Flexible Pickup, FlexFuel
2007 Chevrolet Avalanche LTZ
By Bob Lutz
GM Vice Chairman
At the Chicago Auto Show today we unveiled the newest member of our full-size truck family, the 2007 Chevrolet Avalanche. I know it won’t be much of a shock if I tell you that many of the merits of our new full-size SUVs described in my last post apply to the Avalanche as well. And it will come as even less of a shock that I will be just about as shy in telling you about them.
But I’m only telling you what I believe… and what I believe is that this new Avalanche is another major step forward. Its exterior design has been cleaned up and refined. And it wears the new global face of Chevrolet, with the big Bow Tie centered on the twin-port grille. The interior, too, represents the improvement in craftsmanship and refinement that we in GM product development demand of all our new cars and trucks.
As with our new SUVs, you can find the hardcore product details and specs elsewhere, but, in addition to looking good and handling well, the most flexible pickup on the market is also FlexFuel. Several of the new Avalanche’s available powerplants have the ability to run on either gasoline or E85 – a mixture of gasoline and up to 85 percent ethanol.
GM has more than a million and a half FlexFuel cars and trucks on the road now and plan to add many more. We also announced at Chicago, through a partnership with Shell Oil and VeraSun Energy Corp., the addition of 26 more E85 refueling pumps at stations in the greater Chicago area.
That’s just one small part of our initiative to boost E85 usage and awareness on a national level. If you watched the Super Bowl you may have seen our new TV commercials designed to do just that, extolling the virtues of ethanol there among the monkeys and dancing food products. It may not have been the flashiest ad you saw all night, but, believe me, it was one of the most important.
94 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
Nice work Bob!
Let’s hear it for GM’s Flex-Fuel vehicles, and let’s hope there are more on the road soon, along with more E85 filling stations!
See the whole E85 Flex-Fuel lineup at http://www.gm.com/company/onlygm/energy_flexfuel.html#
With the new Monte Carlo getting the thumbs up from Consumer Reports AND being a flex-fuel vehicle, that’s becoming one attractive sedan. (If you made an SS version with RWD and a stick-shift, I’d probably have to buy one.)
Nice work GM!
Nice truck! I am particularly happy that you threw away all that “Aztek” plastic cladding the old Avalanche suffered from. (What ever were you thinking with that?) I also am happy about the expanded availability of Flex-Fuel vehicles. I hope you expand Flex-Fuel throughout your lineup. But could we actually get a few E85 pumps around town? Last time I checked, there were only 4 in the entire state of Michigan! And only 2 are near Detroit. (one in Southfield, and one in Dearborn) That might be nice for Ford country, but could you swing your Fuel company partnerships over to the east side? I’d love to partake in E85.
Even if I don’t save money. Even if I have to refuel slightly more often. I’d be using a whole lot less oil-based gasoline. That has GOT to be good for the country, reducing our dependence on certain “unstable” overseas oil sources. Plus I also have the option of refueling with gasoline if that’s my only choice.
The new avalanche is a handsome truck, and I really appreciate the flex fuel capability. The only minor quips i have are 1) there are no flex fuel stations in the state of NJ where i live, and 2) I could have hoped for a touch of differentiation between this and the Tahoe. Besides that, I think this is a great product that is very flexible. If the cost isn’t much of an issue, i think all GM products should be flex fuel, hopefully this will encourage more stations to sell E85.
The New GMT 900’s are awesome.. I would request only a few Changes,
1. Please give the option of a floor gated shifter, especially for the Escalades and Denali’s… It will help with perception.
2. Consider a new Steering wheel for the Escalade
3. Redesign the rear Fascia for the Escalade so that the tail pipe does not look like an after thought. Give it attention like you did with the accessorized SRX
4. Include me in your focus groups -Seriously.
This new truck from chevy looks amazing! I was a fan of the last gen and this ones looks to be the best Avalanche yet!!
The Avalanche LTZ?
Bob must believe in it, if he’s put his last name to it
Bob Lutz: Undeterred (To The End?)
Talk about focus! Bob Lutz puts out a post on the GM Fastlane Blog today about the Chevy Avalanche LTZ pickup truck. This on the day after GM made one of the most important announcements in the company’s history: cutting
Well congratulations GM, you past the test. There will be no more grades by me of your product. Comparing new…
Escalade to Navigator and Chrysler Aspen
Hummer H3 to Commander and Toyota FJ
Enclave to MKX, MDX, RDX whatever, Buick is better.
Avalanche or H3T to Ridgeline
…and other trucks like the Scion Xb, Element, I mean compared to them GM has styling mojo. And if analysts can’t see it well too bad for them, the prize goes to those that believe.
So no more A’s or B’s GM passes with flying colors on design. Lutz again gets cum laude.
Everytime you’re about to break through, everytime you are ready to go to the next level you seem to get attacked from every…clowns to the left, jokers…but it’s on plan.
Solstice, Hummer H3 and HHR.
Solstice does for Pontiac line what Porsche 911 did for Cayenne, Panamera and their new smaller ute. The Terazza included, it’s against the law now, no cloning, but a Solstice inspired crossover.
If you think the Hummer H3 is hot, get the H3T out now, believe me they told me today, “No, no, no, no, no (Just the) Hummer Pickup. That’s what I’m waiting for.”
Finally, the HHR to inspire a return to the classic 3D automobile. Buick style.
If you don’t feel it yet, if you don’t get it yet, if you didn’t catch the Big Buick Bug…
Don’t worry just watch your competition and your friends down under, FJ Efigy, Imperial, Red Flag Roller but we can’t “wait and see” we lost that luxury.
Look come to NY in April.
Well again bob… I think this is a hail mary idea. Sure in theory its cool to use ethonal, but really where can someone get ethonal or E85… I live in California, and never once have I seen a place to get it, nor do we ever sell E85 capable vehicles here.
As I’ve read some complaints would be that this will be a nitch market, and while it may be a nitch, can our US Farmers support E85 with enough Oil to accomidate for your 600k+ units a year? and if they can will the price remain cheaper then gasoline?
Also isnt E85 less efficent? doesnt it get worse fuel ecconomy, although i think because i’ve heard it to have a higher octane rating it will be more powerful? at least according to our product knowledge trainer.
Bob… This seems like propeganda, or just something to fireback at the Hybrid, but hopefully you can get as many vehicles equipted with this technology to get gas stations around this country to change.
I always liked the e85 idea, it is just too bad that I so far never had a chance to get it here in Florida, but I am still hoping. You should consider to replace all the gas caps with the new yellow one to make people aware of the flexibility.
Very nice truck, its the only one i’d buy from any manufacturer and i don’t even like trucks!
Get a Methonal flex fuel that will run on 100% methanol to 100% gasoline. That will set up the infrastructure for methanol to run Fuel Cell vehicles. E85 wont run a fuel cell, but Methanol will today. Sell the idea that Methanol can be carbon nuetral if made from hydrogen. That is THE best way to deliver hydrogen. Take the lead and be the green company for a change.
