Charging Ahead on the Volt

Glad to see progress on the Volt. It's just a couple years too late. Too bad managment does not realize that the gas prices are getting so bad lately that people are now buying every Toyota Hybird vehicle they can find. Which is one less GM vehicle being sold. GM does need a back up vehicle however, besides the Volt. You should also concentrate on a decent small gas powered car (not the Aveo) built here with a 35 to 45 MPG rating which is economical to purchase. This will be needed to supplement the Volt demands.

It is great that progess and decisions are starting to be made on the batteries. I wonder why we have never heard of any of these companies. What about all the American companies we hear so much about such as AltairNano? It is surprising that a German company has an automotive solution when the German automakers seem to be sticking with Diesel.

Hopefully some American battery manufacturers will be in the running and actually make them here.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/05/01/autos/diesels/

Diesels are coming back I really feel GM needs to put diesels in their small cars and trucks. If they don't they will be play catch up. With the diesel market.

Thanks for keeping GMs fans and customers posted. We expect great things from the "new" GM.

At this point I don't think anyone can question GM's seriousness on the Volt development and winning back technological leadership.

Keep the press informed, free advertisement and let them know every new breakthrough until we win the last skeptic.

Technology is never too late nor is it ever too soon but right now it's high time we take back our roads from our twin addiction of imported cars and imported oil.

We got plenty of both at home.

This is great news indeed and proves to the naysaysers that General Motors is indeed committed to becoming a greener automobile company.

Check out www.ChevyVoltForum.com for more discussion and join in with your thoughts!

Diesel is a fine thing when it includes the most modern emissions controls, including particulates and NOx. But while diesel helps, its not a long-term alternative to petroleum. Electric charging is a long-term alternative and batteries are the key to that.

GM: show us you still have the EV mojo!

What are the possibilities of GM offering different size batteries for a variety of range capabilities? Similar to having different size engines in an ICE vehicle. 40 mile range is ok,
but I drive 50 to 60 miles a day, It would be nice to have some options.

God job GM! As you may have known, in the automible world and in this battle where GM is in right now, time is the first enemy. For this reason, even though GM seems to speed up Volt production, it would be wise for him to develop simultaneously (at the same time) Volt with diffrent possibilities: diesel, ethanol, fuel cell, gasoline, as production source for the electricity

Toyota's HEV sales have stayed strong due to the company's decision to offer discounts and financing incentives. In the meantime, Honda will be ending Accord Hybrid production after years of slow sales.

I am glad to hear that GM is finally taking Hybrid vehicles serious. If this new technology works out, I will be the first in line to hand over my hard earned cash to an American automaker that seems to be taking more of a leadership role.

If you can produce this car, with a 500+ mile range, using the gasoline engine to recharge the batteries, I wouldn't have to refill the tank for a month or more. This car would be perfect for my driving needs.

Come on GM, hurry up and bring this baby to market.

When the time was ripe for high compression V8s and Automatic transmissions GM was there first and the rest of the industry followed.
No matter were fuels go, electric drivetrains are; more economical to manufature,more precisly controllable,at least an exponent more efficient.
Traditional hybreds are just a stepping stone towards a new paradgm.
America welcome to the future!

This is exactly what GM needs to do: put its money where its mouth is on ultra-efficient vehicles and I applaud the move. It's true that GM is playing catch-up in the hybrid game, but the Volt isn't catching up to anyone: it's establishing a new market.

Denise,
Could you or someone else at GM clarify who will be the battery cell provider for Continental Automotive System. I read somewhere that it will be A123System but nothing offical.

Note the Los Angeles times article 6/5/07, "Honda's pricey Accord hybrid runs out of gas", including the following:

"As Honda learned, people who buy hybrids tend to focus on one number, and it isn't horsepower. 'It's been our experience that hybrid customers respond to high fuel economy numbers,' spokesman Sage Marie said Monday."

This article also includes an interesting chart on year to date hybrid sales, including the EPA combined mileage. Two examples:

Toyota Prius, 55 mpg, 76,747 sales ytd.

Saturn VUE, 29 mpg, 3969 sales ytd.

how about some diesels,die-hys,and hybrids?
short,mid & long term.
diesel are cheaper all the way around compared to gas, better mileage,built less expensive.
diesel- hybrid would give less oil dependability and the use of current technology, which providing cash flow to develop future tech like EV.
if you don't take it in step and try to jump in whole hog your going to lose as you did with EV1.now imports have taken over.
just give consumers something they can grasp now,later & foreseen future.
just my theory!

I just heard a podcast where it was pointed out that the best performing automobile grade Nickel Metal Hydride battery technology has been locked up by Chevron. GM or Toyota can't even have access to this technology that is in some ways better than Lithium Ion. These NiMh batteries were used in an early model of the GM EV-1 until the EV-1 was disbanded and GM sold the technology to Chevron.

I wonder if GM wishes it had this back or are they glady using the iffy Lithium development as a potential excuse to one day say they will not produce the Volt. If Oil gets cheap before the Volt comes out they will happily go back to selling big SUV's. I say this because GM could produce a Volt and persuade Chevron to license NiMh. These would work fine and probably give a 100 mile rage for the cost of the 40 mile Lithium.

Now lets see just how open this comment page is!

For the next Q&A session with the engineers:
Is there any chance of having the Volt in a wagon form-factor?

Since I'd be trading in a compact pickup for the volt, having some extra cargo room ought to keep me from going into truck-withdrawl when I need to carry small bits of furniture around town.

