GM Chevy Volt

[Skotty]

I believe the Volt has a mode that effectively locks out the battery. Designed mostly for Europe you can charge at home then drive to the city on gas then switch to EV mode and drive in the city gas free.

So if you are going on a trip of more than 50 miles you can decide what part of the trip you want to be in EV mode.

This is called "hold" mode. It was added to US Volts in the 2013 model year I think. There were some questions about what affect hold mode would have based on regulations and such that may have delayed it's introduction in the US. I'm not sure there was any intent for it to be primarily for Europe.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

So it's going to go from 38 miles of range, to what, 50?

Not really known at this point. They've just said more. The 2015 (and late 2014) Volt added another 0.6kWh (pretty much all usable) to 17.1kWh, but GM maybe didn't bump rated range because the new car's coming and they didn't want thunder stolen. Some people have speculated a 19kWh battery.

Mary Barra
1) reaffirmed the old 40 mile target
2) said that people wanted more EV range

So, maybe just in the mid-40s to allow for conditions. But, the Volt's current EV range is such that at the margins it's competing with short-range BEVs so they might prefer to push towards a 50 mile AER to try and help steal some of those BEV sales.

Anyone else looking forward to the Detroit show in January?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm thinking more like 39.

Seriously though, it sounds like a good batch of improvements. I drive a Volt and it could use slightly better efficiency and acceleration.

And they've particularly said "low-speed acceleration", which is where it really needs it. From a stop there's a lag and then limited acceleration, but when you're driving 35 to 55 it feels much more responsive. If they can make it as responsive at low speeds as an EV is expected to be it'll be a good thing.

 

[ecarfan]

So it's going to go from 38 miles of range, to what, 50?

Probably. And that is why I wrote that GM is not putting sir heart and soul into the Volt, and by extension, EVs.

 

[Electroman]

Now the question is, will it be 20% more expensive ?

 

[Saghost]

Now the question is, will it be 20% more expensive ?

It's supposed to be substantially cheaper - at least, cheaper to make. We'll have to see how GM prices it.
Walter

 

[rabar10]

So it's going to go from 38 miles of range, to what, 50?

Probably. And that is why I wrote that GM is not putting sir heart and soul into the Volt, and by extension, EVs.

Disagree. Volt was designed around the premise of limited EV-only range plus an ICE, where the EV range is still sufficient for most daily trips. Within that design, you don't need 100+ miles of EV-only range for range sake, as the ICE is there for longer-range trips, and the extra battery would drive the price of the car higher as well as taking up more weight/space.

Now if you add capacity to also increase performance (more battery at same cell discharge rate = more power), you might be going a direction that I thought they would take with the Cadillac ELR. But they didn't do that.

 

[ggies07]

I really don't understand why they are still working on the Volt. The idea is to transition to sustainable transportation. Mary just said the Volt is "leap forward" automotive technology. Really? It still has an engine in it, a car like the Model S is leap forward technology.

After the Model 3 comes out the Volt idea is dead. I don't understand the "yeah, but it's for the demo. that wants to go anywhere after the battery is depleted" theory either. So that's leap forward technology? To be trapped by the old technology we are trying to get away from?

I'm sorry, the Volt was a great idea until Tesla showed how an EV could be made.

Edit:

As I was reading the "It's the batteries stupid" thread, I saw a post from tomas that had this link. This part right here explains my frustration with the Volt idea and others:

Argonne roadshow aims to spark links

For instance, when scientists told automakers they planned to build a battery that would allow an electric vehicle to travel 500 miles on a charge, companies told them what they really wanted was a much cheaper battery that could propel a vehicle 80 miles on a charge. Such a breakthrough would allow plug-in extended range hybrid vehicles that switch to gasoline after a battery runs out to be reduced in price by more than $10,000.

So companies are settling for profit and not "forward leaps"

 

[Saghost]

I look at the Volt as the lizard that can break the chicken and egg paradigm.

For the longest time, EV people were saying they can make real, useful electric cars - but they needed charging infrastructure to make it happen, while people were looking and not buying the cars because there's no infrastructure and no one would build infrastructure because there's no demand.

A car like the Volt can reduce gas consumption by a factor of five or more for a fraction of the battery cost of a Tesla with no infrastructure changes. Better yet, it creates a legitimate demand for the needed charging solutions without requiring them in order to work.

The perfect car? No. Not the ultimate solution to personal transportation either - but a large step in the right direction that's easy for anyone to make.

Once Tesla gets Superchargers along every route you might want to travel the Model 3 will be a better answer if the cost is close - but the Volt can give many of the benefits right now for most everyone that drives a compact car.
Walter

 

[ElSupreme]

As I was reading the "It's the batteries stupid" thread, I saw a post from tomas that had this link. This part right here explains my frustration with the Volt idea and others:

Argonne roadshow aims to spark links

For instance, when scientists told automakers they planned to build a battery that would allow an electric vehicle to travel 500 miles on a charge, companies told them what they really wanted was a much cheaper battery that could propel a vehicle 80 miles on a charge. Such a breakthrough would allow plug-in extended range hybrid vehicles that switch to gasoline after a battery runs out to be reduced in price by more than $10,000.

So companies are settling for profit and not "forward leaps"

I hear what you are saying but which vehicle would have a larger impact?

An $80k car that travels 12.5k miles a year on electricity. That can do long distance trips on heavily traveled but highly specific routes.
A $40k car that travels 10k miles a year on electricity, and 2.5k miles on gasoline. That can pretty much travel any distance anywhere.