There is no E85 station within 50 miles of where I live. Aside from the problem with availability of E85, there is also the question of economics. Cutting our dependencies on oil is a worthy goal, but is using E85 really an effective way of achieving it? If you increase the fuel efficiency by 5% for all your vehicles, that alone could reduce more oil consumption than having ~100 E85 stations nationwide. So if you are serious about the oil dependency problem, how about some practical solutions I could use today.
Can anyone explain me what E85 is?
Sorry, but I’m not a car expert….
I believe, GM deserves big respect for its steps towards FlexFuel. Better you fill up your car a little more often, than being dependent on the good will of the mullahs in middle east. Sooner or later also those people will have to acknowledge that, who still reject E85 for the sake of convenience. I fear, Germany will continue to stick to Diesels and oversleep this development the same way like running cars on LPG, what even is available at every Turkish gas-station.
Hey Bob
How about that paycut
E85 is 85% Ethanol (grain alcohol) and 15% gasoline, unlike previous blends of “gasohol” which were 90% gasoline and 10% ethanol.
Also, since GM isn’t in the energy business, why is everybody bugging Bob about the lack of stations near them. GM just formed an alliance with Shell to promote E85, and I would presume that comments regarding E85 distribution would be more appropriately directed toward them (or BP, Chevron-Texaco, Exxon-Mobil, etc.). GM partnered with Shell, so they ARE addressing the issue. But they aren’t the problem here.
What GM is doing is finally taking some credit for an area where they have a significant lead over the competition. Really, Ford is the only other manufacturer who even has much of an E85 program. Unlike hybrids, E85-fueled vehicles really DO use less petroleum AND cost about the same to buy.
Thumbs up for you, Bob, and GM for getting some spotlight onto this technology. Maybe someday the mainstream media will realize there is actually some substance here unlike most of the hybrid hype. Ultimately, substance is what matters to most of us.
Bob,
Why not introduce an ethanol car with a 4-cylinder engine that would really impress the environmentalists and the press? Why does GM always have to focus on Trucks and SUVs so much? And and Ethanol hybrid Malibu Maxx, now that would be the bomb! 3500VVT engine would be OK, use BAS and then flex fuel, and you get the wagon utility too. But I guess that might “lose a sale” for a hybrid Suburban on the Chevy lot?
-IT
To Thomas:
e85 is a fuel blend 85% ethanol and 15% gas, for more information go to: http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php
To Mr. Langlitz:
I’d rather be in the german position with 50% diesel engines, that would save us a lot of fuel. I think sweden has already a very good e85 network.
And yes it is good that GM moved ahaed with e85, until now it was just a gas guzzler tax solution but now they are realy exploring the possibilities. GM becomes green, what a big surprise, but a good one.
Kudos Bob,
I love to see GM ahead of the game for a change in the switch to E85. This is a far better program than the recently scrapped electric vehicle effort.
For the poster who wanted to know more about E85 visit:
http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php
Simply put E85 is comprised of 85% ethanol with only 15% oil products.
Ethanol is a renewable resource that can be made from a variety of products like hemp, corn, beans, etc.
Oil is a non-renewable resource with rapidly disappearing availability (demand is outstripping supply); and thus is escalating in price dramatically.
Therefore E85 can reduce our dependency on oil dramatically.
However the oil companies, for obvious reasons (known as profit$$$), are reluctant to get on board.
This message is for Imported Tuna,
I believe the reason GM has used Hybrid technology into busses, and are trying to acheive better fuel ecconomy on Trucks first is because GM believes that in order to reduce fuel consumption, one should attack the vehicles that consume the most fuel. Now bob you’re welcome to conterdict me if I’m wrong when I say if a consumer drives a cobalt that gets lets average 27 mpg, and they get a silverado that averages 16 mpg. if you increase the fuel ecconomy of the silverado, you will save the world more petrolum faster.
so, in order to do whats best for the enviornment, rather then the green people in the world, lets get better fuel ecconomy to those who use the most fuel.
The oil companies have been slow to bring out E85 facilities. But with over 5,000,000 E85 capable vehicles on the road right now, they’ve gotta see the business is there.
On the other hand, I do see their problems with it. Oil companies make gasoline, not ethanol, so they don’t have direct control over what would be 85% of their product. Plus both gasoline and ethanol are corrosive, but they are corrosive to different materials. The oil company would have to install new underground tanks, new pumps, new hoses, exactly as GM had to do to make their vehicles Flex-Fuel compatible. The oil companies don’t own the gas staions where all this changing would have to take place. (I know, the oil company name is on the station, but trust me, they don’t own it). And just as there is an oil refinery shortage, there is also a shortage of ethanol producing facilities, but at least these ARE being built.
This would also be a boon to our long suffering farmers who would be the ones actually producing our fuel. And I’d rather see Des Moines controlling our energy needs than Tehran. (and how much corn can you grow in a desert?) Currently almost all of our ethanol is derived from corn, because we already grow that in huge quantities. But ethonol can be produced by a variety of plants (Brazil supports their massive ethanol production for their fuel using sugar cane, it’s easier to grow than corn – in tropical Brazil)
And, unlike Brazil, we aren’t likely to be able to burn 100% ethanol since there are serious cold start problems running pure ethanol – it gets MUCH colder here.
Products like this will keep GM going for years and years.
As the modified saying goes, “Rumors of GM’s death are extremely unlikely!”
To Guido:
Thanks for paying attention on my comment. Well, I also believe Diesels are fuel-efficient, what finally lead to a big success here in Germany. On the other hand, you might know, there started a big discussion about fine dust, coming out of the Diesel’s waste and still not any brandnew car has a filter yet (exception: Opel). For that reason a lot of people here now are worried, whether they will be allowed to enter the cities with their cars at certain times or how many annual tax they will have to pay for their Diesels. The only fuel in Germany, which significantly is cheaper than gasoline, is LPG or CNG. And it’s really clean. Problem: Availability still has to be improved at a high degree.
Will E85 really reduce or dependence on foreign oil? Will it reduce the overall amount of green houses gasses produce? I’m not so sure. The process to convert the starches in corn to sugar and to distil fermented sugar requires a third element, HEAT. How is the heat generated? My guess is by burning oil products or natural gas.
I have done some research and have not been able to determine how much oil/gas product is required to produce E85. Does anyone out there know the answer?
One heck of an improvement over the prior Avalanche.
It’s PC and that is worth a little something if the cost to develop is not astronomical but it’s hybrids and diesels you need. AND DIESEL HYBRIDS
Dzlsabe not getting the hoopla of E85. Any alternative fuel needs to get better mileage, not worse. Smaller, turbo engines maybe…but surely turbodiesels powered by the “new” clean ULSD/BioD need a bandwagon also.
Whether it’s ethanol or biodiesel i’m pretty anxious to get onboard the renewable fuel train so to speak. Do you know how fast our trade deficit would shrink if we stopped importing 50% of our petroluem needs? Really fast. Maybe with the cooperation of Ford and GM, Bush’s new energy policy can get these fuels to our nearest pumps so we can stop lining the pockets of foreign princes.
To Tim,
I appreciate the feedback. I don’t have a problem with GM doing the SUV/Truck thing and agree it would save a lot of fuel, but I think you miss one important point.
