By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
According to the article, the GM powertrain engineers confirmed that one would fit.
Now, I'm not saying that hybrid sales won't increase, as I think they will, and significantly, but last time I checked, the Prius DOES run on an ICE. How does that conflict with his statement that the ICE will dominate for the next 20 years???
Ford, GM, and now Hyundai are developing ICE gasoline engines that squeeze more HP out of less cubes. This technology is (and will be for the forseeable future) cheaper than any other.
Unless we get a breakthrough in Battery technology or Hydrogen like, today, then the ICE WILL dominate for another 20 years.
But that fact doesn't mean we shouldn't try. The Prius is a great example of what happens when you invest in alt fuel tech. So is the Volt. Same for the Tesla and i-MEV.
You can't run your mouth off and enjoy captive market share as in the past. The Volt should have beat the Prius to the market. Look at GM's hybrids vs. Toyota.
Ridiculous!
But let’s be clear: both eco-consciousness and the Toyota Prius have moved beyond fads, into fully blown trends. (Federal legislation sealed the deal.) The Chevy Volt and the Toyota Prius must ultimately compete in the automotive mainstream, where the Volt is at a supreme price disadvantage. Unless GM is willing to heavily subsidize the Volt for many years, no matter how good it is, the Prius will kick its [non-permissible content removed].
Regards,
OW
I can't argue that point, as it harkens back to my statement about a breakthrough in battery technology. The Prius takes what's out there now, and does the best it can with it.
However, even after 11 years on the market, there is a premuin for the Prius. It is, while a versitile car (hatchback), a WHOPPING $6500 more than a base Corolla, yet no bigger.
The upcoming Cruze has a base price of $15,100. It will reportedly get 40 MPG hwy. That is over $7500 less (albeit w/ a manual tranny). I have seen a sign at a Kia dealership advertising 40 MPG for one of it's cars, but can't seem to see which one.
If these cars can get 40 MPG, I'm sure the next gen Corolla and Civic will be hard pressed to get those numbers, and will put pressure on the Prius.
I'm sure that puts even MORE pressure on the Volt, with it's $40,000 price tag (eventually those $7500 credits will run out). The only advantage it will have is it's "no gas needed" mantra.
I'm not a Prius expert by any means, but doesn't the Prius have more standard features like auto climate control etc vs a Corolla? Still, you are paying several thousand dollars for the hybrid that you have to weigh against fuel savings.
If these cars can get 40 MPG, I'm sure the next gen Corolla and Civic will be hard pressed to get those numbers, and will put pressure on the Prius.
Yeah, I know the upcoming Fiesta is suppose to be around 40mpg hwy. Still, they won't match the Prius city mileage, but they'll cost a lot less.
I'm sure that puts even MORE pressure on the Volt, with it's $40,000 price tag (eventually those $7500 credits will run out). The only advantage it will have is it's "no gas needed" mantra.
I think even with the credit it will be a tough sell for many except those who place a high priority of avoiding using gas at any cost. When the credit runs out it will be tough going unless gas gets real expensive IMO.
And as we just saw last year, if gas and oil go too high, too fast, then that will contribute to pushing the U.S. into recession. We saw that people could not long afford $4.25/gal gas, people fall behind on their bills, foreclosures go up, banks fail, stocks go down, and the demand for gas drops, which drops the price.
The only way significant gas price increases can be absorbed is if at the same time, the vehicle fleet is increasing in mpg similarly. If gas is going up 10%/year, auto mpg would need to go up similarly, such that people pay the same amount.
IMO, the Volt is going to be massacred because of all the inexpensive small cars that will be coming to market. I know over in the hybrid forums it was about equal comparing a Corolla to a Prius for cost/mile. A $40K Volt vs,. a $15K or well-equipped $20K Cruze, will never pay off
Particularly when the advances in suspension systems and the weight savings add to the performance value of the smaller cars. The Asians will win again!
Regards,
OW
Regards:
OldCEM
That is true, but I've yet to hear one that sounded good much above 4k rpm. 3.5 vvt included. IMO, every push rod engine I've been around just feels/sounds like it's being stressed at high rpm. That doesn't mean it is necessarily, but they don't sound good doing it. The 305 v8 in my boat sounds very stressed above 4k rpm even though max hp is produced at 5200rpm. I've been around DOHC v6 outboards that run 6500 rpm all day long that are extremely smooth and quiet doing so. No comparison in my experience.
The 5.4 in my Expedition just sounds quieter, feels smoother, and doesn't feel like its working hard at 4k rpm vs the 5.3 powered Suburban I had previously. Ironically, the push-rod 5.3 has significantly less torque than the OHC 5.4 which is very noticeable when towing.
