​

[ad#post_ad]When the Chevrolet Volt concept was first unveiled in January 2007 it illustrated the use of a 1-L 3-cylinder combustion engine.  Other variants of the Voltec propulsion system, then known as E-Flex, were also demonstrated at various times.  These included hydrogen fuel cell and diesel concepts.

In the end GM decided to go with a 1.4 L normally aspirated 4 cylinder engine that will also be used in other GM cars including the high volume Chevy Cruze expected to launch in the fall.

GM has apparently been continuing to study other possible range extenders, according to a report from Edmund's, with the hope that one of these could make its way into the second generation of the car expected in the 2013-2014 timeframe.

One of the barriers to the Volt making it to high sales volumes is the considerable expense not only of the battery but of the complex extended range drivetrain, something pure EVs like the LEAF do not have to contend with.

"Right now, the propulsion system is too expensive, even with using an existing engine," said GM's new vice president of global vehicle engineering, Karl Stracke.

Stracke explained that GM is looking carefully at several different range extenders for future generations.  These systems include two cylinder gas engines, diesel engines, and even rotary or Wankel engines.

"We have a strategy to go rotary engines or a two-cylinder [gas] engine making 15-18 kW," said Stracke.  "Rotary has a higher fuel consumption but here's the advantage [holds up his hands to form round, frisbee-sized shape] — packaging."

Stracke has even piloted a rotary engine-powered Volt prototype.  "I have driven the car already," he said.

"One rotor could be enough," he added. "Of course with the higher rpm of a rotary, you need to have an NVH solution."

Stracke also believes a diesel powerplant could find its way into the Volt.  "The cost of the engine would be higher for the manufacturer," said Stracke of the diesel engine, "but the fuel costs would be cheaper for customers."

To reach high volume sales, not only does GM have to lower the cost of the powertrain but also the cost of the battery pack.  And, for the first time in the history of GM-Volt.com a GM executive finally admitted the total cost of the Volt's 16 kwh lithium-ion pack.

The pack costs "roughly $10,000," said Stracke.  He also said that GM is "working aggressively to get that cost down 50 percent" for the next generation Volt.

"The future of the automobile has never been as interesting as it is right now," said Stracke. "Big question is, what new propulsion system will come next?"

Source ( Edmunds )
[ad#postbottom]

 

wow big news.. Problem with a small genset is the Pikes Peak Run.. there are places in the US with extended runs up a grade 6 hwy.. and you want to maintain at least 65 with occasional extra oomph for passing.

I'm sure they know best but I dont see how developing a new engine is going to be cheaper than using something they already have.. a wankel would be neat due to the low nhv and weight but cheap is not going to be, and they use a lot of fuel. Perhaps a simplified low parts count 2 cylinder like Lotus recently developed..

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/09/lotus-range-extender.html

I had to check the date carefully, make sure it was not aprils fool day

 

Is that just for the cells or is that the whole pack? How does that compare to Nissan's? The number seems high if it's just the cells, but a bit low for the whole pack. We all really just want to know the full cost for the car. The pack price let's us speculate better (if it's even accurate), but there's no forcing this information out of GM. They'll release it when they're ready. Do keep pestering though. Maybe someone will let it slip

 

Sounds about what we figured for pack, about $8,000 for the cells, and $2,000 for the rest of pack hardware. This is another reason to get the Gen 1 Volt, you'll likely never run out of power, you'll have a very long lasting battery with the thermal management system (and who knows what all corners they're cutting in the Gen 2 battery pack to get costs down), and who wants to maintain a diesel or rotary engine when they only run it for a few hours a year? I think they should stick with a common run of the mill engine that can be made cheaply and mechanics won't hate working on, and won't be a pain in the behind to find parts for, maybe offer the option of rotary or diesel for people that still use gas a lot (won't be me that's for sure). Then let the market decide.

That all being said, if they can get the price down so that it's below $30k without subsidies and the range extender mode has crazy gas high mileage with a 2 cylinder engine or something, wow! That'll be huge. 2013-2014 isn't that far away.

 

Marcus R. (WL #5275) : Is that just for the cells or is that the whole pack? How does that compare to Nissan’s?

Lyle wrote it is the whole pack, and how do we know what Nissan is paying?.. more guessing.