Who are the “early adopters” of such technology. The people buying big trucks, or “Green” people you mention? I think that the people who are most likely to buy and support a new technology like a hybrid ethanol car would in fact be unsatisfied with 24 miles per gallon and ethanol.
The GM approach is still the “value” approach, which is like buying a generic Plasma TV…its just not going to attract the kind of fanatical supporters that get behind a car like the Prius.
If GM were to nix its ill-advised idea of killing off the Malibu Maxx, and instead made the Maxx an Ethanol hybrid (the 3500VVT in the Impala is supposed to be flex fuel), then they’d get a rabid supporter in me. But putting flex fuel in their trucks is really nothing new. And the Silverado Hybrid has been something of a dud. Compare Silverado hybrid buyers to the Prius fans, and you’ll see a totally different crowd.
GM needs to be on the cutting edge, not the “Value” edge it is sitting on right now, and make some real R&D investments and make a green hybrid with flex fuel out of a very versatile car like the Malibu Maxx, and watch the orders from people like me pour in. And do it BEFORE 2009.
A Malibu sedan with BAS hardly gets my blood pumping at all, and almost ensures that I will need some kind of utility vehicle to go with it. What does GM have against hatches and wagons anyway? The rest of the world gets it, and the Prius has one – why only a Malibu hybrid sedan?
At least the VUE hybrid is versatile, if not incredibly fuel efficient.
To Thomas: Yes I am aware of the diesel pollution problem, but here we don’t even have the low sulfur diesel right now.
I think sweden took the right way in pushing e85, they worked with independent gas stations or smaller chains in the beginning and so the big ones (I believe the one from kuwait) had to follow, as the consumer bought more and more e85, and now sweden plans to be oil import free in 2020…
Love the trucks and the idea of flex-fuel.
Now we just need the fuel available in Oregon and Washington.
Bob, I think the Avalanche is awesome! I can’t wait till it hit’s the market, I’m going to be first in line. I’ve had three myself and been responsible for selling two others. The last generation AV was great and with the refinements to the truck, I know it will be even better! Can’t wait, Great job! Now if I could get E85 where I am….
To Guido:
It’s interesting: I never heard anything about E85 in Sweden before. Obviously it’s not a big thing for German mass-media. So, thank you for the information, after doing some research by the internet I found reports, which tell the same like you do. Anyway, German automotive industry is still hooked on Diesels and now they are trying to succeed on the US-market with it, as an alternative to Hybrids. I believe, this won’t work. Diesel-cars never had been popular in the States and so it will go on. For example, the same way as automatic transmissions in Europe never will get as popular as in the USA. Every automotive nation has its own habits, which do not change so fast.
“I have done some research and have not been able to determine how much oil/gas product is required to produce E85. Does anyone out there know the answer?”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/07/050705231841.htm
GM has a chance to really hit a note that all AMERICANS can identify with,
the FLEX FUEL vehicles could be the answer to uncertain oil supplies from unfriendly suplliers. We have to overcome the lack of ethanol pumps which could be done easily by putting those pumps in service departments of local dealerships. What a competitive advantage and a great way to bring paying customers to your stores.
Is it in GM’s plans to have an aftermarket package so that I can convert my non-E85 2004 GMC 5.3L to use E85? I really like the thought of spending my money domestically…
Steve S and Thracian,
“I have done some research and have not been able to determine how much oil/gas product is required to produce E85. Does anyone out there know the answer?”
Thracian, the study you points to uses well outdated crop yield data, yet continues to be published (though incorrect). The most recent and comprehensive study was conducted by one of our national Laboratory’s. I recommend that you review the following:
http://www.anl.gov/Media_Center/News/2005/
NCGA_Ethanol_Meeting_050823.ppt
The results to this comprehensive study show a positive energy reduction and significant reduction in global warming gas (CO2) by consuming CO2 in the production of the fuel (crop). Bravo to GM for being a strong leader in this technology.
Bob,
Like the flex fuel ads. Tell us about flex fuel sedans. Will there be a flex fuel sedan for the average car buyer? Will the Enclave be flex fuel? Or is flex fuel just for the tough guys?
The Lucerne ads are very good, especially the North Star system ads, (why not give GM’s other engines a name). Keep hitting the ES330. Some Buick dealers are not merchandising very well, they need more Lucernes and more La Crosses on the front row. Buick should have stronger dealers. GM dealer networks are very weak in some areas of Florida. One way to build them up is to promote GM service, many GM owners move to Florida and can’t find a place to get their vehicle serviced. Brain power is not their specialty in Florida. Many GM service areas in Florida are too small or not enough. Just build more new dealers. If they have a dumpy building that says GM on it in one part of town like some do make them tear it down. Take the dealerships away from crotchy dealers who won’t accomplish GM’s goals. Car shows are a popular trend in Florida. In some areas like the Villages, FL nostalgia car shows occur every month and draw large crowds with buying power. GM ought to have a both to promote GM.
The best strategy for Buick is to keep pounding the Lexus ES330. The Lucerne is turning heads on the streets with a strong presence. When Lucernce sales heat up, will GM be prepared? Just don’t stop the ads for the Lucerne, make it the Buick leading ad for everything, and that will sell everything else.
Cadillac could probably double its sales if it took a dual styling strategy to capture Buick and Lexus trade ups. Cadillac styling is compelling, Cadillac owners are excited about the new looks, very masculine, and bold, they’re selling. We hear some ladies saying Lexus and Buick. Some fashion clothing stores take a dual approach like Banana Republic, with mens cloths to the left and ladies cloths to the right. Why not have one or two alternatively styled models for Cadillac, one femine appeal, and one masculine appeal. This could very well double your business. These are not the same customers. The Enclave is very nice for example, maybe Cadillac should offer one model like that to appeal to the more feminine taste too. Cadillac needs another sedan besides the STS and DTS that has a feminine appeal to capture these customers who are looking outside GM.
Give Pontiac a flagship like the Lucerne, perhaps with vertical headlight geometry to differentiate the customer. These are mostly not the same customers. GM is missing to much full size sedan business. This market can lead the way home for GM.
Keep pounding the Camry with the more of the Impala. (The head to head sites with Edmunds are difficult to access for the average person). Give an exclusive appeal to OWNING an Impala. The Imala is Chevrolet’s leading product, that’s how GM got to be selling so many trucks. It was all those people who loved the Impala taking about Chevy. Start sounding that way. GM talks too much about trucks. If you want to keep selling trucks, talk about Impala sedans for the family.
Start thinking more about brand power and brand presence. The Impala is Chevrolet to the public, it ought to be the talk of every soccer mom. The Lucerne is Buick to the public, it ought to be the talk at every dinner table. A flagship is as a flagship does. GM is an excellent company with many very smart people building beautiful perfect products, then letting the products and the customers who buy them go undefended by the main office, that is where the main mistake was made. Don’t let it happen this time. We’ve examined the Lucerne and the LaCrosse they are top notch sedan, the best on the market. The engineers did their job, now the promotional air war and ground war needs to be won.
