1
2
MadScientistMatt wrote:Nashco wrote: The Volt is a new type of concept, and will require a new way of thinking about MPG.Which is precisely why I don't like that figure - it doesn't reflect the electrical "mileage" of the car, and seems like it's not quite a reasonable way to think about the MPG when a car only partially runs on gasoline.
But electricity is free and clean and comes out of the wall!
I'll believe all of the hype about the Volt when it's actually on the road.
Shawn
Miles per $ works for me. 
Trans_Maro wrote:MadScientistMatt wrote:Nashco wrote: The Volt is a new type of concept, and will require a new way of thinking about MPG.Which is precisely why I don't like that figure - it doesn't reflect the electrical "mileage" of the car, and seems like it's not quite a reasonable way to think about the MPG when a car only partially runs on gasoline.
But electricity is free and clean and comes out of the wall!
I'll believe all of the hype about the Volt when it's actually on the road.
Shawn
Well, even when running off the engine's power it gets 50MPG... not too bad, especially since you can do all your in town commuting for very cheap using only electric power. I've talked with a lot of electric car owners, they are pretty damn cheap to run per mile... The range just sucks and you got to wait for them to recharge.
If this thing can bring all the benefits of an electric car, PLUS give you the range of a normal car while still bringing in decent gas mileage I see no reason to be down on it.
This current mileage claim is crap, they aren't even releasing details on the testing procedure yet... If that doesn't scream manufactured publicity stunt I don't know what does...
Electricity coming out of the wall does still require burned fuel... But we all know that asking an engine to operate well in a 7000 RPM range is bad for efficiency. Having that fuel burned in a central location in an engine that can be tuned to a single RPM with no drive ability concerns IS good for efficiency, and having a centralized plant makes the maintenance needed to run as clean as possibly both easier and more likely to be performed... We all know how the general public maintains their engines.
A bunch of no-linked thoughts after reading this post:
Hybrids are a great alternative to enthusiast cars if you just need an appliance to get you around.
I drive an Intrepid - My dad drives a Prius. He gets 40 - 50 mpg and I get 24 if I'm lucky. I'm envious.
It would take almost 10 years for a 50mpg Prius to pay for itself in gas savings with average miles traveled.
With the new Volt and its highly tauted mileage figures - the car could almost pay for itself if people commute about 20 miles one way to work.
I think it is very interesting that when you don't hear about the Volt for few weeks/months that the Volt just HAPPENS to pop up in the news. Hummmm...
seeker589 wrote: I think it is very interesting that when you don't hear about the Volt for few weeks/months that the Volt just HAPPENS to pop up in the news. Hummmm...
As a completely separate and unrelated point (i.e. feel free to ignore), that seems to be GM's MO. They get a hot concept that's 4-5 years out and then beat people over the head with it until it finally makes production. And then, much of the hype is lost.
How many times did we see Camaro concepts before the first one showed up? Wasn't its debut 2003 or something ridiculous like that?
As for the Volt, I think it's cool for many of the reasons posted already - the first iteration of the technology won't fit me, but the 2nd or 3rd generations might. As it stands, my choice for high-mpg low-maintenance commuting would still be a VW diesel.
I ran some rough numbers at work and it showed that over a length of time a prius is still a cheaper car to own... Emphasis on real rough.
I assumed 5 years of ownership(average person), 20k miles a year, $4 a gallon gas. I also assumed that a prius costs $20k and a Volt costs $40k. I'm ignoring depreciation and maint. Assuming you finance both vehicles 100% @ 0% interest... Payment on $20k prius is $333 and the volt is $666. Yes i said it was rough..
100,000 miles over 5 years costs ~$1700-1800 in a volt @230mpg
100,000 miles over 5 years costs ~$8000 in a prius @ 50mpg.
There is a $6200 a years savings over 5 years to drive a volt. However at the same time you've paid double the payment and double the money for the car. So assuming you save $333 a month in payments and deposit that money, the difference in the monthly payments of the two cars, into an ING account returning 1.5% You get a future value of that cash flow of $20760 or so.. So you make $760 by just investing the money in a crappy bank account @ a crappy interest rate. Get a better interest rate and you'll make more $$$$..
