cool you think Toyota fans found ways around the electric problem too? I would hope the next person that gets that truck ,used is able to know how it was screwed with by its previous owner.This is a play on words your the man.
GM to clear Canada debt in June and put GM stock on the block paying back as much as half of the loan in the USA with the funds it did not use but retained until it was up in sales to cover wages. China sales of over a million out selling its US market, Europe and Canada will carry GM to gold as it did in Vancouver. What a year for Canada?
If the power assist was identified ,it was put in cars so ladies did not brake their nails when turning out of parking spots. Then I see a few of the men call it power steering (bulla) This then lets me think the Hood secondary latch is a safety latch for the hood . (not) It is sad to see the dreams of ownership denighed because your Jobs are minimal as the Jobs in Manufacturing dried up because people bought what is in their range .
Knowing GM in 1990 shed itself of the Engineers of the day and hired new out of schools around the USA tells a lot about GM engineering. I was told to look a the big picture in Detroit then. Welcome to the big picture.
you obviously didn't pay close attention to the words I used in my post, I did not call the current problems power steering issues, I said the problem I, let me repeat, I had with my GM products was having the power steering cut out while I was driving, without any warning lights, etc telling me something was going to happen; the steering wheel locked up and I had to coast myself off the road and crash into the curb!
on, the one Chev I had this happen on, it was just after the 30k mile maintenance check and inspection I had at my local GM dealership so it was no fault of my own!
By the way, the whole second half of your paragraph doesn't make sense to me and I don't understand the ramble your trying to make?
I don't think you understand what the Volt is exactly. No one really knows what it will be priced at. Maybe 40,000 but it will have a large $7,500 or $10,000 tax rebate. GM will sell them at a loss originally but will be able to expand the technology to other cars relatively quickly to help the economies of scale.
It is not a regular Hybrid like the Prius. It is a series hybrid not a parallel hybrid. A series hybrid is what modern locomotives use. An engine operating close to its peak power band so it is the Internal Combustion Engine(ICE) is the most efficient as possible.That engine can easily run on any combustible fuel from gasoline to diesel or even CNG or hydrogen.
On top of that it is a plug in Hybrid so you can charge at night or even at work. If you drive less then 40 miles a day you will use almost no gas and since you are primarily charging at night during off peak hours the charging costs will be low.
Because of the way a series hybrid works you can transplant the power plant into other vehicles very easily. For larger cars you just need to use more batteries and larger electric motors along with a slightly larger ICE.
Want a series hybrid delivery van or truck? No, problem fill the under the floor rear portion with then batter packs and also fill the old transmission tunnel that you don't need anymore with batteries. Mount a small four cylinder turbocharged diesel or CNG motor up front that is half the weight of the old engine so that you balance out most of the weight of the batter packs. All the software and control hardware for the hybrid system is small and easily reprogrammed for a larger heavier vehicle. Finally wheel hub electric motors and BAM you have saved even more weight because you pulled out all the drive shafts, differentials and axles. l You can give cars on demand AWD very, very easily too just by adding two more wheel hub moors to the other wheels.
That is the perfect system for nearly any size vehicle that is driven heavily in city traffic but needs to cover highway distances from time to time.
The leaf might be a whole lot less money but it only has a range of 100 miles before it needs to recharge again. The volt can go 40 or so miles and then the gas motor kicks in to recharge the batteries and/or drive the electric motors. Range isn't a problem at all as long as you have gas in the car. If you have a Leaf you need another car for longer distance drives period end of story.
A Volt can do both. What is cheaper a Leaf at 25k to 30k and another conventional car for 20k or a Volt for 35k-40k? Minus tax rebates for both of course.
I don't need to be patronized and be given a technical history readout for the vehicle, I know what the Volt is!
I'm just saying from a marketing standpoint, regardless of any incentives or tax breaks you eventually would get on a Volt, advertising 40k or 45k for a brand new energy efficient Chevrolet to the general public is a mistake for GM to do! when the public hears those kinds of prices, DURING A MAJOR RECESSION, for a Chevrolet they'll go else where for their products because most people can not afford that initial kind of cost at the onset even if it would payoff in 6-10 years from now!
there are many other electrical, Hybrid, and other energy/fuel conscious choices with much cheaper original msrps then what that Volt is estimated to be, offering a proven track record and just as many incentives and tax rebates as the Volt would offer them!
If GM really wants people to buy the Volt this thing can not be marketed as anything more than 35k! I'd prefer to see 30k, but will see what GM will do!
Early adopters will pay the premium and early adopters are all they need to start the economies of scale working.
A Volt for 35k or a leaf for 27k before rebates is the same price when factoring in the less practical nature of the Leaf because of lower range.
The Volt job one date is set for Nov 1 2010 so by then the recession is going to be officially over for months. Real employment will still be lagging by that time but the economy will be in recovery.
I am not being patronizing but has been my experience that most people don't know how the Volt works or what it is exactly. Even car people don't understand it exactly. Even car people I work with who are fairly technical didn't necessarily understand how it works.
The basis of the technology is proven. Trains have been using it for decades.
well I disagree completely, but the technology in the Volt has not been proven, just like it took a while for CVT to become proven technology so will the Volt's technology; when the first CVT came out it wasn't automatically assumed it would be proven or a reliable new way to have a transmission! hybrid technology had to prove itself when it first came out and since this is GM's first real attempt at a real new technology there is bound to be some kinks to have to work out when the Volt finally comes to market!
Saying something is reputable and proven before it has even come to market, for the first time for a company, in this case, GM, it has to prove itself once people buy it and drive them around for awhile!
there is a big difference between trains and cars, just like in lab testing, there is huge different between animal drug trials and doing the same drug trials on humans
The basis of the technology is proven. Trains have been using it for decades.
Conceptually yes, but practically, no.
Trains don't need to go fast up hills. Trains don't jackrabbit stop and start. Do trains use regenerative braking? Trains do not have significant weight limitations.
I personally don't have a problem with a Volt or any hybrid/electric car being priced at $40K. I have a problem with a Chevy hatchback being priced at $40K.
i don't see the big deal about power steering. My 01 Rio did not even have power steering(ya i know it was a cheap eco box but i could'nt afford anythign else at the time) and i had no problems turning (just needed a lil mucsle when you parallel parked)
though im no GM fan the power steering thing is no big deal like Lutz said.
Nice writeup about the Volt, cleared up a few questions I had that I was too lazy to look up. Thanks!
I think the early adopters will be all over the Volt when it comes out. Last night sitting in traffic on the way home in a group of cars there were no less than six Prius. I can't imagine some of the current Pruis drivers not converting over to the Volt when it arrives.
i don't see the big deal about power steering. My 01 Rio did not even have power steering(ya i know it was a cheap eco box but i could'nt afford anythign else at the time) and i had no problems turning (just needed a lil mucsle when you parallel parked)
A car with failed power steering is different than a car that wasn't equipped with it in the first place, though. For one thing, the ratio is different. I don't know what the ratio is these days, but at one time, a power steering car used to be something like 3.3 turns "lock-to-lock" (from one extreme to the other) while a car without it was probably more like 4.5-5 turns. So, when the power assist fails, you have to put a lot more effort into it, since each movement of the steering wheel turns the wheels more.