Stop letting Toyota and Honda steal your thunder with their wimpy products. They used GM’s image strategies to make their products sound good and people fell for it.
They are also mimicking your truck ads trying to pretend like they actually have a truck!
Actually, the link posted by Thracian is not accurate.
Recent studies have shown Ethanol has a positive energy balance.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/01/0126_060126_ethanol.html
“The doomsdayers are wrong,” said Alexander Farrell, the lead study author and an assistant professor in the Energy and Resources Group at the University of California, Berkeley. “We show that the net energy is in fact positive for corn ethanol.”
http://www.generalbiomass.com/cellethanol1.htm
In this process, a plant byproduct called lignin is burned to create the energy needed, not fossil fuels.
An E85 pump was just installed at a gas station in my town, so my next vehicle purchase will be one that is capable of using it.
Bob,
These Flex fuel vehicles are a definite step in the right direction. Its good to see GM is putting serious effort into it.
Keep up the good work!
Hey Mr. Lutz,
I’m back again for some well needed feedback on the newest launch vehicle.. the 2007 Chevy Avalanche! I could not be happier to see that the Avalanche survived through to see it’s second generation, although they did lose the beautiful set of clothes (cladding) in transition. Sure the new avalanche looks good, better than the current avalanche WBH, but how could you not introduce a cladding option?! The cladding is what made the Avalanche in the first place, and I know that you are looking for numbers over style but that needs to change. The vehicle is verging on bland… it doesn’t have that distinctive look to it like the previous cladded Avalanche had. I thought that GM had gotten past the whole cloning idea, or are we still fighting the current generation clone wars? Well maybe when we see the Z71 Avalanche it will have some kind of cladding on it… lets just hope it’s not a straight clone from the Suburban!! Despite that I do expect that the Avalanche will be about the same as the Tahoe, which my parents saw this weekend and their jaw literally dropped.
To move on with the E85 idea.. it is a great idea, although we are still missing the fueling locations. It’s awesome that you guys can come out and say that you already have these vehicles out on the road but where do you want them to fill them up at?! That’s like buying an HDTV and saying that you can’t see how perfect it is till we get the channels… haha oh ya that is currently happening!! Maybe you should have talked to those big filling stations earlier, maybe a year ago.. and then introduced the “Live green, go yellow” campaign. I really do like the idea a lot but people are gonna be asking all the time, “What is E85!?”
Oh by the way, great Cadillac commercials during the superbowl! Great commercials for the Suburban, and also commercials for E85!!
The Avalanche looks great, i’d buy it regardless of whether it has body cladding or not.., but the cladding just gives it that extra touch of differentiation. Keep up the good work, and i’ll keep telling everyone how awesome GM is.
Sincerely,
Aaron John Curiel
“GM Advocate”
Thracian,
Thanks for the link.
Although this study confirmed what I had suspected: “corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel [ethanol] produced “, I think the presentation of this data may be a little skewed.
They only focused on the energy cost to produce ethanol. They failed to include/compare the energy cost of producing gasoline. Since the need for gasoline would be reduced there would be a reduction in the energy required to produce it. Thus, a “savings”, that should be incorporated into the overall cost of producing ethanol.
The complete answer to my original question is still out there somewhere. I would like to think that someone at GM would know.
I actually want the cladding-without it there is no distinction from the pick-ups. Why bother getting the ‘lanche.
To Tim Geisler and imported tuna.
CAFE is a weighted average of the fleet’s consumption in units of gallons/mile. (Americans are used to refering to miles/gallon when comparing vehicles, but you can’t calculate a fleet average in those units)
Without getting too deep into math, consider that increasing a truck’s mileage from 15 to 20 mpg provides a greater reduction in consumption as would increasing a small car’s mileage from 30 to 50 mpg.
GM’s approach of prioritizing improvements in the higher consumption vehicles first makes far more sense from a logical perspective. However Toyota grabs all the headlines and acolades from environmentalists over their Prius (which does very little to reduce consumption over non-hybrid equivalent models.)
Toyota was correct to assume that most Americans couldn’t comprehend the math and logic behind consumption reduction and that they would instead be enamored by the Prius’ alleged mileage ratings. After all, to them its all about sales and marketing, not reducing American energy dependency.
Ethanol is not the answer to oil problem. I don’t think there is enough crop land in this country to produce enough ethanol to fuel every vehicle in the country.
I never though I would be saying this but the only answer to the energy problem is nuclear power plants. Use the plants to produce electricity to extract hydrogen for fuel cell vehicles. If anyone has a better idea I would like to hear it.
Name one car the size of the Prius that gets better gas milage.
There is one flaw of assumption with the idea of “consumption reduction” through flex fuel in big pickups and SUVs.
Its the idea that Americans will always want, and will always buy large trucks that they don’t need in cities or Suburbia.
Americans did fine with cars and car based wagons for almost 100 years before the Home Depot generation decided that everyone needs a pair of large SUVs or pickups in their driveways.
GM’s plan relies on the continued obsession with SUVs and Pickups, and does not prepare for the eventuality that they might fall out of favor some day.
Also, it ignores that these large trucks and SUVs are usually expensive in themselves, regardless of fuel consumption. Ever seen the price tag on a loaded Silverado or Tahoe?
GM is too focused on trucks, and this touting of flex fuel in thirsty vehicles that get 20mpg at best is another sign of it.
GM needs a showcase vehicle to prove that it is capable of building something that the environmentalists and fuel and cost concious consumers want to buy.
Hybrids are in the works, and still not cost-efficient, fuel cells and electrics…well maybe someday. But E85 is NOW. It’s practical, it’s economically feasible, and it saves a TREMENDOUS amount of gasoline! Replaced by ethanol – home grown (not imported from Venezuela, Iran, or any number of other un-friendly sources. Even if the US can’t produce enough ethanol, the most likely additional source would be Canada. Rumor has it that Canada is considered to be quite a friendly country, and it’s right next door! That makes shipping easy too!
The vehicles are already here, and available, by the millions. But we need the fuel!
I know GM doesn’t make the fuel, but GM has clout with the fuel companies (we won’t be able to call them OIL companies anymore). GM claimed (at the Chicago Auto Show) to have done precisely this, in parterships, to expand availability in the Illinois vicinity. Spread some of this around. We want it. We’ll buy it. (along with the corresponding flex-fuel GM vehicle!)
It isn’t even any risk for the consumer to purchase a flex-fuel vehicle. Until, if ever, E85 becomes locally available, you can still run your vehicle on gasoline.
We can even get the government to help. They can offer tax breaks for the growing, producing, and/or using of ethanol. This is precisely why diesel engines are popular in Europe, the governments there give huge tax incentives to use diesel fuel. Whereas in the US the price of diesel is usually higher than gasoline.
Tim, The Prius has EPA estimates of 60 city and 51 mpg highway. But you won’t find any drivers actually getting those numbers. Google search Prius, mileage, complaints and browse through thousands of web pages to learn why the EPA numbers are totally unrealistic. Most drivers report high 30’s and low 40’s for combined mileage.
The Toyota Echo or Honda Civic will get you very near that at a much lower price.
