-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
GM Chevy Volt
- Thread starter vfx
- Start date
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I'm not sure if you are deliberately ignoring the point I made in my earlier post on this...
You claim the Volt was made with "better engineering choices", yet much of your list have nothing to do with how well engineered the platform is, but rather the design choices made. Things like size, what options are available, available horsepower vs. energy usage, display widgets, etc...
A car with a wheelbase larger than another car can be just as well engineered, lol....
Last edited:
ICEV = Internal combustion engine(d) vehicle.
ICEV - alternator - transmission[ +power split transmission] + battery + motors + charger ~= PHEV
BEV + engine + exhaust + catalytic converter + fuel tank[ +power split transmission] ~= PHEV
Whichever way you look at it PHEV adds components to a BEV or ICEV. The result is that it can _never_ match costs. To be successful the cost of electrification must continue to fall, and the cheaper batteries become, the lower the price differential on the battery, which is where the "EREV" cost savings come from. And the BEV eliminates the ICE and all the other parts needed to support it, which can allow them to be cheaper than an EREV. Also, in terms lowering battery cost, long-range BEV batteries could be cheaper per kWh because their larger capacity allows for a lower power density.
The hybrid miles need fuel. For sustainable transportation you need to be able to power vehicles with renewable fuel. Renewable electricity can meet a high percentage of need. Biofuel can only meet a small percentage of transportation miles. Fuel synthesis would be more energy intensive. If we can't even get compact passenger transportation to 95%, there's no hope to meet the needs of heavy transportation.
You can't argue on one hand that it's OK for the Volt to be 80% electric or that it's not good enough for BEVs to meet 80% of driving needs, and then say that it doesn't matter that the Volt can't meet the needs of many families. In terms of reasonable demand, I think that the 4 v 5 argument is a bit of a red herring. The real problem is the small size. Put the Gen 2 system into a mid-size and I think it'd be a bigger draw.
You wrote that Voltec was special engineering. I was merely pointing out that I don't see anything particularly special in what they did, given that (a) a lot of the concept could already be seen in the Prius transmission, (b) the 2nd gen transmission is more like the Prius transmission in order to be usable in hybrids and (c) part of the capability depends on the clutches, which was something Toyota and Honda tried to avoid with their hybrid transmissions in order to lower cost.
The "has to be" is highly questionable. Many Tesla owners only have BEVs. The main reason long-distance BEV owners need a back-up ICE is because of currently limited charging infrastructure. But that's not a limitation of the technology, that's just the state of the market. There are over 120,000 gas stations in the USA. If there were 1% of that total Superchargers sites in the USA, not only would the network cover the Interstates, it'd cover the vast majority of the US Numbered Highways as well, and possibly even all of them, due to the many intersections.
Also, large reduction in demand for gasoline would lead to a large reduction in the number of gas stations.
I have no problem with the concept of EREVs, but I think they need more range than the Volt 2's range to be a long-term solution to making transportation sustainable. (Although in terms of the current market, cost reduction is currently more important) But I think that over time, expansion of infrastructure, cost reductions and improvements in EV tech, plus familiarity with the technology would shift a lot of the passenger vehicle market to BEV.
I was just pointing out that if you're posting on a site related to a long-distance BEV company, don't be surprised to find lots of people who consider the Volt concept not to be a suitable solution.
Moderator Note: This argument has been getting a wee bit testy, and occasionally bordering on personal attacks. I would like to avoid moving the lot of it to Snippiness, so please tone it down and keep the arguments impersonal and reasoned.
If this discussion goes any further down the slippery slope, I will snip most of the last 3-4 pages. You have been warned.
If this discussion goes any further down the slippery slope, I will snip most of the last 3-4 pages. You have been warned.
Well, I've made several positive comments about the Volt. As of yet, I've not felt that they've been dismissed or refuted.
Assuming I'm part of "everyone", I haven't felt the need to put it down. Again, I've' complimented it.
I do, however, prefer to be accurate in discussing it. It's a well-engineered hybrid platform. It can accomplish ~10% of it's driving before engaging it's engine. After that it operates predominantly in a serial-hybrid mode, although it also has some parallel hybrid modes of operation.
What I suspect it is that you might have a hard time putting your finger on, is the objection by some folks here, myself included, to the attempt to shoehorn the Volt in to categories it doesn't fit in... for many years by Chevy themselves, although they've backed away from that. As a result many folks, owners included, have repeated rather misleading data... perhaps inadvertently.
The platform is not strictly an EV with a gasoline generator that extends range. Thus to categorize it as an EV rather than a hybrid had seemed disingenuous.
The usage case for some subset of users doesn't dictate it's architecture. Just because some percentage of folks only drive it 25 miles a day and rarely engage the gas engine makes it an EV no more that folks who drive it 200 miles a day make it an ICE vehicle. In both cases the car platform design remains a hybrid, with some users exploiting different aspects of it's capability.
So while your perception is that folks are insulting the car, my perception is there are some Volt owners sensitive to the attempts to catagorize their car in a class they prefer it not be in.
There have been blatant exceptions (such as a couple of direct insults I've seen), but those have seemed rather atypical.
Agreed on both counts.
Last edited:
Completely agree on the Volt being a bit miraculous. After I test drove the first one in Seattle I was left with the impression it would do well, but was very worried about all the new mechanical and electrical tech. Unbelievable kudos to the GM engineers who've made that car perform well and with high quality as I haven't heard about many quality issues over the years.
Drucifer
Active Member
I will agree that the Volt is not the "end game". The end game is the elimination of petroleum products in transportation. The Volt is a bridge, but it is a bridge that may be needed for some time to come. That time may be 10 years or 30 years or even more, depending on how fast the world can move to BEV solutions.