The old Ford "Kent" engine that the German Fiesta used in 1980 was a pushrod design as well. It was one of the toughest 4 cylinder engines ever built, and, would happily wind to 6500 RPM. I used to own one.
Can't disagree there. I new a couple of guys in HS that had early 80's Fiesta's and those things could take a beating.
Who knows, maybe GM has something up their sleeve with the upcoming LS v8s. They'll have to figure out a way to make a push-rod engine both refined and powerful at low rpm and high and I've yet so be around one that can pull that off. If they can put out lots of power at 6k rpm plus, then due to the cam lift they usually have a bit of a lumpy idle. That's great for a camaro, but not a 60k luxury car.
Valve control seems to be the biggest benefit of a OHC/DOHC design, they are all going to variable lift, variable timing of both intake and exhaust valves etc. I don't know how you can change the timing of both the exhaust and intake with only one cam shaft. So I'll be interested to see how they improve it. It's just interesting that every other automaker has abandoned the ohv design but GM.
Doesnt the Vette get 25 mpg highway?
Doesnt the Vette get 25 mpg highway?
I think the Vette gets 25mpg or so. IMO, that has more to do with gearing and drag coefficient than anything else. Put the 3.6 in it and it would get over 30mpg.
The OHV design does have some advantages. It's reliable, less complicated, cheaper to build, usually lighter, and takes up less space for it's displacement.
I imagine the LS series SB v8s will be around for a while in the trucks/SUVs and camaro/vette. I just don't see them being logical for a Cadillac outside of a CTS-V. All I've heard about the Northstar in regards to future plans is that it's replacement has been suspended or canceled. I wonder if that means no more v8s?
in primarily highway driving.
One trip to visit friends in Florida w/Daughter
and long weekend luggage returned 29.04.
469 miles on 16.08 gal.
[ 18 gal tank ]
- Ray
OHV V8 not dead yet...
the Volt is dead before it was conceived: there is no viable market for anyone to sell enough Volt to recoup the investment.
the only value it brings to GM is that it became a symbol of hope and excuses for the politicians to pop up GM with taxpayer money.
Yes I know for 2 years (?) in the beginning they had a I-6, but went to the V8 when it was available.
Volt? Gotta see it to believe it.......AND......will they sell it to ya, or will they only lease em, if and when they mke em??
Regards:
Oldengineer
When the T-bird came out, in response to the Corvette, it couldn't match the handling, so it became more the boulevard cruiser of the two. It performed better than the 6-cyl Corvette had, but by 1955 Chevy was putting their 265 smallblock V-8 in the Corvette. The T-bird was by far the more popular of the two, and for 1958 they'd go their separate ways, as the 'Bird sprouted a back seat and put on the pounds, leaving the Corvette unchallenged...on the domestic front, at least.
Even though Buicks Turbo V6's in the 80's for a while there were faster than the Vette!
It would be like a V8 in a Porsche 911!
I'm glad i found this one..I hope I can meet new friends here
I'm glad i found this one..I hope I can meet new friends here
Welcome. Bring your helmet, it can get rough in here;)
It's odd that your IP says you're logging in from India though. Did you forget your link?
Good day, my name is Dave, how can I help you with your technical problem?
No, seriously, that's odd, last I checked I was still located in the middle of Illinois.
The new poster who said he was from London ... the IP didn't say that. You have to wonder anymore if they are newbies wanting to join in or if they are joining just to spam. Otherwise I wouldn't have bothered to check the IP.
Ok, how about some GM/Corvette news?
Corvette Drops to 50-Year Sales Low as High-End Sports Cars Sputter (AutoObserver)
My problem with buying one though is that the vehicle is only going to be driven 8 months a year. It would be a 3rd vehicle. But now my government and insurance company are going to hit me with costs year-after-year, even if it's just parked in the garage most of the time. That makes me think of many people's experience with time-shares.
I'm not asking for the government to give me a hand-out to buy a vehicle; I'm just asking them not to penalize me for buying it. In NH we pay a property tax each year based on the value of the car; a car like a Corvette would be about $1,000 the 1st year, decreasing afterwards. That $1,000 gets me a fairly nice vacation week in Mexico instead.
Just add a set of Bizzacks and it will be good to go. No reason a Corvette should be worse in the snow than any other rear wheel drive car. With stability and traction control, adding a good set of winter tires should mean it would be fine to drive year round. You just don't want to drive in ice and snow with those summer shoes.