IT -
Hmm. The 2006 Chevrolet Impala; the best selling mid-size car that GM produces, comes standard with a 3.5L V-6 engine which is an E85 flex fuel engine. As does the 2006 Monte Carlo.
Sounds like GM is already doing what you’re asking for.
BTW, you can also get an older S-10 truck with an inline 4 cylinder which is also E85 compatible. It was GM’s first flex fuel E85 vehicle.
Greg
Is there any chance of a rear-drive SS version of the Avalanche?
That’s a great idea to use FlexFuel on trucks! Any idea when the E85 pumps will be available in Canada?
Safety is absolutely #1 in manufacturing. Quality is #2.
With the latter in mind, using data that hones in on complete quality methods is key in obtaining less time and lower cost to develop, produce, deliver products and services, and improve safety.
To “Big Picture Guy”:
Let’s assume it’s right, what you wrote about the mileage of the Toyota Prius. This would mean, GM already has vehicles which are the same fuel-efficient like the Toyota, even without Hybrid-Technology! My wife’s Opel Corsa also constantly just requires 6 liters for 100km (=62.5 miles), what finally is the same like 39 mpg. And the Corsa is anything else but a shopping-cart. I’m six feet tall and have plenty of room in that car. I think the Opel Astra’s fuel-efficiency won’t be far from that. Consequently it should be useful, when the Saturn-division and Opel start to share technology.
Hy, Bob!
It’s my first time here and I’d like to congratulate you and GM for this communication channel!
You can be sure that this model works.
Yours,
Guilherme Jotapê Rodrigues
Gradiente’s Webmarketing
Big Picture Guy, the cars you mentioned (echo, civic) are much smaller than the Prius.
I had a 1983 CIVIC FE that got 59 mpg on the highway.
Here’s the perfect example of the carriage leading the horse. I live in the Dallas/Fort Worth area of Texas, and according to all my searching there are no E85 filling stations anywhere close. In fact, a detailed search found about 5 in the state, of which only one is open to the public. At this point GM would be better off designing cars to run on trash like in Back to the Future II, these students did.
Just read an article on Autoblog about a Pontiac version of the cobalt… I just wondered what the point is? It would only compete with the G6 and cobalt… if someone wants a cobalt why wouldn’t they just buy a cobalt? And why announce it’s temporary? Is this a plan to appease dealers or plants with low productions? Why is it we always hear about stuff from GM on a time line way ahead of other companies? It seems half the decisions are right and a lot are just plain silly. Why not put the money you would have used to design the pontiac and upgrade the quality of the Cobalt? (Not saying it necesarily needs it but that would produce a car that would blow a way the competition and would seem to be a better use of the capital with out having to advertise a new model to the nation.) Sorry just a rant from a shareholder that doesn’t quite get a lot of the decisions. If they are being made because of bueacracy get rid of the bueacracy don’t make more bad decisions.
Thanks and hopefully someone at least reads this.
Well, in some ways, I’m happy that other countries are using biomass. Here in Brazil, GM has one of the most varied lineups of FFVs (Celta 1.0, Corsa, Meriva, Astra, Zafira, Vectra and Montana). In my country, these cars are able to burn everything from E25 to E100. GMB wasn’t the first to release a FFV, but it’s the one which spread fastest this technology through almost all lineup. It’s also the first in the world to put FFVs in the racing field (the three Montanas that ran the 2004 edition of the Mil Milhas Brasileiras, in Interlagos circuit). So, as you can see, we got a lot of talent here. And, as far as I know, GMB assisted Saab in putting E85 technology in the 9-3.
Well, now it’s time to improve this technology to avoid an imminent overtaking from other FFV makers. You should:
1) Phase out the Family I and II engines and replace them with the more modern Ecotec units. Why can’t we have these wonders here in Brazil? They would be great and also less gas-guzzling than today’s powerplants (unfortunately, the gas-guzzlers of every class of mass-market car are from GM. The Family I and II engines are good and reliable, but they’re being more and more yestertechs).
2) Put FF engines in trucks, as you’re doing there in US. Well, GMB has the 2.4 16v powerplant of the Vectra Elite, but it’s too much gas-guzzler. Maybe when you’ll be replacing our S10 (bring the Colorado, not the ugly Isuzu D-Max, please), you can think about putting a FF Ecotec 2.4 in its bay.
3) Allow the FFs, in a short space of time, to burn from E0 to E100. Renault does it in their 1.0 and 1.6 engines, which are far more economical than GM ones.
4) Spread the multivalve technology through all the lineup, not just the Vectra. The racing Montanas use a Family I 1.8 engine with a 16v head and can reach something by the 150 hp. in the streets, we could think about 125 with gasoline and 130 with E100.
5) Install, as soon as released, the cold-start systems that allow run on E100 without needing the small gasoline tank that today’s FFVs have. Magneti-Marelli and Bosch are developing it. Maybe other suppliers are doing this, but didn’t tell until now. It will mean full independence from gasoline and the possibility of cold-starting a car using E100 even in the winter of our Southern Region (where sometimes the temperatures fall below 0 C, or 32 F for Americans to understand).
Well, as there in the US you use corn and here in Brazil we use sugarcane to obtain ethanol, isn’t it time to study another sources of this fuel? If we can do alcoholic drinks from a lot of plants and their fruits, so it means that nature has a lot of unexploited sources which could generate fuel, but in a way that doesn’t mean sacrifice crops to feed cars instead of people.
The one comment that I have about the E85 push is the brilliance of the logo I saw on one of the race trucks. There could be no better (or clearer) tagline for E85-capable vehicles than “CORN-FED”.
As evidenced by more than a couple of posts to this article, E85 is still a bit of a mystery to many people. With yellow gas caps, this tagline (& the obvious and eventual reality of more E85 stations), we will really start to see positive impact on the environment and decreased dependence on foreign oil.
Bob
GM should have invested in a small 1.4 Liter all Aluminum Ecotec for this little Aveo. I am very dissapointed in your small vehicle approach.
Would it be posible to get a yellow gas cap for my 2001 Sonoma? It is E85 capable. Call it a form of word of mouth advertising.
I call dibs on the exhaust division!
I will be attending the Toronto Auto Show and hope to see this truck in real life.
“Just read an article on Autoblog about a Pontiac version of the cobalt… I just wondered what the point is?”
On GMI, is is being said that the G5 will be substantially differentiated from the Cobalt, using hydroformed panels ala the Solstice.
I’ve driven a few Cobalts and HHR’s – they are high quality small cars. Give the G5 Solstice-like styling and you will have another winner.
Speaking of winners, it was also reported at GMI that Saturn has copyrighted the name “Astra”… the best looking compact out there.
Bob, you can’t get that car here fast enough.
I don’t know why I haven’t wondered this sooner. But I am wondering: Why can we make V8’s that get in the upper 20’s for MPG, V6’s that get ~30, but we can’t make any 4 bangers that get 40MPG on the highway. With subcompact cars coming from Toyota/Honda/Nissan that are all sure to be higher, what is GM doing to make sure that they don’t finish eating your lunch? The Cobalt’s 4cyl MPG isn’t very impressive – neither is Aveo. When the better subcompacts come, they’re going to steal the subcompact market from Chevy!! You may want to focus on SUV’s because they’re your money makers, but if you lose the youth to Toyota that early, they may never come back to buy an Impala, Pickup, or SUV!