Plus, I don't know how it is with electric steering, but back in the day with those hydraulic systems with the pump, when it failed, the pump and the belt that turns it would seem to fight against you, adding to the effort required to turn the wheel.
That being said, I drove a '68 Dart with a V-8 engine for something like 40,000 miles with a failed power steering pump. When you were moving, it wasn't too bad, and out on the highway, the lack of a power assist was barely noticeable. But parallel parking was a bee-atch, and even tight turns, such as pulling into a parking spot, or making a sharp right turn after a stop sign, could be a good workout.
I wonder if something like a Chevy Cobalt might have as much weight on the front wheels as my Dart did? Cobalts might be small cars, but they're heavy for their size. And while my Dart still weighed a few hundred pounds more, I'm sure, because of the weight distribution of FWD versus RWD, the Cobalt still might have had more weight on the drive wheels.
Personally, I don't see how a power steering failure could cause you to lose control, but I've never had any experience with these electric units. They might be totally different when they go out. Plus, with hydraulic systems, the failure was usually gradual, rather than sudden. I guess if it happened suddenly and at the wrong time, it could cause a crash. And if the problem is the steering itself and not the power assist, it could certainly cause a crash.
>I don't see how a power steering failure could cause you to lose control,
I tried my Cobalt with the ignition OFF to see how heavy the steering is. It's heavy especially if you don't expect it to become stiff. But it's about the same as my leSabres with the engine off. As long as the car is moving slowly the wheels can be turned; near dead stop you're scrubbing the rubber on the tire to turn and that takes brute force.
I blew a power steering pump on my Chevrolet Caprice. It was my fault as I was trying to drive over a snow bank and was too lazy to get a shovel. Highway driving showed no noticible difference, but parking it was like wrestling a 1940s truck into the spot! Ever notice how big the wheel was on those old trucks? They needed it for the leverage. Now, try doing the same thing with the smaller diameter wheel of today's cars!
But parallel parking was a bee-atch, and even tight turns, such as pulling into a parking spot, or making a sharp right turn after a stop sign, could be a good workout.
No kidding, the power steering in my Suburban would occasionally lose assist when it was cold. At parking lot speeds it was extremely hard to turn the wheel when it would act up. Lot different than my 86 Escort that had manual steering. It was never very hard to turn. It took a bit of effort if sitting still, but any motion at all made it relatively easy to turn the wheel.
Another factor is the significantly wider tires cars have these days. 245s will be much harder to steer without power assist than, say, 175s.
My POS Citation would sometimes cut out while I was turning, and suddenly requiring 5-10x more steering effort in the middle of a turn can definitely cause you to run into another car, curb, etc.
No, they don't but I don't see what this has with the Volt. It will plenty of power to go fast up a hill. A train can get up a hill just fine and if it isn't loaded down with a 100 cars it can go up it fairly easily and quickly. They do have speed limits on railroad tracks you know.
Trains don't jackrabbit stop and start.
Not in the way a car does no but they do need to generate massive amounts of torque at very low speeds in order to move a Coal unit train with 100 cars of coal each weighing 100 tons. Electric motors excel at doing just that sort of work and will do better at jack rabbit starts and stops then a ICE.
The energy put into accelerating a train and into moving it uphill is “stored” in the train as kinetic and potential energy. In vehicles with electric traction motors (this includes electric, diesel-electric and hybrid stock) a great part of this energy can be reconverted into electric energy by using the motors as generators when braking. The electric energy is transmitted “backwards” along the conversion chain and fed back into the catenary. This is known as regenerative braking and widely used in railways.
Braking and safety
Braking safety requires installation of additional brakes besides regenerative brakes, for two reasons:
* Braking power of 3-phase AC motors is of the same order as power installed for traction. Additional braking power is therefore indispensable and provided by mechanical (e.g. disk brakes) or other dissipative brakes. Typically brakes are blended, i.e. when the driver brakes, first the regenerative brakes are applied, if more power is needed (especially in unforeseen situations) additional brakes are applied. * If the contact between pantograph and catenary is interrupted, regenerative braking is impossible.
Use of recovered energy
The energy recovered by dynamic braking is used for different purposes:
* on-board purposes (auxiliaries or comfort functions). On-board demand is usually far too low to consume all the energy supplied. * energy is fed back into catenary to be used by other trains motoring close enough (in a section of track supplied by the same substation). * If DC substations are equipped with thyristor inverter units, they can feed back energy into the national grid.
Is it a mature technology?
Why yes.
close main section General criteria
close sub-section Status of development: in use Regenerative braking is used in many DC systems world-wide.
Time horizon for broad application: now (no details available)
Expected technological development: dynamic Regenerative braking itself is a mature technology. In order to effectively exploit the potential of brake energy recovery in DC systems, additional technologies can be implemented on-board or in substations. In this field, there is potential for further technological developments.
Trains may use dynamic or regenerative or sometimes both depending on the situation and type of train.
Trains do not have significant weight limitations.
They do have weight limitations but just because those gross limits are much higher then a car doesn't change that they exist.
You are just taking all of the technology and downsizing it to fit a passenger car. We are good at downsizing technology just look at what has happened to computers in the past 30 years.
My iPhone has thousands upon thousands of times more power then my first computer a Comodore 64 but fits in the palm of my hand.
With a train you have multiple motors each with multiple cylinders that are the size of five gallon buckets. The turbos are the size of a commercial clothes dryer and the electric motors weight hundreds of lbs each and they are lots of them.
We already know how to make small efficient engines. Hell GM knows how to make small efficient engines, though they learned a lot of that from SAAB, the Ecotec based motor gets 30 plus mpg highway in a midsized sedan like a 9-3 and that is without any fancy electronics. It is just a turbo and fuel injection along with relatively low weight and good aero specs. Oh and it will also blow the doors off any four cylinder Civic, Corolla, Accord, Altima or Camry. Turbos are good for midrange and low end torque and so are electric motors.
Small electric motors are no big deal either. Make them hub motors would be even better but that technology is still a little way off for mass market applications. It is coming though.
So really what is a challenge?
The software and hardware to make those systems work together?
Somewhat but not really as it isn't all that different from the software and hardware used in regular hybrids or on demand stationary power generators. Both of those technologies are mature.
The batteries?
Ahh it is always the batteries Li-Ion batteries in that number are coming along though and the cost is just going to keep coming down as more and more devices start to use them. Keeping them all cool will be the biggest challenge.
torque_r wrote
I personally don't have a problem with a Volt or any hybrid/electric car being priced at $40K. I have a problem with a Chevy hatchback being priced at $40K.
I don't mean to be rude but that is just stupid.
If you said you had a problem with any vehicle designed to save gas that cost 40 dollars I could understand your point. You can buy plenty of used cars for less then half that and get 30 mpg highway and mid to low 20s around town. To the early adopters that won't matter and it won't matter to the people who want to be seen in a fuel efficient car for one reason or another.
I just lost a sale to a guy who was looking at a used BMW 5 series wagon with a stick no less because he wanted to, "save gas and money," by spending 15,000 dollars more on a TDI jetta wagon.
