Video: Chevy Volt at NAIAS

This is a very impressive vehicle with a very impressive drivetrain, if it actually lives up to GM's claims.

The plug-in + series hybrid drivetrain just makes so much sense. I would imagine the torque available with the electric motor(s) would make this a more practical drivetrain for light trucks as well, where the rapid depletion of batteries under heavy load is a big problem for other hybrid drivetrains. Having the small engine generate juice on demand is a great idea.

I really hope this comes to fruition and we see this drivetrain make it into a wide range of vehicles.

Good job, GM!

I am curious about one thing: What if you said screw the battery, just put in the generator. Obviously, it must be capable of running the vehicle by itself. W/o the battery, you would save some weight right there. If the generator engine burns say, 1 gal/hr. max, then common sense tells you at 65 mph, you'd get 65 mpg! You could still use a 12v car battery to run the radio, windows etc. To save even more fuel, let the generator run at "idle" when the vehicle is stopped and the A/C off. Just a thought.

The Volt really shined in Detroit, but its legacy has yet to be determined. There have long been concepts that were going to take mankind to the future. All of them have gone nowhere. The Volt is taking part in a field where many have fallen. GM has a lot ahead of in trying to make this advanced battery technology practical. Maybe GM can shine more light on the Volt technology in Chicago. I think GM management understands people's hopeful skepticism here. Nevertheless, I like the Volt and the potential behind it. Don't drop the ball and let Honda take the lead in this area.

A question for Kelly, Tony, and Beth:

In the press release for the Volt GM claimed the following:

When the battery is depleted, a 1-liter, three-cylinder turbocharged engine spins at a constant speed, or revolutions per minute (rpm), to create electricity and replenish the battery. According to Lutz, this increases the fuel economy and range...In the event a driver forgets to charge the vehicle or goes on a vacation far from home, the Volt would still get 50 mpg by using the engine to convert gasoline into electricity and extend its range up to 640 miles, more than double that of today’s conventional vehicles.

If you have the know-how to build a vehicle that gets 50 mpg and has a range of 640 miles why aren't you already doing that?

Even without a lithium-ion battery pack, why not start building cars now with turbo-charged, three-cylinder, constant-RPM engines turning generators to power electric motors at the wheels?

I don't see any 50-mpg cars in your stable of offerings. If you can really do this, why not do it immediately? Why wait until 2010 or 2012?

Wouldn’t 50-mpg cars and light trucks do wonders for your CAFE? That would be even better than that bogus CAFE loophole* you’ve been taking advantage of building and promoting flex fuel SUVs in your Live Green, Go Yellow campaign.

If you actually have the know-how, build an internal combustion-electric series hybrid immediately that gets 50 mpg and send a strong signal that you are indeed serious about reducing the amount of fuels we burn for transportation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* The CAFE loophole:

Although E85 in fact gets poorer fuel economy than gasoline, for CAFE purposes, the government counts only the 15-percent gasoline content of E85. That means the CAFE rating of an E85 capable Tahoe goes from 20.1 mpg to 33.3 mpg, even though the Tahoe really gets only about 15 mpg when burning E85. (Unfortunately, it actually takes four gallons of E85 to do the work of three gallons of gasoline.)

Build the Chevy Volt. If it's under 30 grand, I'll buy it.

Well, that's a little off topic, but look at this:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=119371

GM's division from down-under gets similar honors as GM NA with its Chevy Silverado and Saturn Aura...

Just visited the GM exhibit at Epcot. "They" did not have much info. on the Chevy Volt. I want to know 1) Is the gasoline engine cooled enough so that it may be kept running and charging the batteries (or, conveniently, something else) for 24 hours or more at a standstill? 2) Would it be possible, as done on many yachts, to hook up a small windmill to charge the batteries by wind overnight where the breeze is right...or to add more range by operating while Volt is on the go. I realize the design of the blades would have to make sure that their resistence is not more than the extra power they would produce. I think the Volt is the best way to go, and hope you get improved batteries soon enough to put the volt on the market soon. By the way...the racetrack ride at the GM exhibit is a real hoot!!
In haste, Respectfully, Ralph Dombrower, Richmond, Va.