E T B,
In the next couple of months, GM plans to contact owners of pre-2006 E85 trucks to remind them that they have the choice of E85 ethanol fuel or gasoline and will provide a yellow fuel cap.
If your vehicle was produced prior to the 2006 model year, its E85-capability is indicated by a label inside the fuel door and also by its VIN. For information on what to look for in the VIN, go to http://www.E85fuel.com.
Stop giving Pontiacs boring names-G6, G5, what the heck is that?
Pontiac has heritage and some cool names to use-Grand Am, Le Mans, Tempest.
If the G6 was still named Grand Am it would have resonated more with buyers.
And please fix the interior of the Malibu-its not up to world class standards. Don’t dumb it down because of the G6. This where rebadging really hurts Chevy. The Malibu should not have the same engine as the Cobalt as a base engine! Give it the 170hp Ecotec.
The interior of the HHR needs work too. Why isnt the power window switch on the door? Why is the arm rest unpadded hard plastic? Why is the door lock popping out of an unfinished hole? Come on guys!
My sister saw the new Lincoln Navigator, she said it looked like the truck had braces, so I am not alone in calling the Escalade the clear winner.
Ethanol yeah. Hay wait; I could grow corn in my backyard. I hope that is why fuel prices dropped down the street, and how about this great Solstice weather in the northeast.
You took a product E85 and you refueled the interest in it with a simple add campaign and it is working. That is how you shoot from the hip.
GM has got to shoot from the hip with its cars too, we can’t wait two years. Anyway we already got great product in the G6 and LaCroose now here is where the finesse-the annual dress or redress comes in.
You don’t need a billion dollar makeover just a face-lift. Consider this…
A face-lift lifts sales. Please don’t put the money on the hood put the money on the finesse.
Understand the urgency; just five months and we will be comparing sales to the GM Employee Discont numbers from last year.
Now we have come too far and Rick has cut costs with the skill of a surgeon, but the guys with the machetes are banging at the door. And I can see them now bad talking Buick I bet.
But I have not heard a better plan than the one already in place. It’s just a race now to bring those cars “under the dome” out and in a short while they are going to believe like we believe.
Fuel prices are allowing us to buy some time but please, no new product delays and speed them up everywhere you can. The competition isn’t letting up.
Bob,
Great job on revamping GM’s product lineup over the last few years. The new SUV’s and trucks are especially good. Keep up the good work!
Unfortunately, GM has a huge perception problem with the vast majority of Americans. The perception is that GM’s cars are of poor quality, poor fit-and-finish, poor reliability, and poor gas mileage. This is the reality that GM has to deal with.
This is the biggest problem facing GM today. Mark and the marketing guys have a significant challenge. Changing 250 million American’s opinions is very tough.
One quick way to start changing this perception is to increase your warranties from 3/36,000 to 5/55,000 for all 2007 and later cars. This would grab people’s attention and cut through all the other marketing “clutter.” Increase your warranties!
re: “the new global face”
What’s the point of having multiple models if you can hardly tell the difference from the front, rear, and/or sides?
Most people can not tell an oncoming CTS for an STS. (The letter jumble does not help things.)
I’d like to see GM get bolder in differentiating its products- if the rule book still says an Impala has to bear a (strong) family resemblence to a Cobalt, it’s past time to re-write the rules!
Hey does anyone know what needs to be done to make my LS1 firebird E85 capable, or my LT1 firebird for that matter?
or Does anyone know where I could find the information?
Bob, the following is part of a “response” I wrote to this at a popular GM News forum:
If GM wants to go with Ethanol, then it will win far more image points by going one step further and making a subcompact engine that can run on it available here in the U.S., or make its VUE Hybrid capable of running on E85 as well. An effort like that could help GM take that leap from “trying to keep up with Toyota” to passing or at least matching them – in a single bound.
Aside from the VUE and the less talked about Malibu hybrid, GM focuses most of its fuel savings on its large SUVs and trucks. They say this is to help save the maximum amount of fuel in the end in a product that Americans want to buy. I don’t think its any coincidence, however, that GM’s largest trucks and SUVs are also some of its most profitable vehicles.
They’re also mighty expensive. So if you want to save gas money, buy a 40 thousand dollar Suburban with cylinder deactivation technology? Certainly GM’s “Big truck flex fuel, DOD and hybrid consumption reduction” strategy isn’t targeted towards penny pinchers. Instead, it seems a way to stave off negative press by being able to point out, “Hey, our SUVs aren’t as thristy as they used to be!”
But they’re still expensive. And they’re still relatively thirsty, especially considering the new pack of subcompact cars coming from Toyohondassan that get up to 40mpg with regular gas engines. All that, while the Aveo appears to be launching with basically the same fuel inefficient engine design that was used in the late 1990’s Daewoo Lanos, and the Cobalt’s fuel economy still leaves something to be desired.
A 30mpg wagon-like vehicle such as the Malibu Maxx seems to make a whole lot of sense in this environment of high and unpredictable gas prices, but according to rumor the Maxx is on the chopping block — which isn’t surprising considering how few advertisements I’ve seen for it. The HHR will stay, and is a great little wagon, but strangely also gets only 30 miles per gallon at best, despite a much smaller engine.
To be sure, GM should be praised for its excellent introduction of the VUE hybrid, which seems to be winning some good press. But Saturn is still that brand strangely disconnected from the rest of the GM brand family, where one can’t use GM Card points or expect other special discounts unrelated to rebates like the GM Supplier discount. Its hard to say that Saturn looking green will rub off on GM as a company and its other brands.
This leaves GM’s mainstream brands with its big truck hybrids & SUVs opening up to a huge gap between utility, price and fuel savings with the upcoming Chevrolet Malibu hybrid, which as far as I know will only be offered as the short wheelbase sedan. That and the E85 flex fuel Impala, which might be more of a factor if it was coupled with a little BAS hybrid help.
Where is the mainstream GM brand hybrid or fuel efficient vehicle for someone who wants a little more utility than a compact sedan can offer, without making the leap to a massive SUV and big loan payments?
Like I wrote before regarding wagons, GM pushes potential customers like me away by ignoring market segments that brands like Toyota, Honda, Mazda and others seem to understand, or at least understand by extension of designing vehicles for non-U.S. markets and having the models they sell overseas on hand to sell here. Not all of us need a whopping V8 powered truck with seating for 8 and a whopping price tag to go along with it. Sometimes a fuel efficient wagon or crossover is all we need.
I recall hearing one of the talking heads on a morning news show come out and say something along the lines of “It seems all GM wants to do is build more trucks and SUVs. Why don’t they just save us all the drama and just start doing only that?”
Why go through the charade of introducing the 2004 Malibu when it wasn’t designed to be best in class at the time, and is quickly being eclipsed by other offerings? Is GM really an SUV company first? Should they just build SUVs, trucks, and maybe a few RWD performance cars and call it a day? Is the market success of the Aveo a result of GM’s attempt to compete in the small car market, or was it just a way to raise CAFE numbers and grab a few sales?