$15,000 buys a lot of gas and if you want to save the earth you would be better off buying the used car and putting that $15,000 into energy efficient home improve
Appreciate your response, and I didn't know about the regen braking on trains.
It's just not that simple to adapt technology from a heavy train into a fairly light car, even if the technology is mature at the "heavy" levels.
As you indicated, the Li batteries (which are brought on by the need to save weight) are an entirely new technology, and much of the big challenge. Obviously a train can use heavy lead acid batteries.
A lot of the challenge is also integration of all the systems, plus software. It can't always be said that making a mature technology much smaller and lighter is easy. Certainly putting an iPhone together was not trivial even if desktop computers existed with the same capabilities.
One of the other challenges is that GM has not demonstrated the highest success levels with new technologies. Toyota (ignoring the current UA issues) put a Prius out that by most measures is among the most reliable of all vehicles, even with its complex systems. GM's reliabilities even on old technology engines and vehicles is often not nearly as good. So the Volt is going to be a big risk for any early buyers, even at a very high price.
I also agree with other posters that when I look at the Volt vs. other newer cars such as the Sonata, newer Buicks, even the Fusion - well the Volt looks very bland to me. It should look like more than a bland Chevy at that price, regardless of the technology involved.
The thing that ticks me off the most about the Volt is the battery contract was supposed to go to a company in Massachusetts but GM yanked the contract and sent the business overseas to Korea... Way to invest in the Country and people who bailed your sorry arses out. :sick:
From a mechanical aspect the Volt is actually simpler then a hybrid like Honda's IMA and much much simpler then Toyota's system.
It is a generator attached to one or more electric motors with a battery for reserve power. From a mechanical stand point very, very simple. The software to make it all work correctly is not but it isn't all that different from how a regular hybrid works.
You are just removing the transmission as the middle man.
No need to use an overly complicated and extremely expensive CVT like Toyota does or sandwich in a tiny electric motor between the engine and transmission like honda does.
No need for a transmission at all because electric motors have so much torque.
Interesting in that the Volt is so much simpler, yet so so much more expensive than the Prius and Honda hybrids.
I know what you're saying about battery prices coming down as volume picks-up, but that is true with many new products. And those companies set a low-to-moderate price to drive that demand, which causes their parts prices to drop.
With the Volt I see the early-adopters causing some demand, but then a steep dropoff after that, as the Volt simply costs too much compared to economical cars. The Volt should be priced, as if the lower-cost batteries and other mass-production discounts already exist. Just as MS didn't price their XBox consoles at $3,000 each figuring on selling 20K year, and then lowering the cost when volumes piick-up; GM should have figured what a 3-year average revenue at Price-X would be figuring on selling 150K/year.
If GM wants the Volt to succeed then they need to sell enough of them to make the price reasonable! They are shooting themselves in the foot if they are planning on much lower volumes, which keep mass production discounts from happening, thus keeping their costs higher.
Wait...only GM can invest and support other economies...us idiots who bailed them out are not American when we buy a foreign made car, didn't you get the memo?????????????????????????????????
That GM only exists today because Bush bailed them out with billions of dollars of all of our money (and Obama continued the shananigans).
Buying a GM car is like paying for it 6 times over.
First, you paid for its manufacture and assembly costs with your tax money and bailout funds. Second, you pay the purchase price with your own money after taxes. Third, you pay sales tax and vehicle registration and licensing gov't fees. Fourth, you pay for the "GOV"T BACKED" warranty with your tax payer money. Fifth, you pay for repairs, tow trucks, and reliability issues with your own money after the warranty expires. Sixth, you lose your shirt when you go to resell it on the open market (sans C4C which is paid for by your tax money; so your basically paying yourself $4,500.)
No THANKS!!!
I'd much rather get a vehicle I don't have to worry about getting a gov't to approve my warranty work with. Heck, I'd rather buy a vehicle where I don't NEED the warranty in the first place. And lastly, I want a vehicle I only have to pay for once.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Heck, I'd rather lose MONEY six times over buying a GM car than losing my SOUL, DIGNITY, PERSONALITY, TASTE, and CONSCIENCE buying some dull Asian transportation appliance!
".....there are many other electrical, Hybrid, and other energy/fuel conscious choices with much cheaper original msrps then what that Volt is estimated to be, offering a proven track record and just as many incentives and tax rebates as the Volt would offer them!"
Wrong. All the other choices on the market (Insight, Prius) have exhausted their tax incentives, and the ones that haven't (Tesla) are prohibitively expensive.
The Leaf and Volt (and iMEV) will get the $7500 tax credit for having a 16kv or greater electric propulsion system.
Where the Volt differentiates itself from the others is in the fact that it isn't "tethered" by a virtual electric cord. The Leaf's 100 mile range will mean that at no time can you go any further than 50 miles from your house, whereas with the Volt you can go anywhere.
Now, is that worth another $13,000??? Probably not. But GM has been saying all along that the major cost in the Volt is the battery pack. I would assume that the genset would be the next greatest cost in the car. So I coulsd also imagine that both would be decontented vehicles, meaning that people won't be thrilled about laying out $27 grand for a Leaf either.
Wrong. All the other choices on the market (Insight, Prius) have exhausted their tax incentives, and the ones that haven't (Tesla) are prohibitively expensive.
It is not wrong :mad: , the fact of the matter is, here is a company, GM, still recovering from years of poor quality/reliability and mis-management, coming out with a brand new technology, at least a new technology for them, for the first time and PLANNING on charging a arm and a leg for it!
I think it was a mistake for GM to come out with an all electric vehicle at this time considering it has not even been a year yet since their bankruptcy/restructuring and, their are always some problems and kinks in any new kind of technology when a auto company introduces it for the first time! I think they should have waited a few more years to do this so that they could have more of their 80 billion dollar debt paid down and focus on improving their current models and brought out more or at the very least higher fuel efficient hybrids, which is a proven technology in the business, in order to satisfy the current trend of fuel efficient vehicles
GM needs to spend more time focusing on improving the mpg in all of their hybrid trucks and suvs, especially since GM continues to have the idiotic focus on large vehicles, because getting 20-21mpg in a hybrid Tahoe is just not good enough!
I'll take a extreme position just like lemko just made a few posts ago, I would rather pay more money in the long run and be in a Prius, Insight, Fusion Hybrid, etc with no tax incentives, that have proven reliability/technology and reputation for fuel efficiency, then in a 40-45k Chevy Econobox with unproven widespread practical application of its technology, in a GM based vehicle of course, on the hope that its reliability and problem free enough to see if I get my $7500 tax incentive :P
Those credits start to phase out after the 60,000th unit is sold and continue to be reduced till they are completely exhausted in the fifth quarter after the 60,000th unit is sold.
The Volt has been in development for over three years now. You think they are going to delay it just because the company had to go through restructruing? If you owned a company and you had a completly game changing product that was ready to go but you had just gone through bankruptcy would you delay the product for just that reason?
If it is ready to go it is ready to go. If it isn't then well it isn't.
You said all electric vehicle again which again I repeat it is NOT an all electric vehicle. It is a series hybrid with a 16 kilowatt-hour battery pack.