"Mind the Gap, Mind the Gap Please!"

Just got back from a seminar in NYC. The speaker said that he recently traded in his Hummer and an audience member interrupted...(And of course as fate would have it she was sitting right in front of me out of, What? 700 people)

"Don't buy another Hummer!" She screamed.

"Don't buy another Hummer, No...No...Hybrid...HYBRID!" she finished yelling.

Of course I couldn't keep silent and my natural response was, "Buy American!" (Of course not thinking about the Saturn Greenline, but I know she was not either.)

The reason I am telling you this is because there is still a wide gap between the "SHOW" that GM puts on and the perceptions on the street. It is about 5 years. That's right it takes 5 years for perceptions to change.

For example, if your design renaissance began with the Solstice a year or two ago it will take a couple more years.

I want GM to understand this, this is very important. The excitement you feel does not translate to the consumer for many years and customers perceptions about today were shaped 5 years ago. Saturn and Ford can have hybrids on the road but for what? 2 years, now it's going to take some time.

If you do a steady, focused, and all out campaign then it can happen quicker, but on average, yeah 5 years.

When I walked out of the seminar for lunch something had caught my attention. On the souvenir stand there were images of the twin towers. I thought to myself, "I get it, I get it!" You see many people did not appreciate those towers when they where here, now they mean something. Not only as a symbol of loss but they are recognized now for their design genius. But I recall standing at Liberty State Park adoring the beauty of those towers for hours. I for one appreciated those towers when they were here.

And I appreciate GM and Ford while they are here. I don't have to loose one or both to finally appreciate what value they have in our society or the important role they play in society, nor the integral part they will play in our nation's energy independence. Quite simply, YOU CAN FORGET ABOUT ENERGY INDEPENDENCE WITHOUT GM OR FORD. JUST HANg IT UP! If the imports had their way we would pay for it with hybrids and add $400 billion in "additional" costs to replace our transportation system over the next 10 years to realize a 25 % fuel savings. In the end, it would probably have only slowed the growth of consumption. And what of ethanol? DRRRRAGGGIN' their feet! Just like they are doing now.

Now if we know there is a perception gap between the "Auto Show" excitement and "The Word on the Street" the only thing to do is speed things up with design and technology. GM and Ford know they are a year behind and see progress on their end, but Joe Consumer is not hearing until 2012. That's your reality that is where you stand now with technology. Design, about 2010 they will get the message that GM is on a roll.

So what do we do until then? As they say in the London subway "Mind the Gap, Mind the Gap Please." There is indeed a gap between "Show" perception and "Street" reality unless there is an entire campaign like with E85's "Live Green and Go Yellow" campaign. But in the meantime what you do-or have to do is raise the standard now with future technologies and designs.

A hybrid Toyota style will not do, not to change perceptions they won't that is where you are today. It takes a Volt. And as for design it takes an Efigy, or, OR, a true family sedan that takes its design Q's from it's shape.

Now the promise was, "We can fix Buick once Olds is gone." Still waiting and then it was, "We can fix it after we do Cadillac." Then it was, "Well now Buick's sales are slow so they can't come back-Three maybe four models will do for their volume. No don't worry, once we par down Buick to the bone then Cadillac can grow."

Edward's response, "Well now you lost your credibility. You can have that credibility back when you fix Buick. And don't cry poverty, you know the original Mustang and its successors were done off company time with a shoe string budget, where are those people at Buick to build the great Efigy?

You're not building a car, you're changing perceptions. If you don't know what I mean go ask Toyota."

In Short:

Now that I know you are going to post some of the greatest financial numbers in years I'm raising the standard. I don't want to see you just survive but prosper.

