much but fairly consistent. If I use the gas pumped to compute my gas mpg it is obvious higher, as the 67.9 mile trip computes to 61.06 mpg.

Just curious if any 2016-17 Volt owners have noticed this mild discrepancy when they fill up and compare to the cars computer or Voltstats.net?

Having had our 2010 Prius for the last 7 years the computer always over reports mpg's. 55 mpg indicated usually computes at the pump as 51.5 mpg or so. Our Volt is biting at the heels of our Prius when it comes to mpg's.

 

[TSquare]

I noticed with our 2016 Volt the cars computer appears to over report the amount of gasoline used. For instance the last trip for 67.9 miles on gas the computer stated 1.29 gal's used. Just filled up at Costco, the same place as last time, nozzle on the first, slow click, then when it shuts off, take the nozzle out and done. Pump read 1.112 gals.

You are talking about less than 3 cups of fuel difference. The gas pumps are not that accurate.

 

[Jmaj]

Gas pumps are supposed to be accurate to within 0.3%. Based on my personal experiences comparing pump mileage vs. mpgmeter readouts on a variety of vehicles, the mpgmeter is roughly 5% high.

Best comment I've read about mpgmeters is their proper use is as a tool to help a driver be efficient, not as an absolute statement of performance.

 

[bjrosen]

Gas pumps are supposed to be accurate to within 0.3%. Based on my personal experiences comparing pump mileage vs. mpgmeter readouts on a variety of vehicles, the mpgmeter is roughly 5% high.

Best comment I've read about mpgmeters is their proper use is as a tool to help a driver be efficient, not as an absolute statement of performance.

The pump is accurate in the amount of fuel that it dispenses but not about the fullness of your tank. After the automatic shutoff happens you can generally pump another 1/2 - 3/4 gallon which means that the fullness detector doesn't have to be particularly precise, it just has to be good enough so that you don't over flow the tank. The only way for you to get exactly the same amount of gas each time would either to fill the tank to the brim (not a good idea) or to have some sort of a measuring stick (and who in their right mind would be so obsessed with filling the tank to the same level each time that they would bring a measuring stick).

 

[CurrentEvent]

This is an interesting discussion. How accurate is the Volt measuring the gas it uses? How do you compare it with a gas pump with unknown accuracy? Maybe pour a known quantity of gas in from a gas can. Anyway I'd like to know. I'm happy with the efficiency of the ICE. I don't try to drive carefully to maximize mileage and I still get in the low 40's.

 

[caskConditionedAle]

Thanks for the data, bjrosen. I knew the [email protected] would be impressive.

 

[canehdian]

The pump is accurate in the amount of fuel that it dispenses but not about the fullness of your tank

This, and even if it is accurate to the exact same point of fuel shutoff, the actual volume in your tank varies with temperature.
Some days I've seen it swing as much as 5-10% from a cold morning to a hot afternoon.
The pumps around here give a reading that is corrected to 15C temperature - so the actual volume in your tank may not necessarily be the volume actually used when it's actually burned.

I find the computer to be highly accurate, at least on my gen1.

 

[jerryc]

Is there a way to display the same screen for a trip, without it started calculation after "a full charge"?