The Nissan Leaf has a 24 kilowatt hour battery pack and is supposed to go 100 miles on a charge but it will take eight hours to charge from a 220 volt line. If you have a 25 mile commute one way then you are going to need that 220 volt line because a standard 110 socket will take twice as long to charge.
Battery packs with Li-ion batteries are supposed to cost between 500 and 1000 dollars a kilowatt hour. So at 16 kilowatt hours the Volt pack costs between 8,000 and 16,000 dollars maybe more as no one will say exactly what the packs cost. The Prius and Insight don't even use Li-ions and have tiny battery packs in comparison so their packs are in the sub 5,000 dollar range.
I know that the power transformer or inverter, I forget which, in a Hybrid Highlander costs 7,000 dollars plus instillation because a customer of ours blew one out just out of warranty and Toyota wouldn't cover it even partially.
Obviously toyota's costs are lower but still that gives you an idea of what the power train costs are in a Prius. CVTs are expensive too they run in the $5,000 to $10,000 range retail figure half that on Toyotas end. The CVT in a Audi Cabriolet or first gen MINI Coooper were in the $8,000 range retail.
I never said they didn't expire, if you read closely what I did say, that was, even if I couldn't get a tax incentive on those established, reliable, and well regarded brands/vehicles, I would rather put my money in that then take a huge gamble and pay 40-45k up front for a unproven GM technology to see if there are not any problems and be with a brand that has one of the lowest residual values in the auto business, and as you pointed out, the battery and other stuff in this car would be expensive to replace and that in combo with the low resale value makes it too much of a financial gamble in my opinion!
"I'd much rather get a vehicle I don't have to worry about getting a gov't to approve my warranty work with. Heck, I'd rather buy a vehicle where I don't NEED the warranty in the first place. And lastly, I want a vehicle I only have to pay for once
Yes, it's true that the Prius, et. al. are cheaper in MSRP, and yes, you can't justify the price difference. You just can't make up the difference in fuel savings over the lifetime of the vehicle.
".....I think it was a mistake for GM to come out with an all electric vehicle at this time considering it has not even been a year yet since their bankruptcy/restructuring ....."
The Volt was announced in 2007. By the time bankruptcy came around, they were too far along (2 yrs) and had spent too much money (at least $700 million) on the project to cancel it. There have been 2 major controversies over this project, and they go hand in hand; First, the price, second the battery technology. All the other technologies ( the genset, electric motor, regenerative braking,) have all been proven technologies. Many companies have doubted that the Volt will work, primarily because it relies on lithium ion battery technology. Yet, in the last 3 years many car companies have pumped BILLIONS into lithium ion tech. WHY??? Why would Toyota screw around with this for a plug in version of the Prius if their NiCad tech is so tried and true? What are they afraid of? Could the Volt actually work??? If it does, then everybody will be sinking money into Li Ion tech., making the batteries much, much, cheaper in the years to come, thereby making the Volt much more competitive.
".....GM needs to spend more time focusing on improving the mpg in all of their hybrid trucks and suvs, especially since GM continues to have the idiotic focus on large vehicles, because getting 20-21mpg in a hybrid Tahoe is just not good enough!"
Baby steps....Don't get caught up in the raw numbers. What IS significant about the Tahoe hybrid is that it gets 40% better city fuel economy over a comparable gas engine. What GM seems to have done is "skip over" the traditional hybrid technology and go straight to plug in electric. It's a big gamble, but if it pays off, it will in spades.
What IS significant about the Tahoe hybrid is that it gets 40% better city fuel economy over a comparable gas engine.
And nobody cares, they can hardly give them away. I buy BOF SUV's to tow. The hybrid is pretty useless for that. Insanely tall gearing, and a significant drop in towing capacity. A hybrid Acadia/Traverse would make more sense to me and put a diesel in the tahoe/suburban.
I'm glad both lemko and you have had good luck; I don't wish anyone to have car troubles, but GM products for me have been the worst financial decisions and drain I have ever made in my life; three times over the years I was with GM I almost went broke due to the amount of money I was spending to keep them going with not even 100k on them :sick:
"...... I buy BOF SUV's to tow. The hybrid is pretty useless for that. Insanely tall gearing, and a significant drop in towing capacity."
That is fair enough. I think the main decision behind this was the uppity soccer moms that were driving them prior to 2005. For them that would be a significant increase.
But, for them thr Acadia makes more sense still. I too agree that the Duramax not being available in them and Hummer is (was) wasted potential.
I think the main decision behind this was the uppity soccer moms that were driving them prior to 2005. For them that would be a significant increase.
True, and they still are. My kids are in grades 2nd and 5th. I spend a lot of time around the schools where Suburbans, Denalis, and Escalades are still common sights.
The Lambda's had to be on the drawing board at the same time as the Tahoe hybrid was being designed. I think it would have made way more sense to create a hybrid system around the 3.6 that could have been used in the Lambda's and possible in any other GM vehicle that uses the 3.6 and a transaxle. I don't see the hybrid Silverado being much of a seller either. I wonder how much GM spent developing that hybrid system only to sell a few hundred a month?
Now later on in the post you went on and on that you would rather pay more money for this and that but at the beginning there you said the tax incentives not existing was wrong. And that is not true.
Now you can have the opinion that you would rather pay more for a car with less capabilities I see that all the time in the car business and that is your opinion. To you it is fine and it is never right or wrong to you just your opinion.
It is wrong that The Prius will have the same incentives and rebates as the Volt because it absolutely will not.
We all have no idea what GM will price the Volt at. No one has said and they will not announce anything until most likely the fourth quarter of this year.
It is is priced under 40,000 dollars and then has the 7,500 dollar tax credit then it will be priced cheaper then the top of the line Prius and about equal in price to the second to the top of the line Prius.
I am sorry that you had bad luck with three GM cars but you know what I have seen people get burned by every single car brand in the US. Every single one of them makes bad cars from time to time. It could happen to anybody at anytime with any car.
I have had good look with my GM cars and good luck with my Jeeps. I had great luck with my MINI and so did the person I sold it too for the most part.
My first demo in the car business was a Land Rover Freelander, go check out the Freelander boards if you want to see cars with problems, and you know what in the six months I drove it I never had a problem with it. Now at the time we didn't really know how bad Freelanders were because they had only been out a couple of years. We knew they could be troublesome, it is a Land Rover most Land Rovers can be troublesome from time to time, but had no idea how bad they could be. IMO the Freelander is the least reliable modern car ever sold in the US.
Until very recently the person I sold that car too had had no problems with it. Just a couple of months ago it finally had a major break down. It needed about $2,500 dollars in repairs which it first sounds bad but if you think about it a car that I called the least reliable modern car sold in the US only needed $2,500 in repairs over six years is pretty good.
I test drove a Malibu maxx with 40k miles on it and the interior was nasty but the drivetrain was fine (V6). I test drove a new G5 about 2 years ago and found it quiet, smooth and peppy. At the time I was driving 123 daily miles M-F. I rode around town in a rental Cobalt once. Don't have any issues with it. Problem is a high end Cobalt falls in the range of a Malibu LS.