I 2nd the comments over the necessity to develop batteries with further range. The latest data shows that people are driving further and further. This roughly correlates with the housing boom which forced many in larger cities to move further out to afford homes. Many in the Northeast and West Coast have 3 and 4 hour commutes. Mine is 60 miles a day and is considered mild by local standards. 40 miles is a good start. But I would hope that the evolution in battery research for this model would improve over time.

Perhaps every model year could offer better battery performance. A bold approach might offer a lease program for batteries with the option to upgrade for units that have further range. Either that or enable programs that allow consumers the option to voluntarily upgrade to a better battery. This would be no different than someone electing to install Satellite radio or after market parts. Perhaps invent a whole slew of 'tuner' parts for these cars that offer higher performance, batteries, and so on. Develop a community. Make it cool for the masses.

Lastly, though this is just pure selfish self-interest... please build a small truck version, because that's what I drive. If not... a small truck with a diesel engine would be very good. First car maker that makes a small diesel truck for the NA market gets my money.

Denise
What happened to the Johnson-Saft battery development front? Are they out of the picture?
LD Moderator, gm-volt.com

Hi everyone. Just wanted to say something in response to the "lets see how open this page is" comment.

You know, 'daring' us to publish something by saying 'let's see how open they really are' doesn't work... if a comment is germaine to the conversation and doesn't include profanity/vulgarity, unsupported assertions, or personal attacks, it goes up.

If a comment is off-topic or has any of those things, it doesn't. Someone daring us or trying to test us into posting something has no effect one way or the other. (All anyone has to do is read the comments on other posts to know that we publish people's criticisms quite often!)

Just so you know. :-)

That said, thanks everyone for your comments and please know that we are paying attention to them, adding questions to the list to take back to the Volt team, etc. And I'll try to get the answer to the question about battery cell providers. Thanks!

your man lutz did NOT do you proud today on NPR. he sounded mean, arrogant and willfully ignorant of many topics, including global warming. he had an opportunity to promote the volt to a friendly audience, and spin that into GM's favor in terms of larger climate change issues, and failed to do that. i think it is likely he made more enemies than friends. best of luck moving forward if this is your friendly public face . . .

I'm very excited about the Volt. And to the people that keep citing the Prius as getting 55 mpg on this site, you should know that Consumer Reports tested it and found the Prius to only get about 35 mpg in real world driving conditions. I know that no cars actually get what the EPA says, but 55 down to 35 is pretty rediculous. GM, I think you need to somehow use this discrepency to your advantage.

Edvard said:

A bold approach might offer a lease program for batteries with the option to upgrade for units that have further range.

Edvard,

An even bolder approach would be for GM to offer a "battery-less" electric car that would use a small, constant speed diesel motor to power a generator to power the wheels. (As they do with their superb diesel-electric locomotives.) Afterall according to Lutz, the Volt will get 50 mpg on just such an engine when the battery is discharged.

Edvard said:

...please build a small truck version, because that's what I drive. If not... a small truck with a diesel engine would be very good. First car maker that makes a small diesel truck for the NA market gets my money.

I agree strongly Edvard. While cars such as the Volt and Prius make passable people mover and commuter cars, they certainly don't have the usefullness that small trucks have.

I own a Jetta TDI (usually gets 50+ mpg on the highway) and a GMC Sonoma light pickup. Love the usefulness of the Sonoma but everytime I drive it, I wish it had the VW's TDI engine.

Here's hoping that someday the high muckamucks at GM, Ford, and Chrysler will see the light when it comes to powering their cars and light trucks with efficient, turbocharged diesels.

Best,

Gary Dikkers

GM is trying hard and fighting for its corporation. Being behind the efforts made for the Volt is not heinous. Neither is constructive criticism.

But naysaying does nothing. If one were to work on a legitimate project and have many simply castigate that one, what positive outcome could come of this?

The Volt is not only something which can be a reality, but it shows tremendous effort from a once faltering corporation. And it can be a major contribution to automobiles.

I am one that backs GM in their efforts!

While I appreciate everything I hear about the progress at GM in terms of sales and new product, I really must say that I am being converted over to Peter Delorenzo's way of thinking about all of the PR surrounding the Volt (and other great, but as yet unavailable, products like the Camaro, 2 mode hybrids, fuel cells, etc...)

All of this business progress & engineering via press release gets good headlines, but I fear that it will end up blowing up in your faces. Delorenzo calls it “T-birding” your problem and I could not agree more with the analogy. Ford peddled its Thunderbird around autoshows for 3 years before it was available to the public. It got great buzz the first time it showed up at the NAIAS, but by the time you could buy one it was too costly, too heavy and the street buzz had gone flat. The Chevy SSR was much the same case study and the Pontiac Solstice was nearly the same (luckily it came a bit quicker, cheaper and with the GXP and the Saturn Sky it should survive a bit longer – still DO NOT let the kappa platform wither on the vine – KEEP IT FRESH)

Be careful. All the Fancy Press Releases, blog entries and CNN.com stories about the Volt may in the end buy you nothing. If the Volt debuts in 2010 and delivers only 80% of what the concept promises you will have another EV1 on your hands, the public will yawn with apathy and then go buy the next(next, next) gen Prius. Same with the Camaro, the Transformers movie tie in will be for nothing if it really takes another 2 or 3 years for the public to buy one (hopefully the CAW will cooperate on the Oshawa plant refurb).

Not trying to be a naysayer (a huge GM fan at heart), its just that you may want to cool your PR jets on some of these longer term projects. I know everyone in all the departments from Pontiac to Warren to the Ren Cen want a piece of the lime light, but reign it in until you have something real to sell us.