Three points:
1. I have heard the car doesn't run because batteries don't exist that can support your claims. Is this true? If so, will the next concept car run on Play Doh?

2. This car isn't emissions free. It runs on electricity. (Regional electrical plants emit sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and high-level nuclear waste; all according to last month's electrical bill phamplet.)

3. Since GM has yet to offer a Honda Civic-like package (with it's 30MPG city, and 40MPG highway numbers), aren't you guys running before you have shown you can walk?

Oh, and let's mention small diesels...

Congratulations GM employees on your great innovation. Keep working hard and improving your design.

1)Keep and eye on the new nano-tube, high charge density lithium ion battery cells that have just had a major breakthrough! Make these an upgrade option when marketing the VOLT to consumers. They would eliminate long charging times to minutes with standard outlet voltages (eliminating range limitations). Add this new technology to the mix at an extra price that I'd gladly pay.

2) Incorporate simple in-wheel electric motors to maximize battery to pavement energy efficiency. As opposed to rear wheel drive-trains, having a in-wheel brush-less magnetic motor in each rim, controlled individually from a central computer, would create superior Anti-skid and traction control. Moreover, this would leave far more room for onboard batteries and cabin space!

3) Onboard GPS, Bluetooth wireless capability for mp3 player and cellphone integration.

I know, its starting to sound like a luxury car. But honestly, if you give people these as upgrade options it would be an easy all in one MODERN CAR!

Thank you Gary Dikkers, 1/27, 3:01 PM.

You bloggers are AWESOME!

Micah hit it right on the head! ... that and Larry doesn't know what he's talking about *sigh*... after watching "Who Killed The Electric Car" I am very glad GM is stepping up to the plate for American Automotive superiority. Good job GM! I am proud of you! And as someone else has mentioned, I hope Honda doesn't catch on soon before GM can get the ball rolling on this beautiful machine. I know I want one! Cheers!

The iCar,

I like that. Do you see how one car, ONE single solitary car can change perceptions, raise morale and hike your fortunes?

And it has nothing to do with money does it? Does it?

Let's put it this way. You can pay billions and billions of dollars for a couple of ads inside the magazine which most people will pass along with scant any interest. You end up reaching only 1% of the people.

With the Volt, you get inundated with press coverage, its face is plastered all over every newspaper from Paris, Texas to Paris, France. The COVER mind you. You end up on the cover of every automobile magazine and Popular Mechanics, Popular Science, Popular Pop Stars and Pop Tarts magazine.

That is the kind of thing to do to change perceptions. And understand this, get this, watch this. All that coverage is just a preview of what can happen in 2-3 years when you produce that thing.

That is why I told the GM Product Reduction Board, or Strategyless Board a long time ago to get out of Lutz's way. He seems to be the only person that gets it. If you want to change perceptions you have to blow people away with technology and design. Safe does not do it, a Camry clone will not do it. Let's put it this way, the Camry has already proposed, the customer is married to it now.

I got a message for the GM Strategy Board, if your hearts are not racing when you approve those vehicles, the consumers hearts will not be racing either. If you play it safe with design the consumer will have the same response, "Yeah I am playing it safe too, why change?"

In Short:

I am going to say this again and I said it here a long time ago. It is like GM is complaining about the cost of paint when they got a Picasso.

And by the way, an overprices SSR running around is not a Picasso, the Efigy is, and I am no design expert, how come I can tell the difference? The Efigy is about restoring a brand, heritage and finding that thing which makes Holden indispensable and priceless.

Fastlane Short:

You reached back to '68 and blew away the media with technology. Reach back to '68 and blow them away now with design.

Congrats GM. I like the design and style of this concept car plus its a electric concept car,right. I guess that automakers are now into producing more on electric cars, well why not. Its good that those cars running on gasoline that's keep on polluting our environment. I hope that the EBC Brake Rotors of this concept car is working well. Hope that lots of drivers like this Volt. Goodluck, GM.