Since we know the cells are 70% of the total cost of the pack then we know they cost about $7000, or $437 per kwh. Apparently GM renegotiated their deal with LG.

 

Michigan State U just got a grant from ARPA-E to develop a novel new type of wave disc genset engine, just for cars.. very low parts count:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/10/michigan-state-university-receives-25m-arpae-award-to-build-wave-disc-enginegenerator-for-series-hyb.html

Then you have Capstone Turbines, very expensive:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/02/velozzi-20100204.html

Audi range extender wankel:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/03/a1etron-20100303.html

Fiat 500 range extender wankel:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/05/fev-20100512.html

Normally wankels are not economical, and a small high rpm one is going to be worse.. so I was thinking GM must have WILDLY exceeded their CS Mode MPG goals (50mpg) with the 1.4L ICE to even consider a wankel. Why is 50MPG important?.. is what a Prius gets and GM must match or exceed it for marketting.

 

WOW Lyle! You got a GREAT piece of information. Nice reporting. People have been after this number for a long time, and you got it. Nice. The only number left that you haven't pried out is the MSRP, and I think we'll have that soon enough. (And of course actual prices will be set by supply and demand so costs are not all that relevant to price).

The estimate of the pack cost here was $11,200. Not too far off "roughly $10,000" which is likely closer to $10,500 than $9,500. So basically it would take about ten years to break even if you were just looking at gas prices. Which of course we definitely are not doing.

 

The size of the genset was always driven by one of the original Volt requirements, to cruise at 100mph on a level hwy once the battery was depleted. In a Volt sized vehicle this requires about 50kw out of the generator.. that and total weight also determines maximum cruising speed going up a 6% grade hwy, and that wont be 100mph.

On flat ground a 20kw genset will give you about 70mph, 30kw will do about 80mph.. I doubt GM will ever use a 20kw genset.

A diesel or HCCI genset is not likely due to cost, weight and vibrations.. both require high pressure DI and that is not cheap.

 

I believe the Mazda had developed a wankel way back when, but gave up because of very high gas consumption and emissions. It's unlikely these engines have gotten much better, because no body has been working on them

 

All good news for 2nd GEN VOLT in 2013!!!

Lower cost means getting it back down to MAX Bob's original $30K price, nice!

Good work, GM!

GO EV!!! – Range Anxiety = Oil Dependency
http://www.theevproject.com/

 

http://www.fev.com/data/documents/brochures/Electric_Vehicle_Technology_Web.pdf

This may be the design engineering company that provided the wankel range extender to GM. They made the Fiat 500 EREV as a demo project of their skills:

"Range extender hybrids are pure serial hybrids.
Therefore, range extender modules based on simple
internal combustion engines, which are operated at
their most efficient point, combined with an electric
generator, are a very attractive option. The picture
shows range extenders of about 20 kW based on
different internal combustion engines. Depending
on customer needs, two cylinder engines or a single
cylinder engine or even more exotic engines like the
Wankel engine basically can be taken as ICE for the
range extender.
Alternatively a fuel cell system operated as an auxiliary
power unit (APU) could be one option in future.
Range extenders as power source in the automotive
environment have to fulfill different requirements
compared to automotive combustion engines and
also compared to industrial Gensets. An optimal
design can take advantages of these modified requirements."

 

Wow. Like you guys are saying, and I'll repeat it and say it backwards, "WOW!"

Today, I think I can see Lyle so excited he rushed through typing and forgot to spellcheck since rushing this great story to press just couldn't wait. It's a wow story!

All-in-all, I'd have to say the varieties and possibilities boggle the mind, but as the resident realist at gm-volt.com ( yeah, yeah...self appointed - lol ) , I can say all these solutions sound expensive and require retooling and rethinking. We all remember the original three cylinder and the talk of the interchangeable range extender of the future possibly being diesel or fuel cell...etc.
The Wankel is problematic on too many levels ( although the low end grunt rotarys lack can be subsidized by the electric drive ) and the other solutions have drawbacks like expense, when the whole idea is to reduce the cost of the 1.4 Ecotec.

Being that the Ecotec is shared among models and platforms, mass produced and yet, along with the battery pack, deemed "too expensive" it is going to require thinking outside the current outside the box thinking....( are following....? There'll be a test later.....lol.

