I don't see them as competitors. The plug-in Prius maybe, a little.
It's Volt vs. Leaf, and to a lesser extent, the iMiev.
Did you see the Top Gear episode that went after the Leaf? Also unfair.
A lot of people like the status quo and are afraid of change. So easy for the media to play Monday morning quarterback.
I support all these fuel misers because they reduce demand for imported oil and to put it simply, leave more for the rest of us. I don't care if it's hybrid, EV, hydrogen, natural gas, or diesel, they all help in small ways.
So even though I don't envision buying one, I'm glad they exist. :shades:
So even though I don't envision buying one, I'm glad they exist.
Well, I'd buy this one!
The new e-tron packs four electric motors and a lithium-ion battery pack with a fairly tame-sounding 313 hp but an insane 3,319 lb-ft of torque. The run to 62 mph takes 4.8 seconds, but rolling acceleration from 37-75 mph takes just 4.1 seconds thanks to the e-tron's massive amount of twist.
While acknowledging that electric vehicles are still far from economically viable volume production vehicles, Audi is nonetheless working on electric technology, both for hybrids and pure EVs. The pack sports a 53kWh capacity of which 42.4 kWh is usable. The pack weighs in at 1,036 pounds out of a total vehicle weight of 3,527 pounds and is mounted ahead of the rear axle and liquid cooled. Each of the axles sports two electric motors allowing the e-tron to retain Audi's signature quattro all-wheel drive. The e-tron has an estimated range of 154 miles on the EU combined driving cycle
GM isn't even thinking of something this fantastic.
Yep. That's mainly it. From a technology side of things, it probably works fairly well; however our culture and experience with high-tech items in this country, is that we often abandon technologies, sometimes even if it is better than the alternatives.
I would be a fan of Hybrids and EV's if there was some guaranteed commitment to the technology and infrastructure. This is something that the government could do, instead of trying to push the technology with subsidies. Our government is rather wishy-washy, about hybrids and EV's, as then again they really haven't ruled out CNG or hydrogen being the fuel of the future.
I could think of a few things that the government could do to make partial and full EV's more viable. 1) Review CNG, vs. H2, vs batteries and make a choice as to what is the best. 2) Then start building the infrastructure for that chosen technology. Build the refueling, and recharging spots needed for the proposed fleet of vehicles. 3) If EV's are chosen, standardize the battery type and a couple of shapes and sizes. Choose the best battery technology and go with it. Choose a size and shape battery, which will be used by all manufacturers, to drive costs low, and to assure EV-buyers that they're batteries will be available for a long time. Auto manufacturers would build their vehicle around this standard battery. A smart auto-manufacturer would make the battery changeout possible in 5 min, such that a customer could drive-in to a service center, have their discharged battery removed, and a recharged one installed in 5 min.
The Volt will remain low-volume because there just aren't that many people in this country who have the 2 attributes of a) having the means to buy one + b) having the obsession to save every last drop of gasoline.
Let me give some marketing advice to GM: think about taking that technology, and start building some $5K - $10K scooters. Check out the 65hp, 60-mpg, CVT, maxi-scooters that some companies are now building; like BMW. It might make more sense to use the Volt technology for scooters, which are mainly < 100 mile trips.
I think the Volt is a much-nicer looking car than a Prius, but the problem for me, a GM guy is, it's too damn expensive.
I agree. No questions the Volt is better looking than a Prius, but at the same time, the Volt doesn't "look" like a $40k car to me.
I find the Volt to be an interesting car. With gas prices where they are currently at, if I'm spending $40k plus on a car, I expect the performance, style and luxury to go with it. The Volt certainly offers enough in the tech department, but from what I've read, I doubt I'd like driving it any more than a Cruze.
Honestly, I think the Cruze is a better looking car. I'd simply buy the Cruze, pocket the $15k and live with the fact that I'm only spending roughly $800 to $1k more a year in fuel vs. a Volt.
I guess I'm not enough of a tree hugger to pay a large premium to spend less on gasoline.
But calling someone stupid for doing so isn't the right answer either. If someone values being able to limit and almost eliminate gasoline usage, while spending a hefty sum to do so, who am I to judge.
We've managed to get compressed propane in bottles that are relatively easy to transport, and get gallons of gasoline from a tank in the ground pumped into a car gas tank.
Certainly, we can engineer some relatively simple method of battery transfer that would be suitable for the market.