I think gm is hitting right on design and function alot of people arenot realizing what this volt design means for the next ten years this ground work for a whole new platform of vehicles

Thanks for the update! How about a summary of all the hybrid, E85 and other such GM models listed in one place?
Thanks

we still will need to import oil to make diesel fuel and with everyone using diesel the priced will raise because of supply and demand. i still think that natural gas is the better way to go. i may prejudice because i own shares in gas wells BUT they do not cause any secondary pollution like electric power plants either coal fired or nuclear

I caught most of "Maximum Bob" on On POint yesterday. (wish it had been live where I am as I wanted to call in) He took some unwarranted heat from the NRDC, but don't let that deter your efforts. I wanted to point out, and Bob finally got the chance to near the end, that the Volt is not the replacement car for the family sedan, or any long distance cruiser - that it with its commuter style range for most people will be a second or third vehicle. One concern I have is, if GM has trouble selling the Aveo with segment leading mpg and a real;ly low price, will people flock to a close to $30,000 economy car just for the new technology? As Bob said, the American car manufacturers build big pickups and SUVs because that is what people want, and need - but averaging 9 mpg in a full size pickup and 14 in a full size SUV (not GM but that's my fault) is almost criminal.

So the trend I see is towards mid-size SUVs and trucks just as it was toward shrinking the family sedan 30 years ago. I know that probably 25% of the mass of any vehicle is because of federal mandates, but any weight we can jettison will show up in improved mileage. That's why a 3000# 260 hp Solstice GXP can get 35 mpg highway. That's a number I could live with for a long time on any vehicle I buy, regardless of gas prices.

Two related news items maybe somebody wishes to comment on -
1. Australia's PM has proposed adding a tax to each and every vehicle sold there, except hybrids
2. Honda has announced they are ceasing production of Accord hybrids.

erich, 6/6, 5:42 PM:

Alas, I have to agree. You should have seen Lutz's recent letter to Autoweek concerning the Union of Concerned Scientists. Talk about self destructive arrogance.

Adam, 6/6, 5:53 PM:

Actually, the Consumer Reports combined highway/city mileage for the Prius was 44 mpg, best in the industry. I posted the numbers under "That was the week that was", 5/17, 4:11 PM.
Bloggers can fact check this on the Consumer Reports website.

Yesterday our local paper, the Daily Breeze, reported on the demise of the Accord hybrid. They noted that 729,800 Priuses have been sold since inception.

I have some friends who are either Toyota employees or suppliers. I have challenged them on this idea that the Prius loses money. They just smile and say, "Toyota doesn't work that way." It has the ring of truth to me.

I am not, about to buy a Toyota, at least not yet. I am just saying that this is a viable market.

There's some good thoughts on this blog regarding how to market and share info regarding the Volt.

What you need is to get this car into a cult-like status the same way that the Prius is. Even if the Prius got the same mileage of a conventional car ( which isn't terribly far from the truth), they would STILL sell, and to the same people. The meaning behind the car is undeniably based mostly in perceived imagery. People who buy them are more than likely interested in promoting their image as one of 'environmental concern' and political identity.

In order to get this car into the good graces of most people's minds, an equally drastic change in your advertising needs to be made to personify the car as 'good'. While I myself am a GM fan, your company still has the "old GM" floating around in many people's minds.

You need to sell this car with clever and utterly different, perhaps alternative branding that would probably be vastly different from typical chevy fare. Make it chic, smart, intelligent and so on. Don't make it out to be: "Buy American because we're GM and we're doing better now." It should be more like an understated kind of campaign. Let the consumer make their own conclusions. Perhaps just ads showing people doing mundane things like plugging the car in at night. Simple yet effective ads to show that the car is easy to use yet revolutionary in it's function.

Aveo? Segment leading mpg? I don't think so. Look at the Consumer Reports mileage tests.
The Aveo isn't even in the top 15. If it had segment leading mpg, I would be driving one.

motorman,

Non-imported Diesel fuel is available! See http://www.biodiesel.org for details. This may not be enough diesel fuel for everyone, but I'll certainly pay more for biodiesel it, since it's mostly carbon neutral and since my purchase will support American farmers. It's hard to beat environmentally friendly *and* patriotic.

If there's an option for a diesel engine on the Volt, I'd be very entheusiastic about it.

---
Another question for the engineers Q&A session:

Will the different modules in the Volt be replacable after purchase? For instance, if I were to buy an electric/gasoline Volt on Opening day, and a Diesel-powered version comes out 18 months later, could I replace my gasoline-powered generator with a diesel-powered generator? Or does that modularity only apply during manufacture?

JohnP said:

As Bob said, the American car manufacturers build big pickups and SUVs because that is what people want, and need - but averaging 9 mpg in a full size pickup and 14 in a full size SUV (not GM but that's my fault) is almost criminal.

It is what many people want, BUT it is not what they need.

What GM, Chrysler, and Ford need to do is to stop pandering to what people want, and help them understand what they need and what is socially responsible.

But how many people who drive Hummers, SUVs, and heavy pickups really need them? Is anyone who uses a Hummer or SUV to commute from their suburban home to their office doing the right thing? Of course not. (Every time I see a Hummer go by, I want to ask the driver, "Where's the war, buddy?")

It borders on being criminally irresponsible and wasteful to use the energy needed to move 6,000 lbs of steel, glass, and rubber just to transport one 200 lb man or one 130 lb woman from house to office and back. Yet everyday as I walk to and from work, I see an endless stream of people doing just that -- all in vehicles carrying only one person.

And despite what Bob Lutz said on NPR Wednesday, GM promotes doing exactly that, because that's where their largest profit margin is. (When is the last time you saw a TV ad for the Chevy Aveo?)