The Malibu is missing key features according to some write-ups. the two cons mentioned in CR are turn circle too big and it's missing key features. I find it has many of the options that are on my Riviera and quite a few that are not. The 1LT I got IS missing alloy wheels, leather, courtesy lights abound, turning headlights, power reclining, memory, and heated seats, auto dim inside mirror, memory outside mirrors, hidden wipers, center rr armrest, block heater, climate control incl buttons on the steering wheel, and remote fuel door. But the Malibu does have Onstar, it's own satelite phone, bluetooth link to my cell, xm radio, 17 inch wheels, remote start, split fold down rr seats, stability control, paddle shifting mode, 6 spd auto, turn by turn nav, telescoping steering wheel, DIC, 6 air bags, tire pressure monitor, custom floor and trunk mats, 36 station presets, and an MP3 jack.
The turning circle is way better than my Riv or Silv ext cab.
I have always got great service from all my GM's. The Buick has the paint and trans issues but I bought it with 88k miles on it and put 88k more on it in the 6 years I owned it so far, and I haven't spent anything towards either issue. Thats my most negative GM experience. My most positive is my Silverado. 1 battery in 9 years. Period. Nothing else ever. Still has original wiper blades, air filter, and tires.
You are just removing the transmission as the middle man. No need to use an overly complicated and extremely expensive CVT like Toyota does or sandwich in a tiny electric motor between the engine and transmission like honda does. No need for a transmission at all because electric motors have so much torque.
That's all cool but I think I am missing something. Doesn't the Volt have a 1.4L gasoline engine as a backup power? What happens when the Volt runs out of electric juice and switches to engine mode and you have a direct drive? That's not gonna move at all.
Buying a car I hate, (insert any Asian transportation appliance here) is wasting money in my book. I guess I should marry the ugly girl because my Mom says she has a great personality too?
Comments
on, the one Chev I had this happen on, it was just after the 30k mile maintenance check and inspection I had at my local GM dealership so it was no fault of my own!
By the way, the whole second half of your paragraph doesn't make sense to me and I don't understand the ramble your trying to make?
It is not a regular Hybrid like the Prius. It is a series hybrid not a parallel hybrid. A series hybrid is what modern locomotives use. An engine operating close to its peak power band so it is the Internal Combustion Engine(ICE) is the most efficient as possible.That engine can easily run on any combustible fuel from gasoline to diesel or even CNG or hydrogen.
On top of that it is a plug in Hybrid so you can charge at night or even at work. If you drive less then 40 miles a day you will use almost no gas and since you are primarily charging at night during off peak hours the charging costs will be low.
Because of the way a series hybrid works you can transplant the power plant into other vehicles very easily. For larger cars you just need to use more batteries and larger electric motors along with a slightly larger ICE.
Want a series hybrid delivery van or truck? No, problem fill the under the floor rear portion with then batter packs and also fill the old transmission tunnel that you don't need anymore with batteries. Mount a small four cylinder turbocharged diesel or CNG motor up front that is half the weight of the old engine so that you balance out most of the weight of the batter packs. All the software and control hardware for the hybrid system is small and easily reprogrammed for a larger heavier vehicle. Finally wheel hub electric motors and BAM you have saved even more weight because you pulled out all the drive shafts, differentials and axles. l You can give cars on demand AWD very, very easily too just by adding two more wheel hub moors to the other wheels.
That is the perfect system for nearly any size vehicle that is driven heavily in city traffic but needs to cover highway distances from time to time.
The leaf might be a whole lot less money but it only has a range of 100 miles before it needs to recharge again. The volt can go 40 or so miles and then the gas motor kicks in to recharge the batteries and/or drive the electric motors. Range isn't a problem at all as long as you have gas in the car. If you have a Leaf you need another car for longer distance drives period end of story.
A Volt can do both. What is cheaper a Leaf at 25k to 30k and another conventional car for 20k or a Volt for 35k-40k? Minus tax rebates for both of course.
I'm just saying from a marketing standpoint, regardless of any incentives or tax breaks you eventually would get on a Volt, advertising 40k or 45k for a brand new energy efficient Chevrolet to the general public is a mistake for GM to do! when the public hears those kinds of prices, DURING A MAJOR RECESSION, for a Chevrolet they'll go else where for their products because most people can not afford that initial kind of cost at the onset even if it would payoff in 6-10 years from now!
there are many other electrical, Hybrid, and other energy/fuel conscious choices with much cheaper original msrps then what that Volt is estimated to be, offering a proven track record and just as many incentives and tax rebates as the Volt would offer them!
If GM really wants people to buy the Volt this thing can not be marketed as anything more than 35k! I'd prefer to see 30k, but will see what GM will do!
A Volt for 35k or a leaf for 27k before rebates is the same price when factoring in the less practical nature of the Leaf because of lower range.
The Volt job one date is set for Nov 1 2010 so by then the recession is going to be officially over for months. Real employment will still be lagging by that time but the economy will be in recovery.
I am not being patronizing but has been my experience that most people don't know how the Volt works or what it is exactly. Even car people don't understand it exactly. Even car people I work with who are fairly technical didn't necessarily understand how it works.
The basis of the technology is proven. Trains have been using it for decades.
Saying something is reputable and proven before it has even come to market, for the first time for a company, in this case, GM, it has to prove itself once people buy it and drive them around for awhile!
there is a big difference between trains and cars, just like in lab testing, there is huge different between animal drug trials and doing the same drug trials on humans
Conceptually yes, but practically, no.
Trains don't need to go fast up hills.
Trains don't jackrabbit stop and start.
Do trains use regenerative braking?
Trains do not have significant weight limitations.
though im no GM fan the power steering thing is no big deal like Lutz said.
The air quality will greatly improve when this blowhard steps down from the podium. :sick:
Nice writeup about the Volt, cleared up a few questions I had that I was too lazy to look up. Thanks!
I think the early adopters will be all over the Volt when it comes out. Last night sitting in traffic on the way home in a group of cars there were no less than six Prius. I can't imagine some of the current Pruis drivers not converting over to the Volt when it arrives.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart
A car with failed power steering is different than a car that wasn't equipped with it in the first place, though. For one thing, the ratio is different. I don't know what the ratio is these days, but at one time, a power steering car used to be something like 3.3 turns "lock-to-lock" (from one extreme to the other) while a car without it was probably more like 4.5-5 turns. So, when the power assist fails, you have to put a lot more effort into it, since each movement of the steering wheel turns the wheels more.
Plus, I don't know how it is with electric steering, but back in the day with those hydraulic systems with the pump, when it failed, the pump and the belt that turns it would seem to fight against you, adding to the effort required to turn the wheel.
That being said, I drove a '68 Dart with a V-8 engine for something like 40,000 miles with a failed power steering pump. When you were moving, it wasn't too bad, and out on the highway, the lack of a power assist was barely noticeable. But parallel parking was a bee-atch, and even tight turns, such as pulling into a parking spot, or making a sharp right turn after a stop sign, could be a good workout.