I'd like to see how would work as I've read the battery pack in a Leaf weighs over 600lbs.
So the EV stations would be like a quickie-lube place, except they would have a device similar to an engine-lift. If the batteries are the same design, then the lift can be standardized across the country. If the battery and lift are standardized, then the auto manufacturers know exactly what they have to design their vehicles around - to get the battery in and out quickly.
That would have to bring back full service gas stations.
Of course the battery-swap would be optional, for those who were traveling a distance. People who weren't making a longer journey, would still be able to keep the same battery and charge it at home, or at work. If the extra work keeps a few people off welfare, or out of prison - all the better.
Of course the battery-swap would be optional, for those who were traveling a distance. People who weren't making a longer journey, would still be able to keep the same battery and charge it at home, or at work. If the extra work keeps a few people off welfare, or out of prison - all the better.
I wasn't saying that is a bad thing, merely an observation. No matter how easy they make swapping out a battery, I don't think most refueling facilities would let customers handle a heavy and expensive battery pack. It would almost have to be manned in some manner.
I all ready see an opportunity for thieves. I'd imagine a swappable battery is an easier to steal. Yikes, that's a scary thought.
I hadn't seen that before writing my post, honest. I just knew that if you want EV's or CNG or H2, you need quick refueling (or recharging). You can't recharge a battery that size that quickly, so you need to swap them out.
If NASCAR and such can get a car in and out in 15 sec., using a design that allows quick service, should get a vehicle's battery changed in 5 minutes. The secret to racing pitstops isn't just the number of people, it's that the vehicles are designed to be serviced quickly. You can put 50 fast people around a racecar, but if the fuel-filler is narrow, or the tires aren't mounted on an easy-change wheel, it doesn't help to have more people . The design is critical.
Another topic: anyone note how Dodge is offering their 2012 Grand Caravan at a starting MSRP price of $20,995. You get a 6 cyl w/6 speed ... This is the sort of pricing that will make Chrysler successful. Meanwhile what is the starting MSRP of an Impala or Malibu? I would think GM would lower prices rather than upping them each year!
I don't think most refueling facilities would let customers handle a heavy and expensive battery pack.
Agree. OSHA requires users of lifts, to be trained.
I all ready see an opportunity for thieves. I'd imagine a swappable battery is an easier to steal. Yikes, that's a scary thought.
If you bring a 600Lb hoist along and a pickup. It would be easy enough for the battery manufacturer to implant a $2 GPS tracking device in the battery-internals also; that would make stealing them, or reselling them, stupid. A tracking device would also help if people "dump" them at the end-of-life.
If NASCAR and such can get a car in and out in 15 sec., using a design that allows quick service, should get a vehicle's battery changed in 5 minutes.
Have you noticed some of the people that work at gas stations? Many can't give correct change in 15 seconds;)
But yeah, I think 5-10 minutes is reasonable assuming you don't get stuck behind someone buying lottery tickets;)
anyone note how Dodge is offering their 2012 Grand Caravan at a starting MSRP price of $20,995. You get a 6 cyl w/6 speed ...
No, I haven't seen that. Wow, that's an impressive price. MY SIL has an 08 Caravan for a company car. It's plain, but nice enough. I know she likes it and she has almost 90k miles on it w/o any issues so far.
It would be easy enough for the battery manufacturer to implant a $2 GPS tracking device in the battery-internals also; that would make stealing them, or reselling them, stupid. A tracking device would also help if people "dump" them at the end-of-life.
Something like that would have to be implemented. But never underestimate how thieves find ways around theft deterrents.
I would think a more modular battery design would help compartmentalize the cells so that the battery would comprise, say, 6 separate units that could be replaced separately according to shelf life. If the changed-outs are phased, the change cycle would be ongoing but the replacement would be easier as only one module at a time would be replaced instead of the entire battery-pack.
Another topic: anyone note how Dodge is offering their 2012 Grand Caravan at a starting MSRP price of $20,995. You get a 6 cyl w/6 speed ... This is the sort of pricing that will make Chrysler successful
That is pretty impressive. Chrysler seems to be getting a lot of use out of that new 3.6 Pentastar V-6, and the 6-speed automatic. I guess they're getting some kind of economy of scale out of offering it in just about everything.