The fact is, most of the fuel we burn each day is not used moving people, but is instead wasted moving back and forth the tons of steel, glass, plastic, and rubber that people surround themselves with when they drive.

People who really need heavy vehicles to do their jobs and earn a living should have them. But those who drive heavy vehicles just to satisfy some emotional need, should step back and refocus.

V/R

Gary Dikkers

he had an opportunity to promote the volt to a friendly audience, and spin that into GM's favor in terms of larger climate change issues, and failed to do that. i think it is likely he made more enemies than friends.If you can produce this car, with a 500+ mile range, using the gasoline engine to recharge the batteries, I wouldn't have to refill the tank for a month or more. This car would be perfect for my driving needs.

An even bolder approach would be for GM to offer a "battery-less" electric car that would use a small, constant speed diesel motor to power a generator to power the wheels.

A battery-less electric car isn't the paradox it seems.

A diesel-powered engine/generator power pack would in effect be an electro-mechanical battery, instead of a chemical battery.

It would be a device for turning a fuel into electricity at the car, and would have several advantages over a Volt with a still-to-be-developed lithium-ion battery.

Advantages

I'm serious Denise, if you haven't consider an electric vehicle with a self-contained, electro-mechanical power pack, instead of a heavy lithium battery that may or may not prove practical and possible, you need to.

At least keep it in the back of your mind as an alternate to the Volt when you run into what are probably inevitable battery problems.

Regards,

Gary Dikkers

hi everyone! there is a great article titled "New Batteries readied for Gm's Electric Vehicle at http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/18833/. It's a great article that details advances made in li-ion batteries. i highly suggest everyone including children read it. It will help stimulate a huge amount of interest in science and technology. i can't wait to get a Volt for myself. One man, one volt! It's democracy, baby!

Green and Gold metalic will suffice, I always liked that color anyways when it was offered with the 73 Type LT Camaro.

Since GM is listening, please, oh please, spend some time redesigning the tail end of the Volt. You have a sweet looking front end designed into the concept, but it looks like you ran out of gas with regards to the rear. Look at it this way, give your competition something to look at as you re-take the lead.

But let it be known, if the production model were to sport the same appearance as the concept, I will still be first in line here in Alabama for a Volt. Thank you for the update...

Johnnie

Why not consider the Altairnano nanosafe lithium titanate battery for the VOLT?

It's life has been tested to 25,000 charge/recharge cycles thus far with no degradation in charge capacity. It quick charges in less than 10 minutes. It has no issues with thermal runaway, it can be overcharged, punctured, crushed, etc and no safety issues.

What more does GM need in a battery?

It currently sits in a truck which can carry 5 people and has a range of 135 mph.

Is an internal combustion engine even necessary GM?

Wonderful!

Plug-in electric cars are the answer.
I know, I drove an EV1 for 3 years and NEVER bought gas. 1997-2000.
The EV1 was a fun car to drive. It was a rocket. Very fast and powerful.
People didn't know they wanted an iPod until it was marketed to them.
People didn't know they wanted cell phones until they were available to try.
I guess we need a government mandate like seatbelts, airbags, catalitic converters, etc. , to get GM and the other automakers to make plug-in electric cars again.
P.S. the Prius is an electric car without a plug. You have to put gas in it to generate electricity.
My friend Al gets 58 mpg with his.
Spin away GM!
The truth will prevail.
Jeff

I think the volt is a great idea. Don't give up on hydrogen or ethanol either. All three of these initiatives are good for the planet and should turn into greater car sales in the future. We have to get away from oil and oil based products. People who buy Toyota hybrids don't understand this. I don't see how buying a Prius for an extra $8,000 is economical let alone good for our planet. Keep up the good work GM!!!
One question. Has anyone ever thought about bringing back the chevelle? Just a thought.

I am pleased to hear that Chevy is again going to build an electric car. I hope that this project will not just be another EV-1. I would like to see this car go into full scale production, I would be interested in buying one. I will NOT lease one however.

I really hope that you do build this car. I am sure it will sell, with gas at 3.10 a gallon and this vehile requires no fuel for the first 40 miles, how can it not sell???

Christopher Barger [Director, GM Global Communications Technology] --

I've noted your "byline" on a couple of comments on this blog lately. In a comment on the May 18th post "The Week That Was" I suggested that GM should have representatives post responses in the comments so that we get an actual dialogue going, rather than just a ping/echo effect, and whether or not you are doing so in response to that request, I'm grateful that you are! (Your post on June 1st "Addressing the Volt Questions" consisted entirely of a response to inquiries, as well. Good!)

As you note, the blog comments here are quite "open"; if anybody doubts this, I invite you to use the box at right to search for my handle, "altfuels," to see some of the harsh things I've said that, in fact, blog staff have gone out of their way to help me post (I've now learned not to include URLs, since that gets my comments caught in the spam filters). Or search for "Korthof" (one "f") to see comments GM has posted from somebody who is so "angry left" that he regularly gets accused of being a conspiracy-monger even by other electric-vehicle advocates!

