I ain't sayin' nuthin. Just posting up some news.

I suppose I should say right off that I like the Volt. Sure, it's not a be all end all, but as a usable, efficient car, it's fine. And it looks good too.

That said, I think there are a few issues, mainly the big one JG touched on; the marketing sucks. I want to go a bit further though. It's not just marketing, it's education. To the average Mr. and Mrs. USA, they want to know two things. How much is it going to cost when things start breaking, and who is going to be able to repair it. EVERYONE I talk to about these have those two questions first and foremost. And I think they are questions that are not answered to any real degree. Plus not everyone wants to lease.

The real problem though as I see it, is that it is the wrong vehicle. By that, I mean most people in their target group buy SUVs and Trucks. And to me, this is where the biggest help could come. For reference, my son just bought a new F150 with Ecotech. For comparison, he could have bought a Volt, a Fiat 500 and had change left over, so cost was not a factor. They also have a new Explorer. While both have decent fuel mileage, imagine taking the truck to 40mpg or the Explorer to 50? To me, that's a larger plus than 100mpg in mid sized car. Sure it's like saying build a 12sec car for $200X, but in the real world, trucks and SUVs would have the biggest impact.

I think if we ever start to embrace this technology, and eventually we will embrace something besides internal combustion, it's going to have to go mainstream first. So far, only niche cars.

One other comment. I do work with a guy who's previous job was with the company that manufacturers the batteries for the Volt and other electric cars, including the Fisker, and it's scary when you learn about them. They are not exactly environmentally friendly in any way in manufacture or disposal.

Flight Service wrote: I hope... you feel good about reviving GM and being able to steal your commuter money back from your employer.

Listen, folks, knock yourselves out with your self-satisfied assumptions that are not based on fact, but as a rule, it's best to try not to wave them in front of the actual holders of the facts. JG is stealing nothing from his employer. He came to me with a cost calculation and offered to pay for the electricity he used. I was happy to supply the pennies worth of electricity a day as a very cost-effective employee benefit. I just wish I could make all y'all who do not work for me happy with that small a cash outlay.

Don't get me doing smart right-wing capitalistic math, or I might decide to tighten the E36 M3 out of this particular fiscal policy.

Margie

In reply to dculberson:

You think I don't know that?

I'm out on this one on the tech side, I am comfortable in my position on it. I have seen no data from any fan boi on this site, GM press releases, or GM engineers that own them (who agree with my short hand on it), or the guys that build the thing.

Like I said before, enjoy your car, just because I do not bow at the alter of GM means you don't have a good ride.

Tom Suddard wrote: Oh, then I misunderstood. Frickin' planetary gears!

"berkeleyin planetary gears, how do they work?!"

Marjorie Suddard wrote:

Flight Service wrote: I hope... you feel good about reviving GM and being able to steal your commuter money back from your employer.

Listen, folks, knock yourselves out with your self-satisfied assumptions that are not based on fact, but as a rule, it's best to try not to wave them in front of the actual holders of the facts. JG is stealing nothing from his employer. He came to me with a cost calculation and offered to pay for the electricity he used. I was happy to supply the pennies worth of electricity a day as a very cost-effective employee benefit. I just wish I could make all y'all who do not work for me happy with that small a cash outlay. Don't get me doing smart right-wing capitalistic math, or I might decide to tighten the E36 M3 out of this particular fiscal policy. Margie

Margie,

It was a comment from Knurled not JG. JG never brought up the kindness of his employer.

On a side note: The standard business model 5 years ago in the automotive business was loose money the first year, break even the second, and turn a profit in the third. This model comes from tooling and development costs.

EV/hybrids aren't hitting that model. Long term strategy required. So that begs the question of OP can a company that is not in favor of the people who just gave it a ton of money that they will never see back afford to take the long view on a car that the funding populace doesn't really like.

But if they don't move forward they are dead company walking. Danged if you do, danged if you don't

Marjorie Suddard wrote:

Flight Service wrote: I hope... you feel good about reviving GM and being able to steal your commuter money back from your employer.