I remember not too long ago, they had something like FOUR different engine families. There was the old 3.3/3.8 pushrod engines used in the minivans, and the Jeep Wrangler. Then, there was the 90-degree SOHC 3.7 V-6 used in trucks (a sawed-off 4.7 V-8). There was also the 3.2/3.5 SOHC V-6 that was derived from the 3.3/3.8 pushrod, but didn't really share much with it. Then, there was the 2.7 DOHC V-6 that debuted in the 1998 Intrepid/Concorde that shared nothing in common with any other engine, and was very expensive to replace when it failed. In Intrepids and Concordes, if that engine blew, it was often cheaper to just throw in a 3.2 or 3.5, with the necessary mods, than to replace with another 2.7.
There was also a 4.0 V-6 that was used briefly. I think it was SOHC, and based on the 3.2/3.5, as well.
I think the 3.6 has replaced all those other V-6 engines, with the exception of the 3.7. But even that, I believe is now limited to just the Ram and Jeep Liberty. Maybe that one will get phased out soon, as well.
I dunno - Hertz gave me a 2011 Chrysler T&C a couple of months ago. It was pretty loaded, but if that was representative of the new Pentastar V6, it quite honestly was a pig and rather lousy vehicle to drive. The couple riding with us agreed and were surprised a new vehicle in this day and age could be that crappy. Not just the engine, but the transmission, ride and suspension as well.
DETROIT -- The Chevrolet Volt has received "a disproportionate level of scrutiny" by critics of General Motors and the Obama administration, GM CEO Dan Akerson is expected to tell a congressional committee tomorrow
These and the competitive vans are still a 4,500 Lb curb weight, boxy vehicle. So relative to other vehicles, especially if you drive a car, I'd guess you might not like a van. As vans go the Chrysler products got an average, relative to vans.
Also being a rental and the incentive to keep the vehicles rented and keep costs low, who knows when the tire pressures were last checked. A few psi low, or 1 tire with a bad valve stem, or out-of-alignment?
I would suggest to GM to lower the price of the base Impala similarly - to $20,995. The last new GM I sat in was a Cruze, and when I saw a sticker over $20K (and that was with the low-tech 1.8L), I just walked away.
Bottom-line in my discussion--the car burst into flames.
Only after, and in my opinion, the driver exhibited gross negligence as a driver, and failed to attempt to put the car in neutral at any point (I listened to the 911 tape and this is a logical conclusion).
In addition, the driver failed to ever attempt to turn off the vehicle via the ignition (I believe holding the start button for a couple of seconds would have accomplished this).
Third, he failed to attempt to scrub off speed by side swiping the vehicle with a guardrail and/or rear-ending a fast moving vehicle.
And finally, he chose (wrongly) to go into a dead-end "T" intersection where a 90 degree turn is absolutely impossible at his speed, instead of the 52 West ramp which has a gentle left circle swing (again, with guardrails).
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Yeah, if anything, gas tanks are more volatile then the Volt's batteries ever will be.
The problem is that volatility is really irrelevant when parked in a garage. Gas doesn't spontaneously combust. It requires an ignition source of some kind to be at all dangerous, and in most garages, people naturally keep ignition sources away from their car and gas tanks.
With the Volt, I'm presuming that the ignition source is provided on a nightly basis via the requirement to plug it in all the time. Now you have heat, electricity, volts, amps, and all that potential source for igniting the batteries or something else in some manner.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I don't think he was debating the merits of the accident, rather just noting that the fuel tank exploded in that high speed crash.
Point being a full tank of gas is far more volatile than a sitting set of Lithium Ion batteries.
Politicians can target the Volt to say they're against the $7500 federal credit as wasteful. So they'll jump on the battery fire story, never mind how incredibly unlikely that is to actually hurt any humans.
They exploit a headline to further their own political cause. It has nothing to do with the Volt, really.
I think the GM warranty service story of your friend or acquaintance is more like, the story got changed in the telling at some point. I find it incredibly hard to believe that something that could be disproved in literally one minute would be attempted by the dealer.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Point being a full tank of gas is far more volatile than a sitting set of Lithium Ion batteries.
The Volt has both a full tank of gasoline and the batteries; so therefore it is more dangerous than either the standard IC-vehicle or EV. :P Couldn't resist.
So they'll jump on the battery fire story, never mind how incredibly unlikely that is to actually hurt any humans.