That being the case, I would like to urge you to get somebody to write a response to some of the criticisms out there about GM's public statements and actions with regard to terminated programs like the EV1 electric car (1997 and 1999 model years) and natural-gas vehicles (1992 through 2006). Again, I've learned not to include URLs in comments posted to this blog, so let me point you to my comment at 6:19 p.m. on January 27th on the January 25th "FYI" blog post "Working Together to Keep Electric Technology Alive" with regard to the EV1, and at 2:33 a.m. on May 22nd on the May 16th "FastLane" blog post "300 Miles ... and Counting" with regard to natural-gas vs. hydrogen vehicles. I hate to sound like I'm "pimping" my own comments (look at me, look at me, look at me), but I am trying to draw GM's attention to the necessity of converting skeptics by answering our well-founded doubts about management's sincerity in promising both the Volt and fuel-cell vehicles -- and there are a lot of us, both skeptics and doubts. It's not just me, not by a long shot, though I seem to be the one making the biggest stink about this (civilly, I hope) on these blogs.

This is not a "dare"; rather, I think GM management needs to pay some attention to this, because they are still shooting holes in their credibility to this day. I too listened to Bob Lutz's NPR interview a couple of days ago (iTunes podcast), and at the end he said some things about the EV1 that were right out of the same ol' same ol' playbook. Among other things (e.g., EV1s needed "a great deal of maintenance and care" -- right, like rotating the tires), the one that stood out was his assertion that "the EV1 was a vehicle that, frankly, we couldn't sell. We tried and tried to sell it, we couldn't, we finally put it out on lease." This is flat-out false; GM never offered the EV1 for outright sale -- if they had, I would have had my checkbook in my hand the day in December 1996 when I went to my local Saturn dealer to see the first arrivals (I don't have enough money to lease vehicles).

I don't like to call an ol' Marine a liar, so I'll charitably assume that he was not aware that this was a falsehood; after all, he wasn't with GM during the brief period when EV1s were actually available. If that's the case, though, he should find out who fed him this misinformation and fire that person! GM management's continuing failure to come clean about their reasons for cancelling and crushing the EV1, as detailed in my January 27th comment referenced above, is the main reason that so many people who have been paying attention to alternative-fueled vehicles for more than a couple of years are deeply skeptical about any promises they make about advanced-drivetrain vehicles, and especially about their willingness to sustain any kind of long-term commitment to them. (Of course, we could say the same about the other automakers who built electric vehicles several years ago, then abandoned them as soon as the California Air Resources Board made it possible to do so; but this is a GM blog, so I'm talking about GM. If Toyota has the guts to put up an open forum like this, tell me where to find it so I can give them an earful!) So, again, if you want to win over those of us skeptics who are experienced with alternative-fuel vehicles, who by rights should be the biggest boosters of the E-Flex idea, I urge you to use this blog to either (1) convince us, point-counterpoint, that the stated reasons are not spin, or (2) repudiate that spin and let's start afresh.

Tom --

Try gmaltfuel.com for links to GM's alternative-fuel and hybrid vehicles. Unfortunately, they cancelled their last natural-gas-powered vehicles after the 2006 model year (the first vehicle I ever bought was a 1992 Chevy natural-gas pickup), and the EV1 information disappeared in about September 2004.

getalifeagain --

"Naysaying does nothing" is not correct, at least if by naysaying you mean what I've done above, namely taking shots at the credibility of GM management. Remember that GM's designers and engineers succeeded in creating the EV1, and I am quite confident that they are capable of creating the Volt; however, management strangled the EV1 in its cradle, and as I detailed above they are not acting in such a way as to give us confidence that they won't pull the same thing with the Volt. (I'm not saying they're planning to do so -- I'm just saying we don't have any reason to be confident that they wouldn't if they decided there was a reason to do so, say to scuttle regulations that they don't like, as before.) "Naysaying" in this sense lets them know that we're watching, and it wouldn't take seven years from the end of production for plenty of movies like "Who Killed the Electric Car?" to be made this time. There was little attention paid to the EV1 (and other EVs of that period) by the public until it was too late; we don't intend to let that happen again, and we want GM management to know that. If in the course of making that point we also get a chance to let GM's engineers and designers know that we really want them to succeed, so much the better.

Edward Hayes --

Ditto. GM had "technological leadership" a decade ago with the EV1, and they crushed it; even before they quit making EV1s, they blamed the vehicle and the market and everything but their own refusal to make them readily available, or available at all in significant numbers (or to actually sell them, as I noted above), and they are still doing so to this day. As long as GM management continues to spin and dissemble, those of us burned (crushed?) by their handling of the EV1 have no reason to trust them not to pull the same thing in the future even if the Volt does make it to showrooms. The "last skeptic," and plenty of others before him, will not be won until we see the Volt in showrooms actually for sale (not lease-only and three years from the crusher) in reasonable numbers.

Gary Dikkers --

Your proposed "battery-less electric vehicle" would be less efficient than an ordinary hybrid, precisely because it lacks a battery (plug-in or not). The point of a large (though not Volt-sized) traction battery in a hybrid is to provide "surge" power for acceleration, hill-climbing, etc., so that the vehicle's combustion engine can be smaller and less thirsty. If there is no traction battery, then the engine has to be big enough to put out the power unassisted for the greatest demand that will be placed on the vehicle, and will be correspondingly less efficient under more typical operating conditions -- a constant-RPM setup won't work unless there's a battery (or other power storage system) to "follow the load." Diesel-electric locomotives without batteries aren't particularly focused on efficiency (there are newer models with batteries that are); rather, they are trying to avoid the need for a monstrous clutch or torque converter. Electric motors (or steam engines, for that matter) have all of their torque available from zero RPM; an internal-combustion engine, though, has to "come on the cam" and so there needs to be a clutch or torque converter to slip and pass the revving engine's torque to the (initially) non-revving drive wheels. (In a battery-less electric vehicle, you'd also lose the ability to recover energy through regenerative braking; I understand a battery-less diesel-electric locomotive just takes the power absorbed, a.k.a. regenerated, by the slowing electric motor and blows it out through a bunch of big resistors as heat.)

