Your characterizations are not facts. It's basically an average hybrid (better or equal to many, worse than a few), and as an electric vehicle it has lower range but better power than many other EVs, so I wouldn't call it a "very poor" EV. If the range is enough for your daily usage I would prefer the extra power. I think it's a better choice for many than most of the crap EVs on the market today.
-
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
Your characterizations are not facts. It's basically an average hybrid (better or equal to many, worse than a few), and as an electric vehicle it has lower range but better power than many other EVs, so I wouldn't call it a "very poor" EV. If the range is enough for your daily usage I would prefer the extra power. I think it's a better choice for many than most of the crap EVs on the market today.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
While three across seating in the compact class will never be 100% comfortable (esp. for taller people), typically it is tolerable for rides under an hour. However, that is still far better than no fifth seat option, or a fifth seat that doesn't look tolerable even for a trip around the block (the main advantage for of the "fifth" seat in the 2016 Volt would be for the center child seat).
- - - Updated - - -
Again, comparing to the worse sellers in the industry, with the worst cargo room (I believe the Fusion is the worst in the industry, and the Focus is not much better), does not help the Volt sell better. If the goal is to maintain a similar level of sales as it is now, sure, the Volt's cargo and rear seat room is adequate as-is. But if the goal is to expand sales beyond that then I think they have to do better.
Electricfan
Active Member
Sorry but I don't think that's true, although its subjective so maybe its true for you. But for me, my Volt is a GREAT hybrid when the battery is depleted - gets 41-42 mpg - what about that is "mediocre"? And its electric range gets me to work every morning and home every night using zero gas (my one-way drive is 35 miles, mostly highway). What about that is "very poor"?
I also put a trailer hitch on the Volt and towed a 1000 lb U-Haul from El Paso to Houston a few weeks ago, and the Volt handled it like a champ.
There's nothing "mediocre" or "very poor" about the car. Just my two cents.
It seems to me that in fact Volt 2 would be a decent BEV, with better performance than the Leaf, a TMS that helps limit degradation and, of course, zero range anxiety.
Certainly I'd expect to be able to do my 41.3 mile commute year round in the Volt 2. I'd also be able to commute year round in a Leaf, I believe, but I can't be sure until I try it, and I really wouldn't want to be wrong.
The Volt's hybrid ratings will be better than both of the Energis, while providing much greater EV range and uncompromised cargo storage. The only plug-in hybrids that beat its hybrid ratings are the Prius (which has both low blended range and a smaller gas tank, so you would likely spend more time refueling it than you would a regular Prius; and it's a Prius), and the Honda Accord Plug-in Hybrid with low electric range and tiny trunk.
While the Volt's combined 41mpg rating would mean burning an extra 0.6 gallons per 100 miles on a long trip compared to a 55mpg car in hybrid mode, the increased AER of 50 miles now puts it well into the 90th percentile in round trips, meaning that the percentage of electric driving is going to be very high. 98% of trips and 95% of rural trips (rural drivers drive more miles) are under 50 miles, which means that overall the increased AER is going to eat further into the gasoline miles driven. And it's worth remembering that a 55mpg hybrid won't get 55mpg on the high percentage of short trips that people take.
(Of course, Volt 2's EV efficiency has also increased, which means that it'll also be using less electricity per mile, which is a good thing).
Last edited:
thelastdeadmouse
Member
To say that the Volt is a poor BEV or a poor hybrid is missing the point of the car. Its a great BEV with limited range, and after that its a great hybrid. True its hybrid only mileage is worse than a Prius, but since you're starting with 40 miles of gas free driving, you have to drive about 200 miles between charges before the Prius would use less gas overall. Plus the Volt is a much better driving car than a Prius is; I'm very happy with my Volt, but my driving style is much too "spirited" to enjoy a Prius.
Its not a car for people who have too much range anxiety to drive a Tesla, its a car for people that need to travel more than 70 miles at a time with some frequency who can't afford a $60,000 car. Until Model 3 comes out the Volt is the most practical way for most Americans to drive on electricity.