I think the inherent concern with any incident with any new application of technology is - if the engineers and scientists didn't think this would happen or design it so it wouldn't happen, what else did they miss? And most people are aware that major problems start with "a few reports", so they are cautious until they see what else develops.
I agree though that some media, exaggerate the dangers. Again though this is in response to the history of "cocky" scientists and engineers who have decreed their inventions to be 100% safe (I particularly don't like those 45-year old nuke plants).
I would suggest to GM to lower the price of the base Impala similarly - to $20,995.
FWIW, there are some pretty big discounts on the Impala. For instance, here's a 2012 Impala LT, with a sunroof, with an MSRP of $28,995, with an internet price of $22,515.
And the cheapest Impala Fitzmall lists, a basic LS, is only $20,433, although the MSRP was $26,470.
But, GM really does need to stop playing those pricing games, and instead, just lower those prices down to more realistic levels. And admittedly, the $20.4K for the stripper, or even the $22.5K for the LT with the sunroof, wouldn't be enough to lure me in.
And, I agree on the Cruze...just seems way to expensive to me, for what it is. But, maybe I'm just going through sticker shock. Or maybe I'm just cheap. :P
Issa and other Republicans questioned the "unnatural relationship" between the Obama Administration and GM as well as why it took NHTSA so many months to reveal the fire in November when it happened in June.
Told ya there were political agendas at play.
Yet:
the $7,500 tax credit was first put into law in the 2007-2008 Congress with the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008, well before there was an Obama Administration
Whoops!
GM's Akerson stood up for the Volt, saying that the fire that's caused so much commotion only happened "after putting the battery through lab conditions that no driver would experience in the real world"
Obama said GM was back to being number 1 in the world!
We should all pat each other on the back, kick back, smoke some expensive cigars, and drink pricey Champagne.
He didn't mention what GM was number 1 in, though I guess that doesn't matter. Number 1 in profits? He didn't say. Number 1 in bailout funds received? I'm not sure.
Number 1 in lemon production? I don't know. I have no idea what they are number 1 in, but it sure sounded positive.
Based on the rhetoric in this forum, I'm going to assume he meant number 1 in sales, even if most of them are fleet.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
It's kind of a sticking point in his re-election campaign, putting a feather in his cap that he single handedly saved the Auto Industry...
- Even though Chrysler is now Italian
- Even though the Government still owns 29 billion or so in shares that it has yet to sell (when the stock price hits that magic 60 dollar mark?)
- And lastly, even though "W" was the one who started the handouts, throwing a bone to GM and Chrysler on his way out the door, keeping them afloat till the next President could figure out what to do with them.
But ya, it was all Obama "he's the man, if he can't do it no one can"... :sick:
- And lastly, even though "W" was the one who started the handouts, throwing a bone to GM and Chrysler on his way out the door
If I was making a top ten list of the worst things the old "W" did as president, I'd put bailing out GM & Chrysler (via kicking the can down the road) as #1.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
You are probably right that there might be 3 or 4 items that should be ranked on top of the GM/Chrysler bailouts as horrible things to do, but what really irked me about the bailouts, was that Bush, as a Republican, should have been against them, and I'm a Democrat! If the Republican's were ever good for anything, it would have been to prevent the bailouts. So as I am a Democrat (full disclosure), I truly can say the Republicans are good for nothing.
Unfortunately, I think Democrats aren't good for much lately either. :lemon:
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
but what really irked me about the bailouts, was that Bush, as a Republican, should have been against them, and I'm a Democrat! If the Republican's were ever good for anything, it would have been to prevent the bailouts.
We're in a new era for the last several decades. Those old stereotypes of what a Dem or Rep. support must be purged. GM and other companies, unions, or banks, have lobbyists for both parties. They give $$ to BOTH parties and their candidates to help get elected/reelected. They do this directly and thru 3rd parties to "Superpacs" and such. Regardless of who wins, the politicians are in-debted to those companies, and the lobbyists get invited to those $10K dinner fund-raisers, and get to talk for a few minutes on what "is good for GM and the country".
We're kind of in the situation Poland has always been in - it was a NO-Win situation being between Germany and Russia.
Growing up in S GA in the 1950's, moonshiners paid "the modern day political contribuition" to all the potentially successful candidates running for sheriff.
If, for some reason a guy won, but had not received cash from a particular shiner, then that shiner got busted and his still destroyed. After 2-3 months, no more stills got broken up until a new sheriff got elected.