Since this is a GM blog site, I can only hope they just take a few minutes and read just a few of the hundreds of comments that are listed here. Even if you could combine them all into one. The wording is just about the same in all of them. Build it NOW! Stop playing with crayons, clay and paper. Get this concept car to market before the Camero. That is all we need is another gas hog, retro car that will sit in the show rooms across America and look pretty. When cars like the Prius are UGLY as sin and selling like hotcakes. Smarten up GM. Now is the chance for you to lead in a market that you once owned and are now playing catch up. How many people will be buying this show car to drive back and forth to work everyday? Gas mileage betting will not top 20 mpg. Sure you will sell a few to those muscle car enthusiast but that person's other car is going to be a Prius. Your answer to the Prius is the Saturn Aura Greenline..Please even though it handles better, is constructed better, equipped better and by all means better looking hands down. (Great Job Design Team) it still only gets 35 mpg highway and 28 city. That is the best mpg GM has in their line up. Prius gets 60 mpg highway 54 mpg city. I was told today from a GM Info person that I called to find out more info on the Volt that this car is not slotted for assembly until 2010 or later if ever. WHAT IS UP WITH THAT? She said that the car market just would not hold up selling an economically designed fuel-efficient car. That you are still focusing all of your attention on the Avalanche, Suburban and Tahoe. Where do I need to go to shake someone to snap them out of a trance you seem to be in that big is always going to be better. Please start over, rethink and build cars that people will buy now. There is a reason that ugly little Prius is also mentioned in several of the comments. People are buying them because we need them now. Get out of the gas companies pocket and start to do things the right way now. Lead again, let them follow. Put me on the Volt mailing list and where do I send my check for pre-manufatured sales. I also asked the lady where this car will be shown next I want to see this in person she didn't have a clue.

If history is any indication, Toyota will probably beat GM to the plug-in hybrid market and it will have a product that will be superior in every way compared to anything that GM would come out with. For example, when GM came out with the EV1 in 1996, Toyota introduced the RAV4 EV, a vehicle that was more practical and functional than the EV1 and had a longer driving range.

GM lacks the culture to produce a ground breaking autombile. I know, I used to work for it.

I holding out for the Volt GM, I am getting worried with gas prices. Additionally I will not be trading in any vehicles I plan on keeping my 2005 GMC Sierra 1/2ton Crew Cab for moving and hauling and using the Volt daily. Would like to have a solid release date.

Bob Lutz on NPR last Wednesday

For those who didn't hear it, you can listen on-line at NPR's On Point

The “Thermal Event” euphemism

At 20 min 26 sec into the interview Mr Lutz uses the euphemism "thermal event" to describe what may be one of the more serious potential drawbacks of lithium-ion batteries. Bob Ashbrook asked if he meant, "Fire." and Lutz shot back, "Our lawyers don't allow us to use that term."

I am astounded that someone with the nickname "Maximum Bob," and who used to be a Marine Corps fighter pilot had to resort to such a weak euphemism as "thermal event" to describe a battery fire.

That would have really been something to hear when he was still a fighter jock. Can you imagine Bob Lutz making a radio call to his wingman saying, "Ramrod Lead this is Two, I may have to eject, I'm having a thermal event in the cockpit."

Cheers,

Gary Dikkers

Quoting the Beatles...."I'm so tired..."
Why do I care about GM so much? Do I really think the fate of GM islinked to the fate of this country anymore?
At first, when Lutz was hired, I had high hopes for the future of GM. And again, when Saturn again became the experimental developmental branch of GM and brought in cars with classic lines, power and a first class interior, i thought that maybe they couldn't screw up again. But they proved me wrong. I would love to purchase a GM auto again. But when they keep saying that to improve the fuel efficiency of their cars would cost thousands of dollars, it is too much too take. I think the hypebole is a bit over the top. They currently manufacture or purchase vua sub-contracts a significant number of smaller displacement engines or diesels that would sell here despite what GM execs claim. I am tired of the same old propaganda from the big three. I do acknowledge that the cars they are designing and selling in the USA are on the same plane as the Japsanese , but the Koreans will soon be the benchmark instead of GM only because GM refuses to use their cash to become the pre-eminent auto manufacturer in the world. GM is the only car company that has the capital to do it, but they lack the guts. They have a very small window to capitalizeon this opportunity and I think it is closing on Lutz.
I don't expect this to be printed due to the lack of guts on the Blogmaster and GM in general, but I had to get it off my chest.
An Astra would be in my sights this year, but a Civic and the MINI S is probably the way to go. I will be honest and say that the Cobalt with the German 2.0L supercharged engine s a blast, but the mileage is terrible. How can a MINI-S with a Pueugeot engine get the mileage it gets? Remarkable!
Good luck GM. Get smart quick or go into another business.

Hi Denise, Very interesting comments, I am no engineer but anyone ever thought to built a car (like the EV-1)that runs on electrics only and include a small gas/diesel engine generator to keep the battery top up while on an extended trip, and of course with a ac plug.

I would still like to hear GM comment on how Volt will be significantly different from this car:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1#EV1_series_hybrid

Note that its now 9 years since this car was shown, and Volt isnt yet running.

Please fix 3 things with the Volt:

1. Make the engine flex-fuel (E-85 capable) from the start. No special ordering, no waits for that unique Volt to come in to the dealership. Its a no-cost option on the Impala so it shouldn't be a big deal to make it standard since there's no downside.

2. Reduce the length of the hood on the concept. There's no practical reason that the hood needs to be that long. Bet Honda could fit such a setup in half that space.