I wonder if something like a Chevy Cobalt might have as much weight on the front wheels as my Dart did? Cobalts might be small cars, but they're heavy for their size. And while my Dart still weighed a few hundred pounds more, I'm sure, because of the weight distribution of FWD versus RWD, the Cobalt still might have had more weight on the drive wheels.
Personally, I don't see how a power steering failure could cause you to lose control, but I've never had any experience with these electric units. They might be totally different when they go out. Plus, with hydraulic systems, the failure was usually gradual, rather than sudden. I guess if it happened suddenly and at the wrong time, it could cause a crash. And if the problem is the steering itself and not the power assist, it could certainly cause a crash.
I tried my Cobalt with the ignition OFF to see how heavy the steering is. It's heavy especially if you don't expect it to become stiff. But it's about the same as my leSabres with the engine off. As long as the car is moving slowly the wheels can be turned; near dead stop you're scrubbing the rubber on the tire to turn and that takes brute force.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
No kidding, the power steering in my Suburban would occasionally lose assist when it was cold. At parking lot speeds it was extremely hard to turn the wheel when it would act up. Lot different than my 86 Escort that had manual steering. It was never very hard to turn. It took a bit of effort if sitting still, but any motion at all made it relatively easy to turn the wheel.
My POS Citation would sometimes cut out while I was turning, and suddenly requiring 5-10x more steering effort in the middle of a turn can definitely cause you to run into another car, curb, etc.
Trains don't need to go fast up hills.
No, they don't but I don't see what this has with the Volt. It will plenty of power to go fast up a hill. A train can get up a hill just fine and if it isn't loaded down with a 100 cars it can go up it fairly easily and quickly. They do have speed limits on railroad tracks you know.
Trains don't jackrabbit stop and start.
Not in the way a car does no but they do need to generate massive amounts of torque at very low speeds in order to move a Coal unit train with 100 cars of coal each weighing 100 tons. Electric motors excel at doing just that sort of work and will do better at jack rabbit starts and stops then a ICE.
Do trains use regenerative braking?
Yes some trains do use regenerative braking.
* the dynamic brake, which uses the electric motors of the traction power system to generate current during braking which is absorbed into a resistor (rheostatic braking) or back into the railway power supply (regenerative braking).
link title
Snippets from the article
General information
close sub-section Description
Principle:
The energy put into accelerating a train and into moving it uphill is “stored” in the train as kinetic and potential energy. In vehicles with electric traction motors (this includes electric, diesel-electric and hybrid stock) a great part of this energy can be reconverted into electric energy by using the motors as generators when braking. The electric energy is transmitted “backwards” along the conversion chain and fed back into the catenary. This is known as regenerative braking and widely used in railways.
Braking and safety
Braking safety requires installation of additional brakes besides regenerative brakes, for two reasons:
* Braking power of 3-phase AC motors is of the same order as power installed for traction. Additional braking power is therefore indispensable and provided by mechanical (e.g. disk brakes) or other dissipative brakes. Typically brakes are blended, i.e. when the driver brakes, first the regenerative brakes are applied, if more power is needed (especially in unforeseen situations) additional brakes are applied.
* If the contact between pantograph and catenary is interrupted, regenerative braking is impossible.
Use of recovered energy
The energy recovered by dynamic braking is used for different purposes:
* on-board purposes (auxiliaries or comfort functions). On-board demand is usually far too low to consume all the energy supplied.
* energy is fed back into catenary to be used by other trains motoring close enough (in a section of track supplied by the same substation).
* If DC substations are equipped with thyristor inverter units, they can feed back energy into the national grid.
Is it a mature technology?
Why yes.
close main section General criteria
close sub-section Status of development: in use
Regenerative braking is used in many DC systems world-wide.
Time horizon for broad application: now
(no details available)
Expected technological development: dynamic
Regenerative braking itself is a mature technology. In order to effectively exploit the potential of brake energy recovery in DC systems, additional technologies can be implemented on-board or in substations. In this field, there is potential for further technological developments.
Trains may use dynamic or regenerative or sometimes both depending on the situation and type of train.
link title
Trains do not have significant weight limitations.
They do have weight limitations but just because those gross limits are much higher then a car doesn't change that they exist.
You are just taking all of the technology and downsizing it to fit a passenger car. We are good at downsizing technology just look at what has happened to computers in the past 30 years.
My iPhone has thousands upon thousands of times more power then my first computer a Comodore 64 but fits in the palm of my hand.
With a train you have multiple motors each with multiple cylinders that are the size of five gallon buckets. The turbos are the size of a commercial clothes dryer and the electric motors weight hundreds of lbs each and they are lots of them.
We already know how to make small efficient engines. Hell GM knows how to make small efficient engines, though they learned a lot of that from SAAB, the Ecotec based motor gets 30 plus mpg highway in a midsized sedan like a 9-3 and that is without any fancy electronics. It is just a turbo and fuel injection along with relatively low weight and good aero specs. Oh and it will also blow the doors off any four cylinder Civic, Corolla, Accord, Altima or Camry. Turbos are good for midrange and low end torque and so are electric motors.
Small electric motors are no big deal either. Make them hub motors would be even better but that technology is still a little way off for mass market applications. It is coming though.
So really what is a challenge?
The software and hardware to make those systems work together?
Somewhat but not really as it isn't all that different from the software and hardware used in regular hybrids or on demand stationary power generators. Both of those technologies are mature.
The batteries?
Ahh it is always the batteries Li-Ion batteries in that number are coming along though and the cost is just going to keep coming down as more and more devices start to use them. Keeping them all cool will be the biggest challenge.
torque_r wrote
I personally don't have a problem with a Volt or any hybrid/electric car being priced at $40K. I have a problem with a Chevy hatchback being priced at $40K.
I don't mean to be rude but that is just stupid.
If you said you had a problem with any vehicle designed to save gas that cost 40 dollars I could understand your point. You can buy plenty of used cars for less then half that and get 30 mpg highway and mid to low 20s around town. To the early adopters that won't matter and it won't matter to the people who want to be seen in a fuel efficient car for one reason or another.
I just lost a sale to a guy who was looking at a used BMW 5 series wagon with a stick no less because he wanted to, "save gas and money," by spending 15,000 dollars more on a TDI jetta wagon.
$15,000 buys a lot of gas and if you want to save the earth you would be better off buying the used car and putting that $15,000 into energy efficient home improve
It's just not that simple to adapt technology from a heavy train into a fairly light car, even if the technology is mature at the "heavy" levels.
As you indicated, the Li batteries (which are brought on by the need to save weight) are an entirely new technology, and much of the big challenge. Obviously a train can use heavy lead acid batteries.
A lot of the challenge is also integration of all the systems, plus software. It can't always be said that making a mature technology much smaller and lighter is easy. Certainly putting an iPhone together was not trivial even if desktop computers existed with the same capabilities.
One of the other challenges is that GM has not demonstrated the highest success levels with new technologies. Toyota (ignoring the current UA issues) put a Prius out that by most measures is among the most reliable of all vehicles, even with its complex systems. GM's reliabilities even on old technology engines and vehicles is often not nearly as good. So the Volt is going to be a big risk for any early buyers, even at a very high price.