Its not a car for people who have too much range anxiety to drive a Tesla, its a car for people that need to travel more than 70 miles at a time with some frequency who can't afford a $60,000 car. Until Model 3 comes out the Volt is the most practical way for most Americans to drive on electricity.
ah, yes, I was about to post on this. So then what's the point of the Volt after the cheaper BEV hits the market, Model 3 or Bolt? Automakers have enough reasons to not switch over to BEVs in a timely matter now anyways, so this would be one more excuse.
If the point is to get off of oil, like Tesla's aim, then you really should be trying to do that, instead of coming out with a "newer" model of a car that goes 50 miles on a battery charge. There shouldn't even be a choice for the consumer. The transition will happen anyway with how battery prices are falling, why make the struggle longer than normal?
Sorry...I just think GM should be putting all it's time, money, and energy into something like the Bolt, than this half-ass attempt at getting people to switch.
Really? Don't you think there's value in a consumer experiencing electric drive while having the confidence of "unlimited" range via quick refueling? If a BEV is superior, then that person should switch after a period of time with the Volt. You can't simply tell someone that a BEV is the best thing for them and magically change their mind. You have to create the circumstances where they can come to that conclusion themselves. The Volt allows that to happen along with the availability of the longer range Tesla backed by the supercharger network.
The Bolt won't really be suitable for long range driving without a good charging network. How the Volt versus the Model 3 will be competitively remains to be seen, but the new Volt will be released sooner, so why not. By your logic all the car companies should make ICE cars as inefficient as possible to hasten the switch to electric cars, but that's silly. Electric cars can compete on their own merits.
Shouldn't be a choice for the consumer? Even if the US chose to go 100% EV by government mandate as you seem to be suggesting, we couldn't - we'd need about fifty times the current level of battery production to replace every new car sold - and then a decade or more to turn the fleet over. We'd also need a more complete supercharger network with a lot more capacity.
Something this big can only happen by stages - and the Volt makes a great intermediate step. With only 20% of the (limited) battery resources, it delivers an 80% reduction in oil usage - and without requiring the DCFC infrastructure be in place first.
A large percentage of Volt owners are either adding EVs as second cars or replacing the Volts with EVs as time goes on - the Volt and cars like it are the necessary gateway to let people make the leap to pure BEVs - to give drivers the EV experience and the confidence about driving range - and in the meantime they are a tremendous improvement in and of themselves. I don't understand why you wouldn't want the major reduction in pollution (especially in urban areas) that Volts represent - unless you honestly think Volt owners would all have bought Bolts if only GM had produced them first? (Which wouldn't have happened, especially without Tesla and the Supercharger network to point the way.)
BTW, you did notice that Volt owners are racking up as many electric miles as any other EV owner except for Tesla drivers? And that's with the current generation - it'll only get better when the Volt has 50 EPA miles.
While some of these things might be true, you guys know that if Tesla hadn't come along GM would be just fine and dandy making these Volts and wouldn't do much else. The Volt allows them to still put an engine in the car while touting "battery tech"
Also, the only excuse GM has is the battery supply constraint. They could easily build out a "Supercharger" network for the Bolt if they wanted to
Also, the only excuse GM has is the battery supply constraint. They could easily build out a "Supercharger" network for the Bolt if they wanted to
Last edited:
anticitizen13.7
Not posting at TMC after 9/17/2018
I tend to agree with this, because I've read the comments of a number of Volt drivers who preferred the EV mode and did as much as possible to avoid having the range extender turn on. Ironically, some Volt drivers seemed to develop ICE anxiety because they really did not like using gasoline.
GM may unwittingly be driving a lot of customers towards Tesla and Model 3.
As far as the next generation Volt, I think it's got potential. My issue with the outgoing model is that the interior is small/cramped and I dislike the control stack (the all-white touch panel, specifically). GM appears to have rectified these problems for the next model.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Tesla has been fighting FUD since before the Volt was even a concept car, from the politicians, media, and an ignorant public.
Where exactly were you thinking the funding for GM's DCFC network would come from? For Tesla, it's a marketing expense - which on reflection makes sense because they sell more cars as a result. I don't think the same can be said for GM.
Also, before you paint GM too darkly, you might want to reflect on the history here. GM, working with AeroVironment, created both the modern EV and the mandate that made production necessary (Sunraycer and Impact, then the EV1. CARB was convinced by the Impact concept car to create the ZEV mandate. As far as I can tell, no one was making high power lightweight AC drive inverters before GM convinced Paul McReady and Al Cocconi to design them for GM.)