Even though we were in a "dry" county, there was still a liquor"tax".
The names and adjectives have changed, but Washington does the same thing today, just on a far grander scale...
"As you see, there is certain political air around this discussion about a car that is safe," Akerson said, after testifying before House Oversight subcommittee on the handling of an investigation into the Volt's safety.
To have GM's product mentioned in the same phrase as fire, he added, "causes collateral damage because it makes the market pause, so we're going to go about reconstructing that image."
Stuff I've been saying for days...
I hope he flew in on a private jet just to irk congress.
>I hope he flew in on a private jet just to irk congress.
I hope he flew on a private jet just to save time. Obama flies on a private jet and in fact his wife flies separately, so I believe GM's top officers can use a business jet for travel at far below the costs of AF 1 and AF 2.
You're not serious are you? :confuse: The POTUS should maybe go the airport, go thru security and board a Southwest flight? GM execs have the same security needs as the POTUS? Or need to be in 24 hr secure communications with such organizations as NORAD?
GM invented private jets and the engines that power them. They also manufactured them. Now Honda is taking advantage of America's ignorant putdown of them and is getting a foothold in the market. How is that good for America? We don't need more jobs going overseas.
Comments
It's Volt vs. Leaf, and to a lesser extent, the iMiev.
Did you see the Top Gear episode that went after the Leaf? Also unfair.
A lot of people like the status quo and are afraid of change. So easy for the media to play Monday morning quarterback.
I support all these fuel misers because they reduce demand for imported oil and to put it simply, leave more for the rest of us. I don't care if it's hybrid, EV, hydrogen, natural gas, or diesel, they all help in small ways.
So even though I don't envision buying one, I'm glad they exist. :shades:
Well, I'd buy this one!
The new e-tron packs four electric motors and a lithium-ion battery pack with a fairly tame-sounding 313 hp but an insane 3,319 lb-ft of torque. The run to 62 mph takes 4.8 seconds, but rolling acceleration from 37-75 mph takes just 4.1 seconds thanks to the e-tron's massive amount of twist.
While acknowledging that electric vehicles are still far from economically viable volume production vehicles, Audi is nonetheless working on electric technology, both for hybrids and pure EVs. The pack sports a 53kWh capacity of which 42.4 kWh is usable. The pack weighs in at 1,036 pounds out of a total vehicle weight of 3,527 pounds and is mounted ahead of the rear axle and liquid cooled. Each of the axles sports two electric motors allowing the e-tron to retain Audi's signature quattro all-wheel drive. The e-tron has an estimated range of 154 miles on the EU combined driving cycle
GM isn't even thinking of something this fantastic.
Regards,
OW
I would be a fan of Hybrids and EV's if there was some guaranteed commitment to the technology and infrastructure. This is something that the government could do, instead of trying to push the technology with subsidies. Our government is rather wishy-washy, about hybrids and EV's, as then again they really haven't ruled out CNG or hydrogen being the fuel of the future.
I could think of a few things that the government could do to make partial and full EV's more viable.
1) Review CNG, vs. H2, vs batteries and make a choice as to what is the best.
2) Then start building the infrastructure for that chosen technology. Build the refueling, and recharging spots needed for the proposed fleet of vehicles.
3) If EV's are chosen, standardize the battery type and a couple of shapes and sizes. Choose the best battery technology and go with it. Choose a size and shape battery, which will be used by all manufacturers, to drive costs low, and to assure EV-buyers that they're batteries will be available for a long time. Auto manufacturers would build their vehicle around this standard battery. A smart auto-manufacturer would make the battery changeout possible in 5 min, such that a customer could drive-in to a service center, have their discharged battery removed, and a recharged one installed in 5 min.
The Volt will remain low-volume because there just aren't that many people in this country who have the 2 attributes of a) having the means to buy one + b) having the obsession to save every last drop of gasoline.
Let me give some marketing advice to GM: think about taking that technology, and start building some $5K - $10K scooters. Check out the 65hp, 60-mpg, CVT, maxi-scooters that some companies are now building; like BMW. It might make more sense to use the Volt technology for scooters, which are mainly < 100 mile trips.
If they hesitate China may beat us to it:
http://green.autoblog.com/2011/05/02/better-place-signs-deal-in-china-state-grid- -wants-2-300-swap-st/
Not so different from the gas-grill propane tank swap-out centers that are found at many main-stream grocery chains nowadays...