Yeah that's why I have AWD cars, one with Blizzaks and one with Dunlop Graspics. That usually works on my driveway which is 700 feet and mostly 15-degree pitch; but last year Blizzaks on my AWD X-Type did nothing to stop the car from sliding backwards to the side into a snow bank.
I clear my driveway with a snow-blower attachment on my Sears tractor w/chains and weights and there's still quite a bit of slipping.
No there are certain parts of the country where Corvettes and such just don't hack it many days of the winter.
This wirks great until you hit one clunker...
I live in Illinois, so a 15 degree grade is unheard of around here;) That type of grade means chains required I would think.
I would think the only 15 degree grade to be found in Illinois would be in a downtown Chicago parking garage.
Here in Colorado, we call a 15 degree grade a "hill" or a "gentle slope".
Livin' the high life at 6000'.
Yes it's painfully flat around here and that's considering I lived in Kansas for 3 years. I get can't any flatter than central Illinois.
Anyway, one could easily get around with a rwd car here during the winter. How did anyone survive 30 years ago when few 4wd/awd and fwd vehicles were sold. LOL
Chains...and shovels and sand bags in the trunk, of course.
Regards,
OW
Plus, once upon a time we had these things called snow tires. A RWD car with snow tires probably wasn't much worse than a modern FWD car with all-season radials.
I haven't used a snow tire in ages, though. My Mom gave me her old 1980 Malibu back in 1987, and it had an extra pair of rims with snow tires on it. When that car gave way to my 1969 Dart, I got an extra pair of rims from the junkyard and had the Malibu's snow tires swapped, and they lasted through 1995. That '69 Dart got totaled and gave way to a '68 Dart, and in the summer of '95 I was broke and needed new tires but couldn't afford them, so I just put the snow tires back on. They were pretty old by that time, and one of 'em blew out on me.
I was worried about driving my 2005 Mercury Grand Marquis LS due to its RWD configuration and lack of snow tires, but I managed due to the car's traction control. Still, I think my 1988 Buick Park Avenue and other FWD cars were a lot more sure-footed in the snow.
The Suburban I had and Expedition I have now are easy to drive in ice and snow even just using 2 wheel drive. Automatic 4wd make them pretty much effortless to drive even when icy out (particularly with stability and traction control). Still have to be careful when braking of course. When i had a Nissan Pathfinder, it could be scary when not using the automode 4wd as the back end would tend to get skittish quick. Short wheelbase vehicles can get sideways quick. Just try to drive something like a Jeep Wrangler on ice in 2wd only. Those things will go about every direction but straight ahead.
I can answer that... East Central Indiana. We used snow tires, sometimes with studs, and lots of common sense about how to drive using the laws of physics. We did add weight to the rear to help get more grip with the snow tires.
One of the laws of physics was never go into a snow drift with more velocity that minimum. If you did, the snow is pressed under the front of the car and lifts it as you ride up onto the snow that doesn't blast out of the way. That lifts the rear of the car eventually. That means the snow tires don't have enough weight to help take you back out of the deeper snow.
Limited slip differentials help only if the driver understands that they can remove lateral control by the wheels due to slippage while pulling under load. Slip sideways and you may not be able to back out of what you just got into.
We pulled many city slickers out of the snow on our rural road with our trusty John Deere tractors, for a price.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Sure, I'll take a Corvette.
(you're talking to a guy who drives a wagon and a minivan, lol).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Much to GM's dismay, I'm sure.
1.Dealer installed accessories are not refunded-- so dealer add ons like fabric protection,rustproofing ,etching etc which can be 1k per car or more - will not be refunded even though the actual sale price may just be the invoice without this add on price.But since this is listed it is not refunded.
2.There should be no wear and tear damage more than $200-this includes minor scratches/dents/rock chips/SMELLS
3. If the car is involved in any accident,it is ineligible..
So basically this program is all air and no substance..New GM just like old GM. I hope for everyone`s good they shut shop!!
That's pretty much been the standard ever since Larry Tate on Bewitched dropped the old Louise for the new one! :P
60 Day Trial=Buyer Beware. (99% of customers will not qualify)
Also, who is absorbing the huge hit of driving the thing off the lot. It is no longer new!
You drive a GM off the lot, and you've lost thousands already!
Oh well then, I'm a decade past that stage then. No Corvette MLC for me.
I remember an update to the returned vehicles story a month or two ago. There were quite a few more who had returned their GM vehicles. The spin was that most of them wanted to get into a different GM car, for more room or more features etc.
Can't find anything newer on site than this story about GM Engineers Calling Customers Who Returned Cars.