AC Propulsion was created by the key powertrain engineer (Cocconi) from AeroVironment, and it was his inverter and motor technology that Tesla bought for the roadster.
More than that, you know the Roadster is on a Lotus platform, right? (Some dimensions were changed, so it isn't part for part the same, but it's a common platform.) But did you know that this platform was developed on mostly GM money? Lotus partnered with GM on it - GM marketed the Opel Speedster using that platform.
From the Bob Lutz quotes, it's clear that without Tesla there would be no Volt. But without GM innovation in the mid-80s, there would be no Tesla.
If Tesla hadn't come along, GM wouldn't have built the Volt. Tesla was the excuse to build the Volt, and GM took the approach they did because of cost, density and charging issues with batteries. And GM did something no other manufacturer has done, which was to build it a plug-in hybrid with primary emphasis on the EV side.
Consider what GM has done with Volt 2: more capacity, more range, better low-end acceleration, charges a bit faster, more efficient transmission, more powerful heating system, lowered and shortened the battery to allow for a 5th 1/2 seat and given it a conventional appearance. In summary, they've done multiple things to make it a better EV and also moved away from the idea that electric is unconventional. And then on the hybrid side they've upgraded the engine to help make the car more efficient and also to make the car quieter when the engine runs.
The Volt's new transmission will also be the basis for the new Malibu Hybrid and a Cadillac PHEV that be a PHEV not because of an anemic electric side, but because the engine and motors together will be able to provide good performance.
GM is deadly serious about electrification, is showing it and in my opinion had petroleum prices not tanked a few months before they launched the Volt 2 there would have been a lot more excitement about the Volt than the Bolt.
Personally I would far rather have a plug-in hybrid where somebody has done a lot of thinking about how to make a good usable car than a throw it together compliance EV like most of the manufacturers. I'm with the people that think the Volt moves the EV revolution forward faster, rather than the other way around. EVs very few people want to use are what is hurting the industry.
Yup, that was me. I Bought my Volt thinking that it'd be an acceptable compromise and before I knew how quickly the supercharger network was going to be built out. Then, about a year later, ordered my 85D not long after they were announced.
The Volt is still an awesome car, and an impressive feat of engineering. Pity that it has to burn gas!
I agree. The elimination of range anxiety and the reasonable electric range of the Volt was perfect of me where our Volt 80% of the time used 100% electric and no gas and the other 20% of the time when I needed to take it into the city would have been impossible with a BEV (with the exception of the MS). One big issue was a >20% change in electric range between summer and winter.
For 50% of the price of a MS, the Volt is a heck of a car. The 2016 looks even better and gave me pause before ordering the 70D.
dhrivnak
Active Member
The Volt does meet a valid need. This weekend we need to head to SW Alabama. No way to do that in a MS as there is only one supercharger along the 420 mile route. Next weekend we need to head to DC and there are exactly 0 superchargers along the 400 mile route. Later when we head to Pittsburgh for a family reunion again 0 superchargers along 410 miles. The Volt I can drive now and get the benefit of mostly EV driving. Someday the superchargers will be there but that day is not now for us.
What is the emissions cost of keeping an extra gas car for not infrequent road trips?
What is the emissions cost of keeping an extra gas car for not infrequent road trips?
Skotty
2014 S P85 | 2023 F-150L
I purchased a Volt almost 3 years ago now to support the electrification of the automobile and reduce my fossil fuel usage. It was certainly not my ideal car, but it was the only car that could meet my frequent long range driving needs within my allowable budget while still meeting my primary objective of supporting the advancement of the electrification of the automobile (regular hybrids do not advance the technology anymore). Now 3 years later, the Volt is still the only car that will work for me. My budget is growing to where an S or X might soon be within allowable budget, but there are still key supercharger's missing from the routes I need.
The Volt may become obsolete in the future with the release of the Model E and continued expansion of the Supercharger network. But until then, it makes a nice transition vehicle that for me has nothing to do with easing range anxiety and everything to do with meeting cost and range requirement.
This is nothing against Tesla. Tesla is leading the way. But a Tesla just won't work for me yet. I have to wait. And while I wait, the Volt is a great alternative.
Similar threads