Just create a single (or very few) standardized battery models and sizes...
I'd like to see how would work as I've read the battery pack in a Leaf weighs over 600lbs. Not quite the same as swinging around 30lb propane bottles.
That would have to bring back full service gas stations.
I agree. No questions the Volt is better looking than a Prius, but at the same time, the Volt doesn't "look" like a $40k car to me.
I find the Volt to be an interesting car. With gas prices where they are currently at, if I'm spending $40k plus on a car, I expect the performance, style and luxury to go with it. The Volt certainly offers enough in the tech department, but from what I've read, I doubt I'd like driving it any more than a Cruze.
Honestly, I think the Cruze is a better looking car. I'd simply buy the Cruze, pocket the $15k and live with the fact that I'm only spending roughly $800 to $1k more a year in fuel vs. a Volt.
I guess I'm not enough of a tree hugger to pay a large premium to spend less on gasoline.
But calling someone stupid for doing so isn't the right answer either. If someone values being able to limit and almost eliminate gasoline usage, while spending a hefty sum to do so, who am I to judge.
Certainly, we can engineer some relatively simple method of battery transfer that would be suitable for the market.
So the EV stations would be like a quickie-lube place, except they would have a device similar to an engine-lift. If the batteries are the same design, then the lift can be standardized across the country. If the battery and lift are standardized, then the auto manufacturers know exactly what they have to design their vehicles around - to get the battery in and out quickly.
That would have to bring back full service gas stations.
Of course the battery-swap would be optional, for those who were traveling a distance. People who weren't making a longer journey, would still be able to keep the same battery and charge it at home, or at work. If the extra work keeps a few people off welfare, or out of prison - all the better.
I agree. Speaking of H2, whatever happened to fuel cells or were they too Buck Rogers?
I wasn't saying that is a bad thing, merely an observation. No matter how easy they make swapping out a battery, I don't think most refueling facilities would let customers handle a heavy and expensive battery pack. It would almost have to be manned in some manner.
I all ready see an opportunity for thieves. I'd imagine a swappable battery is an easier to steal. Yikes, that's a scary thought.
If NASCAR and such can get a car in and out in 15 sec., using a design that allows quick service, should get a vehicle's battery changed in 5 minutes. The secret to racing pitstops isn't just the number of people, it's that the vehicles are designed to be serviced quickly. You can put 50 fast people around a racecar, but if the fuel-filler is narrow, or the tires aren't mounted on an easy-change wheel, it doesn't help to have more people . The design is critical.
Another topic: anyone note how Dodge is offering their 2012 Grand Caravan at a starting MSRP price of $20,995. You get a 6 cyl w/6 speed ... This is the sort of pricing that will make Chrysler successful. Meanwhile what is the starting MSRP of an Impala or Malibu? I would think GM would lower prices rather than upping them each year!
Agree. OSHA requires users of lifts, to be trained.
I all ready see an opportunity for thieves. I'd imagine a swappable battery is an easier to steal. Yikes, that's a scary thought.
If you bring a 600Lb hoist along and a pickup. It would be easy enough for the battery manufacturer to implant a $2 GPS tracking device in the battery-internals also; that would make stealing them, or reselling them, stupid. A tracking device would also help if people "dump" them at the end-of-life.
Have you noticed some of the people that work at gas stations? Many can't give correct change in 15 seconds;)
But yeah, I think 5-10 minutes is reasonable assuming you don't get stuck behind someone buying lottery tickets;)
anyone note how Dodge is offering their 2012 Grand Caravan at a starting MSRP price of $20,995. You get a 6 cyl w/6 speed ...
No, I haven't seen that. Wow, that's an impressive price. MY SIL has an 08 Caravan for a company car. It's plain, but nice enough. I know she likes it and she has almost 90k miles on it w/o any issues so far.
That wouldn't be hard to do.
It would be easy enough for the battery manufacturer to implant a $2 GPS tracking device in the battery-internals also; that would make stealing them, or reselling them, stupid. A tracking device would also help if people "dump" them at the end-of-life.
Something like that would have to be implemented. But never underestimate how thieves find ways around theft deterrents.
Regards,
OW
That is pretty impressive. Chrysler seems to be getting a lot of use out of that new 3.6 Pentastar V-6, and the 6-speed automatic. I guess they're getting some kind of economy of scale out of offering it in just about everything.