If you don't want to mess with saving the difference. Think about the straight costs. You are saving $20k in vehicle price. Subtract the $6200 a volt saves over a prius in fuel price and the volt is still $13800 more expensive. Assuming all the assumptions stay the same(equal maint $, etc), over 10 years the Volt would save you $12,400 over the prius, but that still means the prius is $7600 cheaper....
So what does this all prove. Despite the great numbers from GM, the car needs to be cheaper or energy costs need to be much much higher, to make these vehicle a viable option for the average American..
Please pick apart my numbers. I may have made a mistake.
Careful there iggy, I said something similar a while back and got smacked upside the noggin. 
Jensenman wrote:Careful there iggy, I said something similar a while back and got smacked upside the noggin.
Ha..
The damn car is too expensive for the average american and makes little financial sense.
jj wrote:JmfnB wrote:But the battery will only last 200 miles and the acid is made from baby Jesus' tears
Let's find another way to say this.
Made the point and made me laugh. ultra-efficient statement.
Jensenman wrote:Careful there iggy, I said something similar a while back and got smacked upside the noggin.
Jman-What you continually argued in that thread was that the car wasn't capable of your occasional long distance commute and therefore not worth production. We countered that it was capable of long commutes with no degradation in performance, and that just because it may not be right for you doesn't mean it shouldn't be produced.
Iggy made another point entirely. My counter to that no new car makes financial sense. A Prius doesn't get good enough mileage to make it worth buying over a normal car, A Volt over a Prius, etc... It is a neat new (to modern automobiles) technology that is within the upper end of the price range for new cars. Thats enough to make it sell. They have reasonable sales goals, so I think it will survive.
I for one am glad manufacturers are giving us more options. More stuff to play with.
ignorant wrote:Jensenman wrote:Careful there iggy, I said something similar a while back and got smacked upside the noggin.
Ha..
The damn car is too expensive for the average american and makes little financial sense.
I really don't think it's a car for an average American... yet. Like the Prius its first few yeras, it will stroke the wealthy's egos: It shows how environmentally conscious they are, and now they can drive an American car to show how the recession has hit them as well. The S-Class is for weekend duty only now! I vaguely remember reading that production numbers the first year are going to be around 15,000. Twice as many Porsches were sold in the US last year.
ignorant wrote:Nashco wrote:Grtechguy wrote:Of course the smaller, pure (non-hybrid) EV gets a better fuel economy rating. The issue with Joe America is that noone is going to pay $40,000 for a damn car the size of a cobalt from "New GM" .
fixed it for you.
I think you under estimate peoples desire to tell people how cool they are because their car gets 230mpg and how they didnt use any gas on the way to work today.
People dont give a crap about the economics of this type of vehicle. They buy it for the same reason most luxury cars are purchased, to impress their friends.
Bob: HEY JANE, TODAY ON THE WAY TO WORK I DIDNT USE ANY GAS, MY NEW CAR GETS 230MPG (i wonder if Jane will have sex with me now?)
GlennS wrote:I think you under estimate peoples desire to tell people how cool they are because their car gets 230mpg and how they didnt use any gas on the way to work today.
People dont give a crap about the economics of this type of vehicle. They buy it for the same reason most luxury cars are purchased, to impress their friends.
Bob: HEY JANE, TODAY ON THE WAY TO WORK I DIDNT USE ANY GAS, MY NEW CAR GETS 230MPG (i wonder if Jane will have sex with me now?)
In a recession. $40k for a car the size of a cobalt. Sold at a massive loss by GM..
Tell me.. why this is a great business decision, when even GM admits in their own SEC filings, recently, that their competetion is producing similar product and with more available cash(read it's going to be better)..
GM said:"Our competitors and others are pursuing similar technologies and other competing technologies, in some cases with more money available; there can be no assurance that they will not acquire similar or superior technologies sooner than we do."
I understand the buzz it's generating, but if it's such a drain on a cash strapped organization.. WHY?
http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/11/chevy-volt-nabs-shaky-230-mpg-rating-might-not-...
seeker589 wrote:It would take almost 10 years for a 50mpg Prius to pay for itself in gas savings with average miles traveled.
It'll probably take longer than that once you factor in a new battery pack, I doubt they'll last ten years.