3. Make it with the intent that it will be a volume car. Long waiting lists and jacked-up sticker prices could kill this car.

Thanks!

IF GM was really serious about fuel flexibility and efficiency, they would use a small turbine APU for all e-Flex vehicles that could adjust itself so that it could burn almost ANY combustible liquid or gas! Oh, they did that already. http://www.autoworld.com/news/GMC/Series_Hybrid.htm Turbine APUs that use a recuperator, and foil bearings are 3 TIMES more fuel efficient than even the best piston engines and they only have 1 moving part. Talk about longevity!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine What happened, GM? Not enough service work for your dealers?

Denise, as a retired GM engineer, I forward the GM retiree e-news to a freind assocated with Boeing aircraft design for the US Navy. He replied with an interesting comment on the Volt battery that may deserve noting, as follows:
"A side note on the lithium-ion batteries. The USN does not like and for the most part keeps them off ships due to their reaction to water. They actually classify them as HAZMAT material. I tried using them on the UCAV-N (unmanned combat air vehicle-Navy) and they required me to change the battery to some other type. My question is if you use them in cars and they are in an accident will the fire fighters know that the batteries react in a very negative way to water?". I would very much appreciate a reply on this question. Thank you,
Robert Scearce
GM Fairfax Assembly-Retired
Kansas City, Kansas

IF GM was really serious about fuel flexibility and efficiency, they would use a small turbine APU for all e-Flex vehicles that could adjust itself so that it could burn almost ANY combustible liquid or gas! Oh, they did that already. http://www.autoworld.com/news/GMC/Series_Hybrid.htm Turbine APUs that use a recuperator, and foil bearings are 3 TIMES more fuel efficient than even the best piston engines and they only have 1 moving part. Talk about longevity!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine What happened, GM? Not enough service work for your dealers?

Man, I wish GM woul start using its enormous clout for good instead of mediocrity.

If GM successfully lobbied for national healthcare, it would take care of a huge part of its economic burden, not to mention earning the gratitude of millions of grateful working class Americans, most of whom own cars.

If GM could really get its act together and support the fuel efficiency requirements, and start SELLING (instead of just planning) truly fuel efficient vehicles, and really follow through on weaning America off foreign oil, that would be nice too.

And seriously, stop arguing for your right to build gas-guzzling mediocrity, it just makes GM look stupid.

GM,

Please don't take the nutjobs on this site too seriously. They are correct that you need to produce this car ASAP, but their imaginations run wild when accusing GM of hyping up the Volt with no intentions of ever selling it.

Most people in this country just need a little convincing. Produce the Volt by 2011 and you will be back on top to stay.

Bob Lutz on NPR last wednesday

Those who missed it, can listen on-line at NPR's On Point

At 16 min 50 sec into the interview Mr Lutz told host Tom Ashbrook that no one is sure how to compute the mileage economy figures of a battery electric car for CAFE purposes. I'm surprised he'd say that. Afterall, even one of those bachelor degree-only scientists from the Union of Concerned Scientists could figure that out handily. Computing the equivalent fuel mileage for battery electric cars for CAFE purposes is straightforward:

Therefore:

It will be straightforward measuring how many kilowatt-hours a Volt consumes going a set distance and then converting that into an equivalent value to use in computing GM's CAFE.

However, there is one big question:

Should the EPA measure the kWh that actually goes into a Volt's battery, or the amount of kWh that left the power station?

Transmission Line Losses

The reason to care about the difference is that the transmission line losses can be quite high -- as much as 10 to 30%. For example, a power plant 60 miles away might send 1000 kWh of fossil fuel-derived electricity through the transmission lines to the Volt sitting in someone’s garage, while only 700 kWh arrives to end up in the battery and be available for propelling the car.

It will be important for the EPA to decide what value to use for GM's CAFE computation so they can apply that equally to all makers of battery-electric cars.

Regards,

Gary Dikkers

tim what do you do with all the heat produces by a turbine engine?

I find the argument that there exists a risk for firefighters to encounter problems with LI batteries somewhat weak. For one, almost all car fires aren't put out with water. A non-conductive dry chemical agent is often employed instead. Secondly, let's think for just a minute about what a typical current car has in it already: batteries that have a potential to explode due to their hydrochloric acid content, gasoline- which depending on the fullness or emptiness of a fuel tank can be either flammable or explosive.

Lastly, the US Navy operates on a totally different plane than civilian industry. Obviously the Navy wouldn't drive Chevy Cobalts onto the front line, nor would Miss Soccer Mom drive a tank to drop off the kiddies at school.There will exist a level or error and risk that is going to be acceptable and tolerable at different rates depending on the useage of that product, and comparing a daily driver car to a Destroyer Class Navy vessel isn't exactly convincing to me when making an argument over vehicular safety.

I have always felt that by controlling the emission and energy production levels centrally, as in a power plant is far superior to depending on millions of drivers with little to no knowledge of their car's mechanical condition. We all have people in our neighborhoods who drive the clunker car with a cloud of blue oil-burning smoke pouring out of the tailpipe. MOST states still lack inspections for cars, which in itself is a joke.

By converting the passenger car output to an electrically driven one will mean a transfer of power production from individual cars to a central location. The fact that modern power plants can burn sources of energy that still exist in massive quantities- like coal- more cleanly than ever means a diversification of power and fuel options, most of which can be procured in the US.

This alone is why I favor cars like the Volt, which at least start this process.

It is embarrassing that American car companies just don't get it. Like many people, I grew up with my parents buying American. Not so for the more money conscious baby-boomers. Factor in the resale value and American cars just are not worth it. I have three words for GM, et. al., quality, quality, quality.