GM,
with this concept car, you have taken a positive step in the right direction. Gas guzzling Hummers and SUV's will not save GM. But this car will. Give us a product that will get us off our dependency on oil. You can be a force of positive change on millions of people's lives. Imagine the political, socio-economics of helping us weed ourselves from foreign oil. Please do not fail us. If you build it, we will buy it. We will tell our friends, our families, our neighbors, anybody that can hear us. We will do your marketing for you. Build it. We will do the rest!

To Gary Dikkers:

IMHO, what we are concerned with here is the burning of gasoline (i.e. our dependence on unstable/hostile regions of the world, non-renewable resources, heavy emissions, etc). It is not a loophole if we keep this in mind. If we define "mpg" to mean "miles per gallon of gasoline" then the example 33.3 mpg for the Tahoe burning E85 is completely valid.

Comments anyone ?

Thanks,
Chris Hayne (Toronto)

Bill: Just seen the poll for the Volt - over 300,000 would be buyers.

Even if it is only 20% of that 60,000 would be enough to get started and surely another 60,000 would follow in the first few years once the Volt's value is apparent.

Again the buyers have spoken, please keep this car in the spotlight and if possible have a "test mule" for some prospective buyers to drive at an auto show within a year.

"If you have the know-how to build a vehicle that gets 50 mpg and has a range of 640 miles why aren't you already doing that?" - Gary Dikkers

Gary brings up an interesting point: GM did market the 3-cylinder gasoline Suzukiclones for many years (and I heartily applaud GM for that!) and in the right hands they were more than capable of delivering 50+ mpg.

NOW THEY ARE GONE!!! (and their pathetic replacements are a giant step backwards) :(

And I have a huge problem with the way they were marketed, as during all that time (what was it, 10 years for Metros and Fireflys and how many more on top of that for Sprints?) I NEVER SAW ONE ADVERTISEMENT FOR ANY OF THEM. NOT ONE. Not only that, the local dealer didn't even bother to stock them. However as anybody with a TV or a magazine subscription knows, every 4 minutes we are BOMBARDED with ads from the multi-million dollar ad campaigns for full-size pickups and SUVs.

We know you have the technical capability, GM, of producing products that can meet people's transportation needs while getting double the fuel efficiency of what they are getting now (I say this because there is no excuse for virtually everybody to meet their transport needs while getting 30+ mpg. We know many single occupant SUV and pickup-driving commuters are only getting 15). While I lay most of the blame for choosing inefficient models instead of efficient ones at the consumer's feet, GM could do one h*$# of a lot more to promote efficiency than they have.

On a related note, I'd like to see some sort of driver education campaigns too, as the average motorist drives like an a88 and doesn't extract anywhere near the fuel efficiency from their rig that it's capable of. In particular there should be an effort to dispel the stupid and evidently very popular myth about extended idling and warm-up times as having some merit. Autostarts are the worst invention ever!

Thank you for your consideration.

My best wishes are with you GM. If the Volt becomes an actual production vehicle I can guarantee you that I will gladly put my money on the dotted line and pre-order one. Good Luck!

GM stands on the brink of making a paradigm shift in the auto industry. In doing this, they also have the opportunity to influence, shape, and change consumer perceptions regarding their corporate image of being once again the world leader in technology, design, and innovation. They have thrown down the gauntlet and ask themselves from designers, engineers, managers, and executives to rise to the challenge and make the Volt, E-Flex, and Plugin Serial Hybrids a reality by bringing this vehicle into production as soon as possible.

We are witnessing a turning point in history and a milestone in transportation not seen in over a hundred years. Consumer confidence is high and desire to lower Greenhouse Gas Emissions and reduce Fossil Fuel consumption is even higher. The race is on, and those automakers with insightful management recognize that they must make the hard choices and take the chances and bring solutions from concept into reality sooner rather than later.