You will sell a lot more of the less expensive car. The less expensive car can leverage existing infrastructure and allow almost limitless freedom in travel. Sure pure EVs are well more pure. And are definitely the end goal. But Volt and other plug in vehicles are a very important market, and most likely will be for a decade or two. Infrastracture and install base of ICE vehicles make the transition to EVs a long process. Even if 100% of the people who could use an EV switched when they needed a new car we are talking a 20+ year transition.

Even if those prices are $35k and $45K that is a large incremental monthly cost. And if it requires someone to rent a car, or fly, for a vacation the marginal cost gets even greater.

Sure I don't want to buy a Volt, or ICE plug in, and I wont. I didn't buy a Prius, or other hybrid. Because they were half-steps towards something that I wanted. But they aren't worthless cars. And a 80% solution can have a bigger impact if they sell more volume. It's easy to be ideologically pure, but in realitiy it isn't always the best or most meaningful path to change.

 

[Skotty]

I really don't understand why they are still working on the Volt. The idea is to transition to sustainable transportation. Mary just said the Volt is "leap forward" automotive technology. Really? It still has an engine in it, a car like the Model S is leap forward technology.

After the Model 3 comes out the Volt idea is dead. I don't understand the "yeah, but it's for the demo. that wants to go anywhere after the battery is depleted" theory either. So that's leap forward technology? To be trapped by the old technology we are trying to get away from?

I'm sorry, the Volt was a great idea until Tesla showed how an EV could be made.

Edit:

As I was reading the "It's the batteries stupid" thread, I saw a post from tomas that had this link. This part right here explains my frustration with the Volt idea and others:

Argonne roadshow aims to spark links



So companies are settling for profit and not "forward leaps"

The problem is you are getting ahead of yourself. The Model 3 isn't here yet. The SuperCharger network is still under construction. Destination charging is still a problem for many people. Tesla is the future, but the Volt will remain relevant for quite a few more years. Though if the majority of your beef is just with the legacy manufacturers largely wanting to just rest on their laurels, that I completely understand.

 

[ggies07]

I hear what you are saying but which vehicle would have a larger impact?

An $80k car that travels 12.5k miles a year on electricity. That can do long distance trips on heavily traveled but highly specific routes.
A $40k car that travels 10k miles a year on electricity, and 2.5k miles on gasoline. That can pretty much travel any distance anywhere.

You will sell a lot more of the less expensive car. The less expensive car can leverage existing infrastructure and allow almost limitless freedom in travel. Sure pure EVs are well more pure. And are definitely the end goal. But Volt and other plug in vehicles are a very important market, and most likely will be for a decade or two. Infrastracture and install base of ICE vehicles make the transition to EVs a long process. Even if 100% of the people who could use an EV switched when they needed a new car we are talking a 20+ year transition.

Even if those prices are $35k and $45K that is a large incremental monthly cost. And if it requires someone to rent a car, or fly, for a vacation the marginal cost gets even greater.

Sure I don't want to buy a Volt, or ICE plug in, and I wont. I didn't buy a Prius, or other hybrid. Because they were half-steps towards something that I wanted. But they aren't worthless cars. And a 80% solution can have a bigger impact if they sell more volume. It's easy to be ideologically pure, but in realitiy it isn't always the best or most meaningful path to change.

The problem is you are getting ahead of yourself. The Model 3 isn't here yet. The SuperCharger network is still under construction. Destination charging is still a problem for many people. Tesla is the future, but the Volt will remain relevant for quite a few more years. Though if the majority of your beef is just with the legacy manufacturers largely wanting to just rest on their laurels, that I completely understand.

I see those views. I guess I just have a problem with Mary saying it's "leap forward" technology, because it's not anymore... Also, I have a strong/strict view about not messing around with this transition and I don't want to see the majority of consumers to think the next leap forward is only a hybrid. I don't want them to think that driving around for 40 miles and then using gas is the way to go, that's not the end game. Tesla has shown us we are a way more advanced society than that.

 

[TEG]

I see those views. I guess I just have a problem with Mary saying it's "leap forward" technology, because it's not anymore... Also, I have a strong/strict view about not messing around with this transition and I don't want to see the majority of consumers to think the next leap forward is only a hybrid. I don't want them to think that driving around for 40 miles and then using gas is the way to go, that's not the end game. Tesla has shown us we are a way more advanced society than that.

FYI, in case you didn't know, there is a thread here for those wanting to debate the "purity" of desire to completely avoid internal combustion in vehicles.
It is:
Pure BEV Dogma
Be forewarned, the arguments never seem to get settled either way (except in our own minds.)

 

[JRP3]

I'd say that thread has less to do with "purity" and more to do with accurate terminology.

 

[Doug_G]

Just FYI, I now move all "troll" references to snippiness

 

[rolosrevenge]

Just FYI, I now move all "troll" references to snippiness

Including your own?

 

[mknox]

I see those views. I guess I just have a problem with Mary saying it's "leap forward" technology, because it's not anymore...

I always try and distinguish between marketing-speak and the facts. Isn't every product refresh referred to as "New and Improved"? They're not going to sell may cars if they say "Buy the Volt because we've made some incremental improvements". "Leap Forward" sounds a lot more enticing!

 

[Doug_G]

Including your own?

Just people who quote me.

 

[gameon]

any pic of new model...

 

[GSP]

Car pics will likely not be released until the Jan 10th Detroit Auto Show.

Here is a pic of the most important part, the hybrid electric transaxle:

GM unveils more efficient 2016 Volt powertrain - SAE International

GSP

 

[Kofi]

The next generation Volt should have more SS inspired styling, and less an American Prius.