I remember not too long ago, they had something like FOUR different engine families. There was the old 3.3/3.8 pushrod engines used in the minivans, and the Jeep Wrangler. Then, there was the 90-degree SOHC 3.7 V-6 used in trucks (a sawed-off 4.7 V-8). There was also the 3.2/3.5 SOHC V-6 that was derived from the 3.3/3.8 pushrod, but didn't really share much with it. Then, there was the 2.7 DOHC V-6 that debuted in the 1998 Intrepid/Concorde that shared nothing in common with any other engine, and was very expensive to replace when it failed. In Intrepids and Concordes, if that engine blew, it was often cheaper to just throw in a 3.2 or 3.5, with the necessary mods, than to replace with another 2.7.
There was also a 4.0 V-6 that was used briefly. I think it was SOHC, and based on the 3.2/3.5, as well.
I think the 3.6 has replaced all those other V-6 engines, with the exception of the 3.7. But even that, I believe is now limited to just the Ram and Jeep Liberty. Maybe that one will get phased out soon, as well.
Amazing value, I'd be all over one of those on a test drive if I needed a van today. Is that the cheapest you can get the Pentastar for?
I'm taking my dad 200 convertible shopping on Thursday. :shades:
I still think that van's only been half-way redone. The interior improved but it's still not a complete re-do, like the Durango for instance.
Can't wait to see the next DGC.
Well, I'll sample the Pentastar tomorrow...let's see.
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20120124/OEM11/120129956#ixzz1kTx3JtrP
I'm surprised he didn't mention Volt enemy #1, Nick Cavuto of Fox News.
Also being a rental and the incentive to keep the vehicles rented and keep costs low, who knows when the tire pressures were last checked. A few psi low, or 1 tire with a bad valve stem, or out-of-alignment?
I would suggest to GM to lower the price of the base Impala similarly - to $20,995. The last new GM I sat in was a Cruze, and when I saw a sticker over $20K (and that was with the low-tech 1.8L), I just walked away.
Take thirty seconds to look at any GM warranty book, now or then, and it plainly states from 'date put in service'.
I agree, it is BS. But I think the BS was coming from the Chevy/GM dealership this young gentleman was trying to get warranty service from.
As others have suggested, it could just be a bad rougue dealership, or maybe they thought they could take advantage of a young guy?
When you are young, you are far less likely to have the time and/or resources to pursue a protracted legal battle with an expensive legal team.
Only after, and in my opinion, the driver exhibited gross negligence as a driver, and failed to attempt to put the car in neutral at any point (I listened to the 911 tape and this is a logical conclusion).
In addition, the driver failed to ever attempt to turn off the vehicle via the ignition (I believe holding the start button for a couple of seconds would have accomplished this).
Third, he failed to attempt to scrub off speed by side swiping the vehicle with a guardrail and/or rear-ending a fast moving vehicle.
And finally, he chose (wrongly) to go into a dead-end "T" intersection where a 90 degree turn is absolutely impossible at his speed, instead of the 52 West ramp which has a gentle left circle swing (again, with guardrails).
The problem is that volatility is really irrelevant when parked in a garage. Gas doesn't spontaneously combust. It requires an ignition source of some kind to be at all dangerous, and in most garages, people naturally keep ignition sources away from their car and gas tanks.
With the Volt, I'm presuming that the ignition source is provided on a nightly basis via the requirement to plug it in all the time. Now you have heat, electricity, volts, amps, and all that potential source for igniting the batteries or something else in some manner.
Point being a full tank of gas is far more volatile than a sitting set of Lithium Ion batteries.
Politicians can target the Volt to say they're against the $7500 federal credit as wasteful. So they'll jump on the battery fire story, never mind how incredibly unlikely that is to actually hurt any humans.
They exploit a headline to further their own political cause. It has nothing to do with the Volt, really.
The Volt has both a full tank of gasoline and the batteries; so therefore it is more dangerous than either the standard IC-vehicle or EV. :P Couldn't resist.
So they'll jump on the battery fire story, never mind how incredibly unlikely that is to actually hurt any humans.
I think the inherent concern with any incident with any new application of technology is - if the engineers and scientists didn't think this would happen or design it so it wouldn't happen, what else did they miss? And most people are aware that major problems start with "a few reports", so they are cautious until they see what else develops.