Lets see GM do more along the VUE Greenline angle with an Equinox hybrid, building a 40mpg ethanol hybrid, and investing more in its gasoline 4-cylinder engines to get a much needed dose of R&D money to improve fuel efficiency in the Aveo and Delta-based cars. Lets see a best in class mid-size car that shocks the critics. Or how about that Saab BioPower wagon? More talk of “mild hybrid” trucks and flex fuel in large pickups will barely make a dent in the image battle with Toyohonda.
GM has to prove to the public through its actions and product that it is not dependent on SUVs and trucks for its survival — that it is not a dinosaur that cannot adapt; a beast floundering in a tar pit waiting to be put out of its misery with the next oil shock or thrust of product from a Japanese rival. Only then will we stop seeing the articles that tie GM to the image of a massive, thirsty SUV.
Bob,
One queston, two suggestions.
Question: Why do lesser expensive cars/trucks have to look cheap? It doesn’t cost any more to bend the same metal into appealing, upscale looking shapes.
The same with interiors. Chrysler has done very well by selling cars and trucks whose design, inside and out, is more upscale than the competition. Same manufacturing costs as ugly cars, but they’re more elegant.
The same is true when comparing GM to Volkswagon. GM doesn’t have anything to compare style-wise, or performance wise, for the money, with the new Passat. Why in the world not?
Suggestion: Three engine options per car. An economy version, hybrid or otherwise. A performance/economy version, which would probably be something with a turbocharger or turbo/hybrid combo. This would probably be your biggest seller. And finally, a muscle engine.
This covers every one’s desires, regardless of what vehicle they’re buying, and ultimatly keeps your engine variations to a minimum–which lowers manufacturing costs.
Suggestion Two: Why doesn’t the company have recycling centers around the country? You buy old cars for next to nothing, recycle the parts, which might save the company some money, you’d help the planet, and you’d make people better like the company.
Recent Chevy Experience: I just drove a Chevy rental car and it was very tinny. It’s no surprise the company continues to lose market share.
Reading the comment before, there are certain things I can’t agree. For example, Volkswagen, especially the Passat, is overestimated in my opinion. Recently there had been a survey by the ADAC, the most important automotive club here in Germany. The two car-companies with the lowest consumer-satisfaction-rating had been DaimlerChrysler and Volkswagen. Look at JD Power, where GM performed pretty good with several models and I think, it will become more in the future. I am driving a 2001 Alero (used to be sold here in Europe as a Chevrolet) and maybe its “Haptic-Design” is not as perfect as it is at a Volkswagen or Mercedes. But after more than 60.000 miles it’s still more reliable than many other so-called (German) premium-cars of the competition, which friends or co-workers are driving. Haptic-Design may emphasize quality, but it isn’t the same like quality. Just today I read a report about the thousands of complaints about Mercedes’ 7-speed-automatic-transmission. It’s changing the gears in a rough way or even its electronic controls fail completely. Then think about the price you have to pay for such a car. That’s no fun anymore.
E85 FlexFuel is fine, if the oil companies are going to invest in making it universally available. I’d personally rather see more diesel vehicles (lighter pickup trucks, vans, minivans) equipped to use biodiesel, vegoil, and WVO. (And yes, some of those luxury SUVs and large cars outfitted with diesels, too.) Diesels are the original, and still the most efficient, flexi-fuel vehicles.
And back up all the nice words with a 100,000 mile transferable warranty on all GM cars and trucks.
“Just today I read a report about the thousands of complaints about Mercedes’ 7-speed-automatic-transmission.”
I look at these 7, 8 or who knows how many more speed transmissions as no different than the race to see how many blades can be stuck on a razor.
Now they’ve got a razor with a motor in it, 5 blades on the front and one on the back. I don’t get it… is “My razor’s bigger than your razor” really a big deal?
At some point (probably at 2 blades) the law of diminishing returns starts kicking in. And so it is with transmissions… once you get above 5 or 6 speeds, it gets to where you are adding gears just to say you have them.
As these Mercedes owners are finding out, this unnecessary complication has a downside.
I haven’t seen where GM has any plans to go above 6-speeds…. and I say good for them.
You know who would by E85 powered flexfuel vehicles? Those highly educated, environmentally minded, high-performance insistant Saab buyers. What gives? Bring that 310hp 9-5 SportCombi BioPower beast from the LA auto show sooner than later (6 montshs would be too long to wait). I realize that there isn’t a big service market for E85 vehicles as of yet, but the average well-healed Saab shopper wouldn’t mind plopping down a few extra grand to purchase a car that could one day save them money while helping the environment. I consider it such a highly desireable must-have option that I’m wainting for it to be released in the US.
I’ll take two thank you!
2004 Saab 9-3 and 2005 9-5 owner.
as a mech.eng (kettering u), i find it an effort in futility to run a flex fuel vehicle. the biggest reason is that gasoline averages 89 octane, while ethanol is 112! so basically, you have a gasoline optimized engine running ethanol…what a waste.
on pure alcohol, you can run 13.5:1 compression (even higher with direct injection), and realise 15% increased power or fuel economy over the flex fuel baseline. ethanol requires 9:1 fuel ratio (vs 14.5:1 for gasoline). all that extra fuel isn’t being used to its fullest. ethanol burns rather than explode – so it’s easier on engine parts.
the downside to alcohol is that you do use more of it…and with a low compression, you don’t see any more power.
i’d love to see a 3900 vvt ethanol car with 13.5:1 compression. 275+ hp, neck snapping throttle response, more engine braking, less wear and tear on engine parts, lower nvh, and eco cachet.
btw, Bob, the 3900 is an abomination. change it to 4.24″ bore centers, on-center bores, slightly taller block, open deck, 2.2″ deep water jackets, proper bed plate, lightweight high-pressure die cast pistons, (gkn 4126) longer pm forged rods, SB2.2 valve configuration (2″ intake, 1.575″ exhaust valves), and if you could make it aluminum, that’d be killer. the 3500 could have a cast iron block.
if toyota had to base one of their engines on a gm ohv v6, that’s how they’d make it (oh wait, toyota started with the buick 3800). seeing as how toyota’s (and dodge’s) nastruck engine is a virtual carbon copy of the SB2.2, i’d say it’s a sound idea. if gm wants to reinvigorate one of its most celebrated engines, drop me a line!
“In the next couple of months, GM plans to contact owners of pre-2006 E85 trucks to remind them that they have the choice of E85 ethanol fuel or gasoline”
Why would anyone with the choice use E85 on purpose and give up 25-30% fuel mileage? Check out the mileage ratings comparing the difference on “fueleconomy.gov” specifically 2006 Flex-fuel vehicles.
Currently wholesale ethanol is about $2.50 a gallon, whereas regular gasoline is less than $1.50. And it takes more ethanol go go the same distance.
Simple fact is, ethanol is expensive to produce, and doesn’t have the energy per unit that gasoline has.