So here's a big idea. Put a Chinese engine in Volt. Nothing spectacular, nothing ground-breaking, but an ICE 3 cylinder with balance shaft, or 4 cylinder mass produced using good ol' cheap Chinese manufacturing. The shipping costs can be countered with mass production levels and sharing among models as well. Also, since Shanghai is involved in developing MPV5 and battery think-tanking ( as per prior gm-volt articles ) - I think China could take on a rather pivotal role in seeing Volt burst out into the high production , lower cost arena.

So I know I just lost the "buy 100% American" folks - the UAW and probably the government support, but for us realists it really makes sense to cut manufacturing costs this way, and yet put the Volt and Voltecs together here in the our beloved USA. If shipping costs are spread amongst MPV5 parts also - cost cutting can make the Volt dream be realized. Remember, all we seem to hear between the lines, along with that dreaded foot-dragging GM seems to have been practicing, is "Volt is too expensive to build", "Volt is so expensive", "Volt drivetrains , Volt batteries, Volt everything ---- TOO EXPENSIVE... .... ...... .......... ......... " , and so on.

So what do you think? I'm just brainstorming here. The above article is like GM engineers thinking out loud. Notice the article says how the 1.4 Cruze/Volt Ecotec is too expensive , but gives more expensive, more research-heavy, problematic solutions to fill that dilemma....So as not to make any sense.

Would you be willing to buy a Volt with more Chinese content if it insures Volt comes to fruition?

RECHARGE! James <------ FOOD FOR THOUGHT DIVISION

IF YOU BUILD THEM THEY WILL COME

 

James : Would you be willing to buy a Volt with more Chinese content if it insures Volt comes to fruition?

GM actually manufactures a couple of cheap 3 cylinder engines in China, for use there, perhaps they could import them.

They could also buy a wankel canned design from FEV, then the expense may not be so bad.. they may even be able to resell it to 3rd parties such as Fisker Karma. The nice thing about wankels is that they are modular.. use one rotor for the Volt, two rotors for the Voltec Corvetron and 3 rotors for a light duty Voltec PU. All pretty much based on the same parts.

In any case if they commit the resources to develop an optimized genset then you know they really believe in the Voltec architecture.

 

Herm :
GM actually manufactures a couple of cheap 3 cylinder engines in China, for use there, perhaps they could import them.
They could also buy a wankel canned design from FEV, then the expense may not be so bad.. they may even be able to resell it to 3rd parties such as Fisker Karma. The nice thing about wankels is that they are modular.. use one rotor for the Volt, two rotors for the Voltec Corvetron and 3 rotors for a light duty Voltec PU. All pretty much based on the same parts.In any case if they commit the resources to develop an optimized genset then you know they really believe in the Voltec architecture.  
Hi Herm! Nice to see someone else up at this unGodly hour! The only word that scares me about your comment is "cheap"....I'm sure you're describing inexpensive manufacturing cost per unit and not quality - quality control of a Chinese powerplant would be penultimate to it's successful application.

As an option I can even see more aluminum in the construction. An all aluminum 3 cylinder with balance shaft and maybe even a low boost turbo makes sense to me. Aluminum parts manufactured here seem price-prohibitive, but in China....? Weight savings only means less battery pack needed, less hp and less overall cost to own and drive. Lightness is next to godliness - must be an engineering motto down in Warren, Michigan.

Composites seem like batterys today. Costs may be coming down. The up front cost of composite manufacturing is intimidating. Aptera made strong gains in realizing a more cost effective composite technique, or so their PR dept. says. Perhaps overseas composite parts can also be a big part of weight reduction of the Volt.

Rotary engines, it seems to me, make no sense. Unless, of course, GM is onto some new wrinkle that irons out some of a Wankel's fatal flaws - as mentioned, nasty gas mileage and vibration issues along with low rpm anemia.

It's a whole new world. Anything designed by GM engineers, made in China would be produced in a flimsier, cheap cheaper copycat factory as a "Chinese knockoff" faster than Oprah starts a new diet. But to me, it would be worth that risk to get Volt to market - and end all the fidgeting from corporate over "Volt is just too too too expensive to mass produce now".