OK, better "design choices" depending on use case**
**footnote for future space for additional clauses and caveats to satisfy members of this forum.
OK, better "design choices" depending on use case**
**footnote for future space for additional clauses and caveats to satisfy members of this forum.
Last edited:
The 2016 Volt is rather nice and is a real improvement over previous years. Besides the better range, I also appreciate the thoughtful improvements they've made to the interior.
I've suggested it to several friends where it makes sense for their particular situation.
I've suggested it to several friends where it makes sense for their particular situation.
Bangor Bob
Member
Within the next 5-10 years, for most passenger vehicles that will not be an engineering or financial choice, but will be one purely of personal preference/(perceived) risk acceptance choices. With batteries < $100/kWh, putting 300 miles of batteries into a nearly any vehicle should be cheaper than putting in a mid-range ICE + all the support and pollution control systems. And while the traditional automakers are known for being slow-moving, conservative, tech-averse... They are also all about doing things the cheapest possible way for the biggest possible margin.
The Volt is a decent bridge in the meantime for those who can't or won't put high-5 to 6 figures into a depreciating asset but can't make the low-range EV's work. Certainly GM made a few odd choices with the first-generation (3.3kW charging, 91 octane and poor charge-sustaining mileage). The second-gen corrects some of those, but introduces a few new oddities as well. On the up side, very few drive unit replacements with the 1st-gen Volt - just a few transaxles swapped for an improperly assembled bearing over a narrow date-range.
It has been asked "how much of this is better engineering?" Here are my two cents (probably not even worth that. LOL):
1) partly due to smaller size (design choice, not better engineering), but also more efficient components from AC inlet to the drive wheels, which is better engineering
2) clearly better engineering
3) design choice, but also better human factors engineering (Tesla has a better user interface overall, by far, but not this one item)
4) clearly better engineering
5) design choice
6) pricing choice (GM can lose money if they choose; Tesla needs to fund future development)
7) design choice, but perhaps another example of better human factors engineering (if you like the green ball)
8) design choice (and a much better one I think)
I will add a few more examples of better engineering on the Volt:
1) Charge based on departure time option (better human factors engineering)
2) Quick and easy lift pedal regen selection, by selecting D or L, or steering wheel paddles in the 2016 (ditto)
3) Best Quality Relibiity and Durability of any three year old car in its size class (class C). This take lots of engineering prowess and hard work for design, manufacturing, and supplier quality engineers.
Of course, Tesla has done better engineering in many areas. That is another list. In my opinion, the Volt, the Model S, and the Model X are by far the best cars on sale today, at any price.
GSP
The delay you are referring to was when the transmission switched from power-split mode to series mode when stronger acceleration was required when the gas engine was running. That's been fixed with the new transmission design in the gen 2 Volt. The gen 2 ICE is also generally a lot quieter and more "refined" when it has to be used.
- - - Updated - - -
For the record, very few drive units were swapped due to this problem. GM quickly realized the bearing issue could be easily fixed without removing the drive unit from the vehicle. The problem was caused by a failure of the bearing cage around the larger motor unit axle and it happened to a random small number of cars primarily during the first 3 years of production. The underlying cause seems to have been fixed since there are few reports of this on newer cars on the GM-Volt forum.
+1. I have a friend who doesn't want to winter drive his Model S, so I suggested a 2016 Volt. He liked it and bought one.
Skotty
2014 S P85 | 2023 F-150L
Absolutely. I stand by that statement. Pretty much everyone not in a CARB state would probably agree.
The Volt is a good car, but it does have it's flaws. I drive a 2012 Volt and can speak to some of them.
The 5th seat issue is mostly a non-issue, made vocal by a small minority of folks who need to carry 5. The bigger problem with seating is the lack of rear seat room. I have to move my seat so far forward to make my kid fit in the back that it is extremely uncomfortable and annoying.
The engine rattles on initial acceleration, especially on turns. Always has since new. I attribute that to it being a Chevy.
ERDTT is exceptionally annoying in the winter, especially considering most of my trips in town are only a few miles, so the mileage ends up being really bad despite only using maybe 2 miles of the electric range.
They have made some great improvements for the next gen Volt. I'm glad they did. But it's not a real car until 2017.
scottf200
Well-Known Member
Why haven't you installed the few dollar fix for that? Of course, you realize you are in the minority of driving only a few miles so they have to go with the statistical norm.
Breezy
Member
I'm not in a CARB state and I disagree. :smile: The 2016 Volt is on sale in Canada. Definitely a real car.
Skotty
2014 S P85 | 2023 F-150L
If it's the fix I'm aware of, it's not approved by Chevrolet and technically is grounds for voiding the warranty. Tempting though, as with ERDTT, a lot of my trips end up looking like this:
Last edited:
These are apparently the new features in the MY 2017 Volt - which will be sold nationwide:
New features confirmed for MY 2017 - GM order guide
(KSG) Adaptive cruise control 
(UGN) Forward Automatic Braking 
(NTB) Emissions, Federal Tier 3 
(GA1) Citron Green Metallic (Promotional Color. Limited Availability.)
New features confirmed for MY 2017 - GM order guide
Last edited:
I don't know. If they weren't planning on selling it outside the CARB states you'd have a point, but we're just talking about the rollout. That's just like the people who say the Model X is a 130K car because that's all they are selling right now.
flankspeed8
Member
2017 Volt ordering opened today. Production should begin in February and delivery will be nationwide.
Also, 1980 sold the past month for the best November ever. Not great, but at this sales pace there is less than a months supply on dealer lots and that is only going to get tighter as they are getting ready to start 2017 production.
Also, 1980 sold the past month for the best November ever. Not great, but at this sales pace there is less than a months supply on dealer lots and that is only going to get tighter as they are getting ready to start 2017 production.
Similar threads