I agree though that some media, exaggerate the dangers. Again though this is in response to the history of "cocky" scientists and engineers who have decreed their inventions to be 100% safe (I particularly don't like those 45-year old nuke plants).
FWIW, there are some pretty big discounts on the Impala. For instance, here's a 2012 Impala LT, with a sunroof, with an MSRP of $28,995, with an internet price of $22,515.
And the cheapest Impala Fitzmall lists, a basic LS, is only $20,433, although the MSRP was $26,470.
But, GM really does need to stop playing those pricing games, and instead, just lower those prices down to more realistic levels. And admittedly, the $20.4K for the stripper, or even the $22.5K for the LT with the sunroof, wouldn't be enough to lure me in.
And, I agree on the Cruze...just seems way to expensive to me, for what it is. But, maybe I'm just going through sticker shock. Or maybe I'm just cheap. :P
Un-Fair Fax
Regards,
OW
You got me. Totally forgot about that! My mouth was open!
Issa and other Republicans questioned the "unnatural relationship" between the Obama Administration and GM as well as why it took NHTSA so many months to reveal the fire in November when it happened in June.
Told ya there were political agendas at play.
Yet:
the $7,500 tax credit was first put into law in the 2007-2008 Congress with the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008, well before there was an Obama Administration
Whoops!
GM's Akerson stood up for the Volt, saying that the fire that's caused so much commotion only happened "after putting the battery through lab conditions that no driver would experience in the real world"
You go, Dan.
I think the shorter wheelbase is really evident in the rear-door area. Other than that, looks nice I guess.
We should all pat each other on the back, kick back, smoke some expensive cigars, and drink pricey Champagne.
He didn't mention what GM was number 1 in, though I guess that doesn't matter. Number 1 in profits? He didn't say. Number 1 in bailout funds received? I'm not sure.
Number 1 in lemon production? I don't know. I have no idea what they are number 1 in, but it sure sounded positive.
Based on the rhetoric in this forum, I'm going to assume he meant number 1 in sales, even if most of them are fleet.
Regards,
OW
- Even though Chrysler is now Italian
- Even though the Government still owns 29 billion or so in shares that it has yet to sell (when the stock price hits that magic 60 dollar mark?)
- And lastly, even though "W" was the one who started the handouts, throwing a bone to GM and Chrysler on his way out the door, keeping them afloat till the next President could figure out what to do with them.
But ya, it was all Obama "he's the man, if he can't do it no one can"... :sick:
If I was making a top ten list of the worst things the old "W" did as president, I'd put bailing out GM & Chrysler (via kicking the can down the road) as #1.
Unfortunately, I think Democrats aren't good for much lately either.
We're in a new era for the last several decades. Those old stereotypes of what a Dem or Rep. support must be purged. GM and other companies, unions, or banks, have lobbyists for both parties. They give $$ to BOTH parties and their candidates to help get elected/reelected. They do this directly and thru 3rd parties to "Superpacs" and such. Regardless of who wins, the politicians are in-debted to those companies, and the lobbyists get invited to those $10K dinner fund-raisers, and get to talk for a few minutes on what "is good for GM and the country".
We're kind of in the situation Poland has always been in - it was a NO-Win situation being between Germany and Russia.
I will say - it looks better, too. No abrupt end at the back like the hatch.
If, for some reason a guy won, but had not received cash from a particular shiner, then that shiner got busted and his still destroyed. After 2-3 months, no more stills got broken up until a new sheriff got elected.
Even though we were in a "dry" county, there was still a liquor"tax".
The names and adjectives have changed, but Washington does the same thing today, just on a far grander scale...
CEO says vehicle not engineered to be 'political punching bag'
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20120125/OEM02/120129944#ixzz1kVfwg7My
"As you see, there is certain political air around this discussion about a car that is safe," Akerson said, after testifying before House Oversight subcommittee on the handling of an investigation into the Volt's safety.
To have GM's product mentioned in the same phrase as fire, he added, "causes collateral damage because it makes the market pause, so we're going to go about reconstructing that image."
Stuff I've been saying for days...
I hope he flew in on a private jet just to irk congress.
I like it eons better than the hatch.
I hope he flew on a private jet just to save time. Obama flies on a private jet and in fact his wife flies separately, so I believe GM's top officers can use a business jet for travel at far below the costs of AF 1 and AF 2.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,