GM has an award winning design and brilliant technology with the E-Flex system, but waiting for the 'perfect battery' to start production will not win the prize. Therefore, I pose the following: produce the Volt now with a smaller 'disposable' (yet recyclable) battery pack that gets replaced with an upgrade at a later date. Take the $4000-$5000 projected battery cost you will get from the sale of each unit and put it into short term investments. The 400,000 orders you will have up front is almost $2 billion. The interest from this over 2 years would pay for any cost overages and/or R&D necessary to bring the battery pack to production, or may well pay for an even larger battery pack with extended range once they are available in mass quantity.

How do you market this? Even without the battery pack for plugin all electric mode, the backup engine should still deliver 50 mpg. Offer a free battery pack upgrade within three years of purchase to gain the all electric features. Everyone who has voted to buy a Volt will gladly purchase this vehicle in this configuration. At the end of three years, the battery technology should be available to install the upgrades. Everyone wins. GM beats the competition to market with a high mileage winner that transforms at a later date into an unbeatably efficient solution.

This would be a bold and highly unconventional move to sell something with a promise to change the propulsion system at a later date as an upgrade. But, these are challenging times and Plugins are probably the most competitive product platform the auto industry has ever seen. That requires someone to push the envelope of conventionality and take some chances. Entrepreneurs never became successful without taking chances. GM has a window of opportunity to take a leadership role and be a corporate role model for America once again. Make the hard choices, take the chances, be the winner. Everyone that buys the Volt will be standing on the podium holding up the prize with you.

Why does it take so long to bring an EV car to market?

Seriously?

GM might be bankrupt by then

-------------

As an owner of a Prius, I can tell you the best thing about the car is when it is running in full electric mode. Like most Prius owners, I just hate to hear that gasoline motor start up.

A 40 mile range would be enough for me to run in full electric mode 95% of the time. My office is only 8 miles away, so it would have enough for work and back and some errands on the way home, perfect.

But why wait for it for so long?????????????

Right. Do it!

Some smart blogger said that, if you can get 50 mpg from the Volt through its electric drive and little engine after the battery is discharged, just forget the battery and give us the 50 mpg Volt.

Right!

I'll take one with an empty space for a battery to be named later. When you make up your minds about the battery pack, I (we) can just retrofit it and fire up the plug in capability.

Sky King and Proud Prius Owner are dead right. The future is NOW!

Plus, if you can bring this concept forward quicker without developing a whole new platform, why not put the new technology into the Cobalt, for example.

I would buy one for sure, and maybe it would give some halo and pizazz to the Cobalt.

“The CAFE loophole:

Although E85 in fact gets poorer fuel economy than gasoline, for CAFE purposes, the government counts only the 15-percent gasoline content of E85. That means the CAFE rating of an E85 capable Tahoe goes from 20.1 mpg to 33.3 mpg, even though the Tahoe really gets only about 15 mpg when burning E85. (Unfortunately, it actually takes four gallons of E85 to do the work of three gallons of gasoline.)”

The “CAFE loophole” is meant to be there. The goal of CAFE is not to reduce FUEL consumption. It is to reduce OIL consumption. Sure, I would like to spend less money, and burn less fuel (of any kind), but I would gladly pay more for ethanol, and burn more of it, if it means reducing oil usage.

Oil comes (mostly) from countries that don’t like us. Ethanol comes from here.
Oil is not a renewable resource. Ethanol is.
Oil usage pollutes a lot more than ethanol.

We will probably never be able to produce enough ethanol to totally replace oil. But if every 4 gallons of ethanol replaces 3 gallons of imported oil, that is a fantastic bargain.

Two words and all your range-limiting worries are washed away. "Altairnano Batteries!" With Lithium batteries like this, there would be no need for any Eflex waste of time backup system. Greater energy density = more space for more batteries cabin space and DRIVING RANGE!! A driving range wouldn't even be defined if you used these because you could charge up in a matter of minutes!
I know I would really like to see GM open their eyes MORE to the possibilities of sustinable/profitable driving. However, I will shed no tears if they do not use such products to their advantage and are left behind by the others that do.(ie. Phoenix Motorcars Inc.)