Let's focus our collective energy towards the Ren Center, downtown Detroit ---- OHHHHMMMMM, OHMMMMMMM, OHMMMMMMMMM ( Ohm, get it? )

Maybe through collective will, deep mind melding, lots of prayer and some arm-twisting, we can convince GM Volt can make them money - achieve high profitability, or whatever other catch-phrase is popular in GM's Accounting Offices.

RECHARGE! James

IF YOU BUILD THEM THEY WILL COME

 

Thursday May 27, 2010, 4:50 am

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) -- Analysts don't expect a temporary shutdown of the trans-Alaska pipeline system due to an oil spill this week to have much effect, if any, on crude prices and gas supplies.

While it could be back up by Thursday, energy economist Doug Reynolds says even a week idled, in the global scheme, shouldn't affect those things much.

The 800-mile line was shut down Tuesday, after what its operator characterized as several thousand barrels of oil spilled into a tank and overflowed into a containment area.

Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. says it expects to begin recovery of the spilled crude early Thursday.


=D-Volt

 

I hope GM eventually offers a few range extender options.

As for me, I just want a limp-home genset that alleviates the range anxiety and allows me to go a few miles above the minimum legal limit on the highway. So perhaps 60 mph at 100 percent of continuous output. You can then go a few miles over that for reasonable periods without destroying the unit.

Additionally, they must continue to iterate though the light-weighting process to get the weight way down and aerodynamics up.

This might even be a different model to satisfy those that really want to get off of oil and do not care to match the performance of yesterday's fossil boxes.

My Ideal EREV:
Lightweight (smaller drivetrain needed)
Aerodynamic (more fuel efficient)
low rolling resistance (more fuel efficient)
minimal genset that is flex-fueled (can transition to biofuels)
battery pack size matched to driver's daily need (not lugging around unused weight)

I'll take two.

 

I noticed Stracke said the size of the Wankel, or lack of it, was the reason they are looking at it. Maybe what they want to do is move some of the battery pack under the hood in order to make the ever more requested 5 passenger Volt or MPV5. A smaller engine that runs more, might give a better overall CS mode mpg, to boot.

 

Texas : I hope GM eventually offers a few range extender options.As for me, I just want a limp-home genset that alleviates the range anxiety and allows me to go a few miles above the minimum legal limit on the highway. So perhaps 60 mph at 100 percent of continuous output. You can then go a few miles over that for reasonable periods without destroying the unit.Additionally, they must continue to iterate though the light-weighting process to get the weight way down and aerodynamics up.This might even be a different model to satisfy those that really want to get off of oil and do not care to match the performance of yesterday’s fossil boxes.My Ideal EREV:Lightweight (smaller drivetrain needed)Aerodynamic (more fuel efficient)low rolling resistance (more fuel efficient)minimal genset that is flex-fueled (can transition to biofuels)battery pack size matched to driver’s daily need (not lugging around unused weight)I’ll take two.   (Quote)

I'm not so sure the limp home would be good enough. Not for traveling anyway. But I do like the idea of a 100 BEV Volt with a range extender trailer for long trips. So many options for Gen II. I still want my Gen I for the thermal management system. I love overkill. It sure will keep the battery happy for many years. Then a 100 mile BEV for my second car.

Fellow Bloggers we sure live in interesting times. So many manufacturers so many products all powed by electrons.

Sure hope GM makes enough Volt so I can get my hands on one.

Take Care,
TED

 

The SMART car has a 0.6 litre or 0.8 llitre diesel and gets about 60mpg. I can't see why they don't just make their own or license this one. it also must be a tiny engine to fit into the standard Smart car and the Smart FourTwo. There's also the Smart roadster - with a 74kW engine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Roadster
The standard Smart engine apparantly is: 45 or 60 kW (61 or 82 PS) versions of the turbocharged 698CC 3-cylinder Suprex engine

 

mark yates : The SMART car has a 0.6 litre or 0.8 llitre diesel and gets about 60mpg. I can’t see why they don’t just make their own or license this one. it also must be a tiny engine to fit into the standard Smart car and the Smart FourTwo. There’s also the Smart roadster – with a 74kW engine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Roadster The standard Smart engine apparantly is: 45 or 60 kW (61 or 82 PS) versions of the turbocharged 698CC 3-cylinder Suprex engine   (Quote)

even better the Smart ForTwo (correct name) has a diesel fuel economy of an astounding 83mpg. Surely this is the best range extender!!!
I'd also suggest they should keep back 3% of the battery for over-taking - which would give you 2 minutes or so of extra power where you can get generator + battery power. Is anyone else a bit concerned that somebody might try and start overtaking then find the power ease back at a crucial time - wouldn't this be a problem?