I also agree with other posters that when I look at the Volt vs. other newer cars such as the Sonata, newer Buicks, even the Fusion - well the Volt looks very bland to me. It should look like more than a bland Chevy at that price, regardless of the technology involved.
It is a generator attached to one or more electric motors with a battery for reserve power. From a mechanical stand point very, very simple. The software to make it all work correctly is not but it isn't all that different from how a regular hybrid works.
You are just removing the transmission as the middle man.
No need to use an overly complicated and extremely expensive CVT like Toyota does or sandwich in a tiny electric motor between the engine and transmission like honda does.
No need for a transmission at all because electric motors have so much torque.
Just use direct drive so good more simplicity.
http://earth2tech.com/2009/01/12/why-a123systems-lost-the-volt-battery-deal/
A123 might still get some sort of contract from GM in the future according to that article.
I know what you're saying about battery prices coming down as volume picks-up, but that is true with many new products. And those companies set a low-to-moderate price to drive that demand, which causes their parts prices to drop.
With the Volt I see the early-adopters causing some demand, but then a steep dropoff after that, as the Volt simply costs too much compared to economical cars. The Volt should be priced, as if the lower-cost batteries and other mass-production discounts already exist. Just as MS didn't price their XBox consoles at $3,000 each figuring on selling 20K year, and then lowering the cost when volumes piick-up; GM should have figured what a 3-year average revenue at Price-X would be figuring on selling 150K/year.
If GM wants the Volt to succeed then they need to sell enough of them to make the price reasonable! They are shooting themselves in the foot if they are planning on much lower volumes, which keep mass production discounts from happening, thus keeping their costs higher.
Regards,
OW
Buying a GM car is like paying for it 6 times over.
First, you paid for its manufacture and assembly costs with your tax money and bailout funds.
Second, you pay the purchase price with your own money after taxes.
Third, you pay sales tax and vehicle registration and licensing gov't fees.
Fourth, you pay for the "GOV"T BACKED" warranty with your tax payer money.
Fifth, you pay for repairs, tow trucks, and reliability issues with your own money after the warranty expires.
Sixth, you lose your shirt when you go to resell it on the open market (sans C4C which is paid for by your tax money; so your basically paying yourself $4,500.)
No THANKS!!!
I'd much rather get a vehicle I don't have to worry about getting a gov't to approve my warranty work with. Heck, I'd rather buy a vehicle where I don't NEED the warranty in the first place. And lastly, I want a vehicle I only have to pay for once.
Wrong. All the other choices on the market (Insight, Prius) have exhausted their tax incentives, and the ones that haven't (Tesla) are prohibitively expensive.
The Leaf and Volt (and iMEV) will get the $7500 tax credit for having a 16kv or greater electric propulsion system.
Where the Volt differentiates itself from the others is in the fact that it isn't "tethered" by a virtual electric cord. The Leaf's 100 mile range will mean that at no time can you go any further than 50 miles from your house, whereas with the Volt you can go anywhere.
Now, is that worth another $13,000??? Probably not. But GM has been saying all along that the major cost in the Volt is the battery pack. I would assume that the genset would be the next greatest cost in the car. So I coulsd also imagine that both would be decontented vehicles, meaning that people won't be thrilled about laying out $27 grand for a Leaf either.
Regards,
OW
Wrong. All the other choices on the market (Insight, Prius) have exhausted their tax incentives, and the ones that haven't (Tesla) are prohibitively expensive.
It is not wrong :mad: , the fact of the matter is, here is a company, GM, still recovering from years of poor quality/reliability and mis-management, coming out with a brand new technology, at least a new technology for them, for the first time and PLANNING on charging a arm and a leg for it!
I think it was a mistake for GM to come out with an all electric vehicle at this time considering it has not even been a year yet since their bankruptcy/restructuring and, their are always some problems and kinks in any new kind of technology when a auto company introduces it for the first time! I think they should have waited a few more years to do this so that they could have more of their 80 billion dollar debt paid down and focus on improving their current models and brought out more or at the very least higher fuel efficient hybrids, which is a proven technology in the business, in order to satisfy the current trend of fuel efficient vehicles
GM needs to spend more time focusing on improving the mpg in all of their hybrid trucks and suvs, especially since GM continues to have the idiotic focus on large vehicles, because getting 20-21mpg in a hybrid Tahoe is just not good enough!
I'll take a extreme position just like lemko just made a few posts ago, I would rather pay more money in the long run and be in a Prius, Insight, Fusion Hybrid, etc with no tax incentives, that have proven reliability/technology and reputation for fuel efficiency, then in a 40-45k Chevy Econobox with unproven widespread practical application of its technology, in a GM based vehicle of course, on the hope that its reliability and problem free enough to see if I get my $7500 tax incentive :P
The tax incentives on all those hybrids have expired because they sold more then 60,000 units.
You can look it up on the IRS website.
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=185050,00.html
2009 MY
Make
Model
Credit Amount
Chrysler
Aspen Hybrid
$2,200
Dodge
Durango Hybrid
$2,200
Ford
Escape Hybrid 2WD
$3,000
Ford
Escape Hybrid 4WD
$1,950
Mazda
Tribute Hybrid 2WD
$3,000
Mazda
Tribute Hybrid 4WD
$1,950
Mercury
Mariner Hybrid 2WD
$3,000
Mercury
Mariner Hybrid 4WD
$1,950
Nissan
Altima Hybrid
$2,350
Those credits start to phase out after the 60,000th unit is sold and continue to be reduced till they are completely exhausted in the fifth quarter after the 60,000th unit is sold.
Here is the full list.
See all toyotas and hondas are phased out.
The Volt has been in development for over three years now. You think they are going to delay it just because the company had to go through restructruing? If you owned a company and you had a completly game changing product that was ready to go but you had just gone through bankruptcy would you delay the product for just that reason?
If it is ready to go it is ready to go. If it isn't then well it isn't.
You said all electric vehicle again which again I repeat it is NOT an all electric vehicle. It is a series hybrid with a 16 kilowatt-hour battery pack.
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/chevrolet-volt-battery-production/
The current Prius has a 1.3 Kilowatt hour battery pack and the new Insight only has 0.58 kilowatt hour.
http://www.hybridcars.com/compacts-sedans/honda-insight-overview.html
The Nissan Leaf has a 24 kilowatt hour battery pack and is supposed to go 100 miles on a charge but it will take eight hours to charge from a 220 volt line. If you have a 25 mile commute one way then you are going to need that 220 volt line because a standard 110 socket will take twice as long to charge.
Battery packs with Li-ion batteries are supposed to cost between 500 and 1000 dollars a kilowatt hour. So at 16 kilowatt hours the Volt pack costs between 8,000 and 16,000 dollars maybe more as no one will say exactly what the packs cost. The Prius and Insight don't even use Li-ions and have tiny battery packs in comparison so their packs are in the sub 5,000 dollar range.
I know that the power transformer or inverter, I forget which, in a Hybrid Highlander costs 7,000 dollars plus instillation because a customer of ours blew one out just out of warranty and Toyota wouldn't cover it even partially.