Shawn
Trans_Maro wrote:seeker589 wrote:It would take almost 10 years for a 50mpg Prius to pay for itself in gas savings with average miles traveled.
It'll probably take longer than that once you factor in a new battery pack, I doubt they'll last ten years.
Shawn
I take it you don't know that the batteries have a 10 year/150k mile warranty coverage....? The battery is included in the emissions warranty coverage in CA (and other CA-adopting states) so the manufacturers have built the parts to outlive the 10 year/150k mile requirement.
Bryce
In reply to Trans_Maro:
After my father bought his Prius - I wanted to get on board(I really didn't like the idea - I told him to get a luxury sedan and live it up - he is 78!) and did some research on warrantee claims on the battery packs. At the time - only about two years ago - only one battery pack has had to be replaced and there were many Priuses (Priuii?) that had over 200K miles with their original battery packs - some with over 300K.
Remember - it is a Toyota - Toyota can't afford to sell a car with the media coverage and hype that they generate with questionable long-term quality. Come to think of it neither can GM.
MrJoshua wrote:We countered that it was capable of long commutes with no degradation in performance, and that just because it may not be right for you doesn't mean it shouldn't be produced.
Oh contraire my fine feathered friend. I read in C/D (I think) that GM has intentionally reduced the power of the gas engine so that when you are driving the car using the "generator" you are only getting about 60% of the power that's available from a fully charged batery. This was done on purpose by GM. They say they are trying to encourage folks to plug the car in every night instead of using the engine to charge the battery during the morning commute.
This irks me to no end! It's typical of GM to have the mindset "we know what's best for you better than you do." Why would you hobble your car?
I wasn't aware of the battery pack warranty.
I've only got my experiences with cordless tool L-ion battery packs.
It's a good thing Milwaukee offers a 5-year on theirs, so far only about 10% are going to make it that far. They're not the only company with problems.
One of the problems I see is when the car is out of warranty and the motor/battery/control system dies, who's going to want to pay the bill to replace it?
Plenty of conventional cars cost a lot of money for major repairs and get thrown out even when theyre still useable.
I think cars with costly repair bills are wasteful in the long run. My '67 Jeep show no signs of dying any time soon and neither does my '96 F-150. As long as they're running there will be no environmental impact of building a new car for me, just whatever pollution they pump out.
Shawn
When EFI first came to be and cars had all sorts of complex computers, sensors, etc. the long term maintenance probably seemed absurd. These days it's actually easier to find somebody to service your injected car than to find somebody who knows how to rebuild and adjust a carb. You can build a completely custom injection system for chump change.
Fast forward ten years...I expect the same to be the case with something as complex as the Volt. Hell, people (like me) are already doing it, just not to the level of stuff like Megasquirt is with injection. Why should it have to be expensive? Sure, you can spend a lot of money maintaining stuff, same goes for gas cars.
Bryce
DrBoost wrote:MrJoshua wrote:We countered that it was capable of long commutes with no degradation in performance, and that just because it may not be right for you doesn't mean it shouldn't be produced.
Oh contraire my fine feathered friend. I read in C/D (I think) that GM has intentionally reduced the power of the gas engine so that when you are driving the car using the "generator" you are only getting about 60% of the power that's available from a fully charged batery. This was done on purpose by GM. They say they are trying to encourage folks to plug the car in every night instead of using the engine to charge the battery during the morning commute.
This irks me to no end! It's typical of GM to have the mindset "we know what's best for you better than you do." Why would you hobble your car?
My point was that the Volt will, as Dr Boost mentioned, be somewhat of a curiosity (at least at first) due to full power range restrictions, I'm not going to list my concerns all over again.
Add to that the $40k price and you have a niche car. That means many people would have a Volt as a commuter car, then a conventional vehicle for long weekend trips (maybe even just rent something). But what's the point of buying a $40k car which will sit in your driveway over the weekend as you spend your hard earned cash renting something else? For the same $40k you could buy 2 Focuses (Focii?), one for you, one for the S/O. Sure, they wouldn't get 230 MPG but at least you'd be able to get home.
Like Bryce said, as the technology gets better we will see much more useable hybrids and electrics. I'm looking forward to that. In the meantime, I'm going to be practical about the whole thing.
I dont understand why you would park it on the weekends, thats what the range extender feature is for.