As pointed out in a proir message above, a gasoline engine that happens to be able to also burn E85 will be very inefficient with the lower compression ratio necessary to be able to run regular grade gasoline. An engine needs to be optimized specifically for E85 to run efficiently and get the most mpg from the high octane ethanol.
Parabéns, Bob !
A GM lança, mais uma vez, um belo veículo !!!
Mr. Lutz: GM should be commended for putting E-85 powered vehicles a priority. It addresses the supply issues that many say they are concerned about, but are unwilling to commit to. They think that addressing the consumption issue is the only solution. This thinking is just plain wrong. I have done enough research of unbiased reports of ethanol production to know that we are close enough to get production ramped up immediately.
I would point out to these “gloom and doom” experts that:
1. The oil supply market is unstable and must be augmented or replaced.
2. Doing nothing about the oil/alternative energy supply is not an option.
3. A viable solution to any market problem cannot address only one side of the supply/demand curve.
4. The industry will improve the efficiency of ethanol production to make it competitive will regular gasoline.
5. Vehicles using E-85 can be made more efficient further reducing the cost differential between the fuels.
6. Our world class agricultural industry will also improve crop yields of all types of biomass needed for ethanol from corn to switch grass.
7. Alternative energy sources from Solar to Wind power can also be employed to provide heat for the distillation process.
8. The technology from ethanol production can be used to produce renewable oil alternatives – such as oil produced from beef and chicken byproducts.
9. Bio-Diesel production would also benefit from increased E-85 efficiency.
10. Demand from millions of E-85 vehicles will allow energy companies invest in the required infrastructure of refineries to create and mix ethanol with gasoline.
11. Current “Mid-Grade” pumps can be converted for use of E-85, providing an immediate supply.
12. E-85 technology can be used on any vehicle currently running on regular gasoline with minimal cost for modification.
GM should push the availability of E-85 Impala models and expand E-85 capability to all mass market vehicles.
Personally, I am looking forward to the new E-85 capable Sierra and would be interested in a GMC version of the Avalanche with a power window/mid-gate like the Envoy XUV had. While it won’t allow having the 8 foot bed with the window in place, it would be easier to make the conversion. The current Sierra is the best looking truck on the market, and a versatile vehicle like the Avalanche would sell well with Sierra styling.
Some desirable features on the new Silverado/Sierra would be a base 4.2L 300 HP I-6 with AFM and 6-speed automatic. An E-85 Hybrid model should result in a full size pickup capable of 25 to 30 MPG highway. And is there a law against offering a 5.0L to 5.7L Turbo-Diesel V8 or large V-6 in 1500 model trucks? A 5.3L should be able to deliver 285 HP and 520 ft-lbs providing more than adequate power and superior fuel economy. Be the first on the market with one, and expand your E-85 push with one for Bio-Diesel.
Interior improvements would be fold flat passenger seat. On LS and SLE models GM should use the bucket seats on all models (bench and bucket) and change only the center seating area. On bucket seat models the console would be used and on 6 passenger bench models a center seat with storage (optional cooler) in the seat bottom. This would minimize seat variations on the assembly line and allow GM to upgrade all LS/SLE models to power 8-way heated cloth seats as standard. Optional heads up display with infrared vision would also be a great addition for drivers on back roads.
As always keep up the great work and thanks for listening.
Hey Bob,
I’m interested in knowing if you have any plans to make the Trailblazer and Envoy E85 capable.
Somebody please wake me up from this nightmare!! There is no way GM has followed up the original Av’s bada** design with that thing! It looks like a freakin’ Ridgeline. What happened to the cladding? Only someone from Brokeback Mountain would ever think of having one without the cladding. I guess I’ll keep my ‘03 until the next evolution.
How about GM auto-truck dealerships selling E85? When autos were first produced, dealers sold gasoline. ADVANTAGE TO DEALERS: Having the fuel at the dealerships will get consumers near the showroom floor and hopefully induce them to purchase new GM vehicles since they can get their vehicles, fuel and service at the same location.
Re: FlexFuel
Bob:
I don’t know if there is some kind of legal reason this wouldn’t work, but I would think if GM dealers could somehow open E85 refueling sits on their lots it would help the whole E85 movement plus get a new stream of customers coming to the store on a regular basis.
Wow! That looks great! Sorry, I just bought one at the Honda dealership though. It looks just like the Ridgeline!
The only reason you are promoting Flex-Fuel cars is that you get a government CAFE credit for every vehicle sold. This is why you keep hearing all the same stuff about GM, the lack of good cars…etc. Companies like Honda and Toyota are relevant because most consumers are smarter and better informed than they were 10 years ago. Hum? That’s about when GM started the BIG SLIDE. If you don’t wise up and start designing and building cars that fit consumers lifestyles the slide won’t end anytime soon.
Brazil has saved rouphly $70 billion by becoming energy independant. It transformed its car industry and now 75% of vehicles are flex fuel. If there are any skeptics left WAKE UP and smell the Brazilian coffee.
The USA produces half of the world’s corn without even trying. I stopped to read news on ethanol and the number of companies breaking ground with new ethanol factories that generally produce 30-110 million gallons of oil a year is exploding. The 4 billion gallons produced now will soon double to 8 billion putting a dent in the annual 140 billion gallon gasoline market.
The farmers win, the environment wins and the automakers win.
If GM pushes this ethanol campaign along with Ford and the Japanese automakers sleeping at the ethanol wheel wake up and this thing expodes in competition and popularity. I believe we will not have to import a drop of oil outside of Canada as soon as 2010.
Thanks GM, you schooled us all.
There are days when America was suffered financial crisis,but GM manage to make great achievement during this period of time.Everyone in China think that GM is a great company,and it is great,im a university student in BeiJing ,China,im so enthusiastic about cars,i love your company,and i also i have some suggestions for you-vice president,wish you could send me a E-mail…hope to hear from you….a admirer in China ……
When is GM going to sell some flexfuel vehicles in New Zealand. Surely a flexfuel Holden is not hard to produce and would be a market leader. No one sells ethanol blend fuels in this country because vehicle manufacturers won’t say if their cars will run on ethanol. GM- break the stalemate, become a leader again.
I am quite encouraged to see that the number of E85 fuel stations in Michigan seems to have essentially quadrupled in the last 3 months, since the last time I checked the LiveGreenGoYellow.com website for a list of E85 station locations near me. And I anticipate with enthusiasm the increase in the volume of E85 vehicles expected to appear on the market, according to the recent GM public announcement. Only I wonder if these vehicles would include a compact wagon, like the SAAB 9-3 Sport Combi wagon, or some sports coupe, like the Saturn Ion Quad Coupe and the Pontiac Solstice. While I understand and admire the motivation for leading the E85 phenomenon with Avalanches, Suburbans, and Monte Carlos, I would like to suggest that there are those of us who cannot accomodate these vehicles in our livestyles but yearn to join the E85 evolution. Perhaps an appropriate official means to petition for smaller E85 appplications can be recommended to me. Alternatively, if such means does not currently exist, perhaps responses to this blog could serve the purpose.
Try as I might, I cannot find out the crush quotient on the bumper of A 2002 Avalanche. do any of you guys have knowledge of this. thanks