Obviously toyota's costs are lower but still that gives you an idea of what the power train costs are in a Prius. CVTs are expensive too they run in the $5,000 to $10,000 range retail figure half that on Toyotas end. The CVT in a Audi Cabriolet or first gen MINI Coooper were in the $8,000 range retail.
If you don't like my point of view, TOO BAD!!
Yeah. You should buy one of these:
>>link titlehttp://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.efda853/6668!keywords=#MSG6668
".....I think it was a mistake for GM to come out with an all electric vehicle at this time considering it has not even been a year yet since their bankruptcy/restructuring ....."
The Volt was announced in 2007. By the time bankruptcy came around, they were too far along (2 yrs) and had spent too much money (at least $700 million) on the project to cancel it. There have been 2 major controversies over this project, and they go hand in hand; First, the price, second the battery technology. All the other technologies ( the genset, electric motor, regenerative braking,) have all been proven technologies. Many companies have doubted that the Volt will work, primarily because it relies on lithium ion battery technology. Yet, in the last 3 years many car companies have pumped BILLIONS into lithium ion tech. WHY??? Why would Toyota screw around with this for a plug in version of the Prius if their NiCad tech is so tried and true? What are they afraid of? Could the Volt actually work??? If it does, then everybody will be sinking money into Li Ion tech., making the batteries much, much, cheaper in the years to come, thereby making the Volt much more competitive.
".....GM needs to spend more time focusing on improving the mpg in all of their hybrid trucks and suvs, especially since GM continues to have the idiotic focus on large vehicles, because getting 20-21mpg in a hybrid Tahoe is just not good enough!"
Baby steps....Don't get caught up in the raw numbers. What IS significant about the Tahoe hybrid is that it gets 40% better city fuel economy over a comparable gas engine. What GM seems to have done is "skip over" the traditional hybrid technology and go straight to plug in electric. It's a big gamble, but if it pays off, it will in spades.
And nobody cares, they can hardly give them away. I buy BOF SUV's to tow. The hybrid is pretty useless for that. Insanely tall gearing, and a significant drop in towing capacity. A hybrid Acadia/Traverse would make more sense to me and put a diesel in the tahoe/suburban.
And mine have all been money wasted.
That is fair enough. I think the main decision behind this was the uppity soccer moms that were driving them prior to 2005. For them that would be a significant increase.
But, for them thr Acadia makes more sense still. I too agree that the Duramax not being available in them and Hummer is (was) wasted potential.
True, and they still are. My kids are in grades 2nd and 5th. I spend a lot of time around the schools where Suburbans, Denalis, and Escalades are still common sights.
The Lambda's had to be on the drawing board at the same time as the Tahoe hybrid was being designed. I think it would have made way more sense to create a hybrid system around the 3.6 that could have been used in the Lambda's and possible in any other GM vehicle that uses the 3.6 and a transaxle. I don't see the hybrid Silverado being much of a seller either. I wonder how much GM spent developing that hybrid system only to sell a few hundred a month?
You said...
there are many other electrical, Hybrid, and other energy/fuel conscious choices with much cheaper original msrps then what that Volt is estimated to be, offering a proven track record and just as many incentives and tax rebates as the Volt would offer them!
Cooter said...
Wrong. All the other choices on the market (Insight, Prius) have exhausted their tax incentives, and the ones that haven't (Tesla) are prohibitively expensive.
The Leaf and Volt (and iMEV) will get the $7500 tax credit for having a 16kv or greater electric propulsion system.
Then you replied with...
Wrong. All the other choices on the market (Insight, Prius) have exhausted their tax incentives, and the ones that haven't (Tesla) are prohibitively expensive.
It is not wrong , the fact of the matter is, here is a company, GM, still recovering from years of poor quality/reliability and mis-management, coming out with a brand new technology, at least a new technology for them, for the first time and PLANNING on charging a arm and a leg for it!
Now later on in the post you went on and on that you would rather pay more money for this and that but at the beginning there you said the tax incentives not existing was wrong. And that is not true.
Now you can have the opinion that you would rather pay more for a car with less capabilities I see that all the time in the car business and that is your opinion. To you it is fine and it is never right or wrong to you just your opinion.
It is wrong that The Prius will have the same incentives and rebates as the Volt because it absolutely will not.
We all have no idea what GM will price the Volt at. No one has said and they will not announce anything until most likely the fourth quarter of this year.
It is is priced under 40,000 dollars and then has the 7,500 dollar tax credit then it will be priced cheaper then the top of the line Prius and about equal in price to the second to the top of the line Prius.
I am sorry that you had bad luck with three GM cars but you know what I have seen people get burned by every single car brand in the US. Every single one of them makes bad cars from time to time. It could happen to anybody at anytime with any car.
I have had good look with my GM cars and good luck with my Jeeps. I had great luck with my MINI and so did the person I sold it too for the most part.
My first demo in the car business was a Land Rover Freelander, go check out the Freelander boards if you want to see cars with problems, and you know what in the six months I drove it I never had a problem with it. Now at the time we didn't really know how bad Freelanders were because they had only been out a couple of years. We knew they could be troublesome, it is a Land Rover most Land Rovers can be troublesome from time to time, but had no idea how bad they could be. IMO the Freelander is the least reliable modern car ever sold in the US.
Until very recently the person I sold that car too had had no problems with it. Just a couple of months ago it finally had a major break down. It needed about $2,500 dollars in repairs which it first sounds bad but if you think about it a car that I called the least reliable modern car sold in the US only needed $2,500 in repairs over six years is pretty good.
True, unfortunately I seem to get most of them.
The Malibu is missing key features according to some write-ups. the two cons mentioned in CR are turn circle too big and it's missing key features. I find it has many of the options that are on my Riviera and quite a few that are not. The 1LT I got IS missing alloy wheels, leather, courtesy lights abound, turning headlights, power reclining, memory, and heated seats, auto dim inside mirror, memory outside mirrors, hidden wipers, center rr armrest, block heater, climate control incl buttons on the steering wheel, and remote fuel door. But the Malibu does have Onstar, it's own satelite phone, bluetooth link to my cell, xm radio, 17 inch wheels, remote start, split fold down rr seats, stability control, paddle shifting mode, 6 spd auto, turn by turn nav, telescoping steering wheel, DIC, 6 air bags, tire pressure monitor, custom floor and trunk mats, 36 station presets, and an MP3 jack.
The turning circle is way better than my Riv or Silv ext cab.
I have always got great service from all my GM's. The Buick has the paint and trans issues but I bought it with 88k miles on it and put 88k more on it in the 6 years I owned it so far, and I haven't spent anything towards either issue. Thats my most negative GM experience. My most positive is my Silverado. 1 battery in 9 years. Period. Nothing else ever. Still has original wiper blades, air filter, and tires.
9 year old wiper blades?!!! Man, you must be Armor-alling those puppies. :P
No need to use an overly complicated and extremely expensive CVT like Toyota does or sandwich in a tiny electric motor between the engine and transmission like honda does.
No need for a transmission at all because electric motors have so much torque.
That's all cool but I think I am missing something. Doesn't the Volt have a 1.4L gasoline engine as a backup power? What happens when the Volt runs out of electric juice and switches to engine mode and you have a direct drive? That's not gonna move at all.