 

Future LEAF Driver : Range Anxiety = Oil Dependency

NO,

Range Anxiety = I have a life and people that rely on me to be able to travel where I need to be when I need to be there.

 

Herm : Michigan State U just got a grant from ARPA-E to develop a novel new type of wave disc genset engine, just for cars.. very low parts count: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/10/michigan-state-university-receives-25m-arpae-award-to-build-wave-disc-enginegenerator-for-series-hyb.html Then you have Capstone Turbines, very expensive: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/02/velozzi-20100204.html Audi range extender wankel: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/03/a1etron-20100303.html Fiat 500 range extender wankel: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/05/fev-20100512.html Normally wankels are not economical, and a small high rpm one is going to be worse.. so I was thinking GM must have WILDLY exceeded their CS Mode MPG goals (50mpg) with the 1.4L ICE to even consider a wankel. Why is 50MPG important?.. is what a Prius gets and GM must match or exceed it for marketting.  
Wow, thanks for the links!
If GM *has* been wildly underestimating their CS mode, they simply haven't been listening to me. (LOL).

Be well and believe,
Tagamet
/AFK again today :-(
LJGTVWOTR!!

 

I had a 1980 Mazda RX-7, and the Wankel engine was very smooth at 5000 rpm. It had two rotors and produced about 105 hp. I was a small engine, but fuel economy was not great for such a small car.

I can see the packaging advantages of the Wankel, although there are efficiency and emissions penalties that go with it. I could see this, however, for a smaller E-REV like maybe an Aveo sized car.

For the Volt, I agree with Herm that most people will want the 53 kW of power to go up hills at 60 mph or have the power to cruise at 85 mph across Kansas (or keep up with traffic between LA and San Diego).

I see the 2 cyl. being a good fit. GM has announced their next generation V8.

http://wot.motortrend.com/6639187/industry-news/small-block-big-money-gm-spends-890-million-for-next-gen-v-8-production/index.html

"...GM says the new V-8 range will exclusively utilize aluminum blocks. The new engines will also feature direct fuel injection, an “all-new advanced combustion design,” and the ability to run E85 ethanol blends."

These engines, with direct injection, variable valve timing and probably HCCI (all-new advanced combustion design), will be powerful and efficient. Since manufacturers like to stay with common and proven designs (the 3.8L V6 that GM used for years was essentially a 5.0L V8 with 2 cylinders shaved off), I could see the 2 cylinder range extender as being 2 cylinders from this next gen V8.

If a next gen 5.0L V8 produces 400 hp, then a 2 cyl. would be 1.25L and put out ~100 hp (75 kW). This would use common parts from the GM parts bin and have essentially similar combustion and emissions. So although they are not using a stock engine like the 1.4L 4 cyl, they are using pistons, valves, rods, etc. that already exist. Obviously, the block, head, exhaust manifold, and other parts would be unique to the 2 cyl.

So for a little more money and volume than the Wankel, you get a high efficiency range extender that can take you up hills and allow you to run in the left lane down I5.

 

James : Would you be willing to buy a Volt with more Chinese content...
No! The quality would always be suspect in my mind.

 

BillR : “…GM says the new V-8 range will exclusively utilize aluminum blocks. The new engines will also feature direct fuel injection, an “all-new advanced combustion design,” and the ability to run E85 ethanol blends.”
These engines, with direct injection, variable valve timing and probably HCCI (all-new advanced combustion design), will be powerful and efficient. Since manufacturers like to stay with common and proven designs (the 3.8L V6 that GM used for years was essentially a 5.0L V8 with 2 cylinders shaved off), I could see the 2 cylinder range extender as being 2 cylinders from this next gen V8.
Very interesting! I'm for whatever will provide for more extended range without sacrificing fuel economy.