Listen, folks, knock yourselves out with your self-satisfied assumptions that are not based on fact, but as a rule, it's best to try not to wave them in front of the actual holders of the facts. JG is stealing nothing from his employer. He came to me with a cost calculation and offered to pay for the electricity he used. I was happy to supply the pennies worth of electricity a day as a very cost-effective employee benefit. I just wish I could make all y'all who do not work for me happy with that small a cash outlay. Don't get me doing smart right-wing capitalistic math, or I might decide to tighten the E36 M3 out of this particular fiscal policy. Margie

Hey, after reading JG's last column about the burrito blowout I think the dude needs a raise.

racerdave600 wrote: One other comment. I do work with a guy who's previous job was with the company that manufacturers the batteries for the Volt and other electric cars, including the Fisker, and it's scary when you learn about them. They are not exactly environmentally friendly in any way in manufacture or disposal.

Who's disposing Lithium Ion car batteries? They are being recycled or used as UPS battery backups in businesses and homes after their automotive lifespan is up.

Flight Service wrote: In reply to dculberson: You think I don't know that? I'm out on this one on the tech side, I am comfortable in my position on it. I have seen no data from any fan boi on this site, GM press releases, or GM engineers that own them (who agree with my short hand on it), or the guys that build the thing. Like I said before, enjoy your car, just because I do not bow at the alter of GM means you don't have a good ride.

So because I know more than you do about my own car, I must "bow at the altar of GM?" After owning 120 cars from most major manufaciturers over the last 37 years of car driving, you think I bow at the altar of GM? berkeley you.

Unless you or your moron engineer buddy can come over here and prove to ME how MY car uses it's engine to drive the wheels like a berkeleying Prius, then I'm going to write your comments off as the typical engineer "I am an engineer, so I know better than anyone" BS.

wvumtnbkr wrote: In reply to Tom Suddard: I get that electric engines are more efficient. That doesn't mean they get power for free in a true hybrid. They are not 100% efficient. In a "regular hybrid" there is still an ICE that is generating the electricity. Therefore you are still converting energy 1 extra time. Even with a ICE that is 10% or 15% more efficient (a HUGE improvement) over its normal car ICE equivalent, I still don't get how you come out ahead. Your graph shows an electric motor vs an ICE. This is NOT the comparison. The comparison is between a MORE efficient ICE + electric motor VS. a standard (larger rpm range) ICE. That's 2 devices that turn potential energy into rotary motion vs. 1. However, this is all totally off topic and doesn't matter as soon as you are able to plug in the car to charge the battery. When you can do this, it becomes potential energy into rotary motion. This comparison makes sense (this is what your chart above is comparing). Maybe I should start another thread on this. Rob R.

It's more efficient because the ICE can run for only brief periods at peak efficiency, then shut down. The gross difference in efficiency over a stop-and-go daily commute overcomes the losses from the conversion.

Chris_V wrote: Unless you or your moron engineer buddy can come over here and prove to ME how MY car uses it's engine to drive the wheels like a berkeleying Prius, then I'm going to write your comments off as the typical engineer "I am an engineer, so I know better than anyone" BS.

Hey- I take offense at this senseless, stereotypical engineer bashing!

The Volt is the most technologically sophisticated mass-produced car in the world. GM makes it. Call me a "homer" but I like the fact that it is made by a U.S. company.

For SOME people it works incredibly well. (JG used .6 gal of gas in his first few hundred miles) It also doesn't suck electricity at a terrible rate. For SOME applications it is amazing.

This isn't a cure-all for every automotive application. However, if we could convert say 10% of our cars to this sort of propulsion over the next 10 years how much less fuel would we need? Do we really have any interest in decreasing our dependence on foreign oil, or not? Isn't the increased stability caused by this worth a few tax dollars? Perhaps more military action to protect our oil interests would be cheaper?

I've driven the Volt--- I've seen JG's direct experience with it. IMHO it's one of the coolest cars that has ever been released to the public. It isn't going to solve all problems, it isn't going to cure all of societies ills, but in the history of the automobile it is an important milestone.

Keep in mind the Veyron isn't a model T--- automotive evolution happens.

volvoclearinghouse wrote:

Chris_V wrote: Unless you or your moron engineer buddy can come over here and prove to ME how MY car uses it's engine to drive the wheels like a berkeleying Prius, then I'm going to write your comments off as the typical engineer "I am an engineer, so I know better than anyone" BS.

Hey- I take offense at this senseless, stereotypical engineer bashing!

I couldn't love GRM the magazine or the website more, and believe me, I don't like to be the P.C police or anything or the guy who has a problem with everything thing, but I do have a problem with this...