After commenting here yesterday, I ran across the latest Road & Track, which has a picture of the Volt and says that it signals the next generation Cobalt.

Outstanding, if true. Maybe such a standout bit of design is the way to differentiate ourelves from you-know-who.

Even if the styling wasn't quite so radical, the technological leap would give us a huge halo effect.

Although I really do LOVE the composite body components with the recycled plastic content. PLEASE do it!!!

BLOGGERS NOTE - I believe that this constitutes a positive comment.

My fear is that the brilliant volt concept will actually get an off-the-shelf GM engine not optimized for generator operation at constant speed. A lightweight spark engine of enough displacement to produce the torque needed for 55 shaft kW at 3200 rpm could have smaller, lighter cranktrain components and low-friction OHV should suffice; why do I need crank parts heavy enough to go 7800 rpm if they drive up the weight, cost, and package space of an engine that is after all not supposed to be running? Who needs 16 valves and two cam phasers here... unless they demonstrably add to BSFC reduction? Same for the turbo; it must pay its way by reducing BSFC or lose the turbo; it's costly ballast.
The EV1 was sharply engineered from the ground up to be an electric vehicle and barely managed 90 mile range in clement weather with its two-seat capacity and very, very low drivetrain and wheel rolling losses. The Volt must be executed with a ruthlessly enforced energy, mass, and loss budget or be doomed to ignominious EV range underperformance. I'd love to see this car done well; the EV focus with low-mass range extender idea has caught on in the minds of many who haven't thought to shop GM in a generation. DO NOT LOSE FOCUS. DO IT RIGHT! Keep the IC battery charger as light and thrifty as technologically possible and emphasize the effficient execution of the electric drive motor and chassis parts. Go fast but stay smart; sloppy execution on this one would be a humiliating black eye to GM. Delivering a car with thrift and range close to the show car claims is not negotiable, it must be accomplished.
DO IT!

After viewing "Who Killed the Electric Car' and then reading that GM plans to have an EV by 2010...I'm perplexed. They had an electric car that worked and killed it, but now that have one that is only in the 'concept' stage. Why doesn't someone at GM just look around for the EV1 files...oh, maybe they were destroyed along with cars.

Sounds like smoke and mirrors to me...

The Volt is the best looking electric car in the world...

Will the liberals still buy the Prius or wake up in 2010?

Hi,I have idea for electric car that may be good for the Volt.It is a car that runs on air,has a generator and own power supply.Needs no gas ,batt or charge.

As I read over and over all these postings, everyone has great ideas/suggestions and questions. As I watch oil go over $100/barrel this week and still see row after row of SUV’s at the dealership – it is no wonder they have huge sticker prices. 2010 before production of this vehicle is absurd. How many billions has GM received from the Fed Gov’t year after year specifically for this type of R&D and the best GM can do is 2010? Didn’t see Toyota or Honda getting any of those huge subsidies. GM is still promoting 2010 for the Volt but is releasing a new Camaro next year?? Back in their hay days, 60-70s, you could afford to buy a camaro or firebird for that HS or College Student. Now you’re bringing back a Retro Camaro for what? For who? How about bringing us the Pontiac FireVolt or some other Chevy ‘Retro Named’ SSVolt equivalent! Produce these cars where we can afford to put our HS and College students in them and you’ll see numbers like never before. GM – Get some fresh executives that ‘walk with a purpose’ and make a vehicle we can afford at the dealership and pump! Buy American use to be a slogan for many people in this country. Made in China/Japan or some other Asian Nation is now accepted and America now works for these Countries. So will GM if they don’t keep up and get right with their consumers.

I would pre-order a Volt, up to $30,000.