I find it a bit offensive that you use terms like “Engineer” etc etc... for your little descriptions or whatever in the threads. I myself am not an engineer [but I really am], but I feel sensitivity for people with engineering backgrounds, and my Girlfriend is pursuing her masters in the field.

These terms although I'm pretty sure are not even real words, are obviously meant to resemble the words used to describe people with engineering impairments, and it appears that they are used on these boards in a joking sense which, as I view it, makes light of people who are afflicted with no engineering skill.

Can we change the direction and bring this back to a happy place?

I love the idea of cars like this as despite the pollution from making the batteries there’s a lot to be said for controlling where and how the pollution is released (electricity production) as opposed to out the tail pipe in in and around urban areas. The Volt along with many of the newer plug in hybrids are a big step forward in making what are effectively pure electric cars for day to day commuting and errands practical for families who want to travel out of town at times as well without having to look for charge points. But forget that. Does this thing work on the track, at an autocross or even a rallycross. Is JG going to thrash his in more normal GRM testing environments as well as regular schlepping around? All I’ve seen online is the wheel and tire upgrade, is there anything more coming in the future?

Adrian_Thompson wrote: Does this thing work on the track, at an autocross or even a rallycross. Is JG going to thrash his in more normal GRM testing environments as well as regular schlepping around? All I’ve seen online is the wheel and tire upgrade, is there anything more coming in the future?

This. I mean, it doesn't have to be a great autocrosser for me to want one (I actually think I'm going to dislike my WRX as an autocrosser after years in older SP and SM rear-drive cars), but I am curious. Or even just about driving impressions on a twisting public roads with aggression set to "responsibly fun-loving".

Chris_V wrote: So because I know more than you do about my own car, I must "bow at the altar of GM?" After owning 120 cars from most major manufaciturers over the last 37 years of car driving, you think I bow at the altar of GM? berkeley you. Unless you or your moron engineer buddy can come over here and prove to ME how MY car uses it's engine to drive the wheels like a berkeleying Prius, then I'm going to write your comments off as the typical engineer "I am an engineer, so I know better than anyone" BS.

Calm down now, don't be testy.

Flight Service wrote:

Chris_V wrote: So because I know more than you do about my own car, I must "bow at the altar of GM?" After owning 120 cars from most major manufaciturers over the last 37 years of car driving, you think I bow at the altar of GM? berkeley you. Unless you or your moron engineer buddy can come over here and prove to ME how MY car uses it's engine to drive the wheels like a berkeleying Prius, then I'm going to write your comments off as the typical engineer "I am an engineer, so I know better than anyone" BS.

Calm down now, don't be testy.

Please don't ruin all the goodwill you've gained in the Good God Almighty thread by trolling. Playing nicely is a requirement of this board.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: Is JG going to thrash his in more normal GRM testing environments as well as regular schlepping around? All I’ve seen online is the wheel and tire upgrade, is there anything more coming in the future?

Yeah. So far it's just been a matter of scheduling. Then when the VW TDI came along it threw another scheduling wrench in the mix.

I've got a complete set of KW coilovers for the Volt that we'll be experimenting with. It'll do plenty of track and autoX testing, but it might not make it to a rallycross. I don't think it has the ground clearance to pull that off, and I doubt the lease company would be too happy.

jg

In reply to Joe Gearin:

and "berkeley you" and calling people MORON engineers is playing nicely?

I can't help this guy thinks that owning a car makes him an expert over people who spend their lives designing and build the damn things.

Tit for tat my friend tit for tat.

Flight Service wrote: In reply to Joe Gearin: and "berkeley you" and calling people MORON engineers is playing nicely? I can't help this guy thinks that owning a car makes him an expert over people who spend their lives designing and build the damn things. Tit for tat my friend tit for tat.

This board works best when it is an honest exchange of information. You are correct, calling people Morons is not acceptable. However discounting an actual owner's experiences of what the car is like is also not called for-- regardless of what your engineer friend says. (he is welcome to join the conversation though and I'm sure we'd all like to hear his input)

The Volt raises blood pressure, which is one of the reasons JG leased one-- to find out the real deal.

Play nicely people.....or the ban hammer will be brought into play. When we are courteous of one another's opinions this is a great board. When we insult one another and get angry.....it loses it's appeal and becomes just another forum that no one will want to take part in.

For the record, I never discounted the owners experience, just his/hers knowledge of the vehicles technical workings.

It isn't a Miata