A few quick searches on Autotrader.com and Cars.com shows a used Honda Fit is going for eqaul, and in many cases, more money than a new one. When the American companies get a reputation that allows a small fuel efficient car like that command more money used than new they may have a chance. Until then they can market, market, market till the cows come home (and they've been coming for years) and all the while continue to loose market share.

On one hand, you have GM saying that the Volt is the future.

On the other you have them complaining about increased fuel economy adding too much money to the price of cars (Source: http://tinyurl.com/266je3)

So which is it, GM? Do you want to produce fuel efficient cars or do you want the status quo? It seems like you want to be dragged kicking and screaming into making cars with better fuel economy

GM - I will be one of the first to put down a deposit on a Volt. I was wondering if there is a plan to partner with Solar Panel manufacturers to manufacture and install home charge stations? I was finally glad to see that someone finally took the Union of Concerned scientists to task. If they are so smart how come they don't invent a better battery, more efficient engines, bio-fuels, etc?

john:

You and your cohorts on here either a) clueless about the auto industry or b)purposely ignoring the facts in order to blame GM for the US' oil dependency.

The idea that the ONLY measure of a companies commitment to fuel economy is the presence of a 60mpg hybrid is a joke. There is ONLY one such car for sale in the US today so by that definition only Toyota is being environmentally responsible.

"start SELLING (instead of just planning) truly fuel efficient vehicles, and really follow through on weaning America off foreign oil, that would be nice too."

This makes no sense whatsover. GMs midsize cars, midsize SUVs, pikcups and large SUVs get class competitive or class leading mileage. The Aura GL are '07 Vue GL are on sale now. The Malibu hybrid and 2008 Vue hybrid are coming out within months. The Malibu 4 LTZ will have class leading mileage for gas only midsize cars. Event he current Malibu with a 4 speed auto gets nearly class leading mileage in 4 cylinder and V6 forms. 60mpg hybrids are very rare in this auto market and having one in your lineup does not excuse the rest of your offerings. By the same token, not having one doesn't mean GM has no fuel efficient offerings in its stable.

"And seriously, stop arguing for your right to build gas-guzzling mediocrity, it just makes GM look stupid."

I guess that makes Nissan, Ford, Chrsyler and the truck/SUV half of Toyota stupid. BTW, in case you missed it none of the Asian automakers have endorsed the aggressive fuel economy rules being proposed in congress.

These progress announcements have to stop. The only announcement I want to hear is that GM is taking orders for its 2008 E-Flex vehicle, be it the 2008 E-Flex Saturn VUE or 2008 Chevy VOLT or both. As it stands now, the only use these progress announcements have is deterring potential car buyers from plunking $$ into a NEW gasoline powered ICE car. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why car sales are down. People are waiting for E-Flex. This reminds me of what happened to VHS Recorder sales when the DVD was announced. GM needs to rapidly align greater resources to bringing the E-Flex vehicle to the public ASAP. If management is afraid to make that decision, maybe it should let the share holders decide for them. See my question to GM shareholders on Yahoo! Answers.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Alm1Cng34uYaWbNNHur3pizsy6IX?qid=20070603073302AA5LfGr

Gary,

You are talking about the equivalent of "well-to-wheel" efficiency I think.

If you are going to take the power plant into account when calculating the efficiency of an electric-drive vehicle, then you have to take the refining and transportation of gasoline into account in order to be consistent.

I'm very excited for the Volt and am hoping to make it my first new car once I finish college and become a pharmacist. 2010? Sounds good. If not, I hear the 1935 Detroit Electric car gets 80 miles to a charge. ;)

Best regards
Andy S. Rodriguez

Robert Scearce said:

"A side note on the lithium-ion batteries. The USN does not like and for the most part keeps them off ships due to their reaction to water. They actually classify them as HAZMAT material. I tried using them on the UCAV-N (unmanned combat air vehicle-Navy) and they required me to change the battery to some other type. My question is if you use them in cars and they are in an accident will the fire fighters know that the batteries react in a very negative way to water?"

That is a legitimate concern Robert, and an unanswered question. (Probably one reason why GM's lawyers make Bob Lutz say "thermal event" instead of fire.)

Lithium is a very energetic metal that wants to grab the oxygen atoms from any material around it. Put water on lithium and the lithium will combine with the oxygen atoms, causing a violent reaction creating heat that ignites the hydrogen released in the reaction. (I bet when you where in about the 7th or 8th grade, your science teacher showed you a similar experiment with sodium, an element closely related on the periodic table to lithium.)

Whoever makes GM's lithium battery will have to make sure the battery case containing the lithium is robust enough to remain intact in any high-speed crash, since I'm pretty sure GM won't be able to make sure no one ever crashes a Volt. ;-)

I spent a number of years in the Air Force and they had the same restriction about carrying lithium batteries on cargo planes the Navy has for ships. An out of control lithium fire (sorry Bob, I mean "thermal event") is not something to mess around with on an airplane or ship.)

Your concern is well-founded Robert, and I'm interested in seeing what the answer will be.

Regards,

Gary Dikkers

"A side note on the lithium-ion batteries. The USN does not like and for the most part keeps them off ships due to their reaction to water."

That is Lithium Cobalt or Lithium Manganese batteries ( found in most of consumer electronics ). These are entirely different in their safety characteristics from Lithium Phosphate batteries ( just now hitting the market, Valence, A123, PHET and so on )

Lithium Phosphate batteries do not have fire hazard problems to speak of.

Do not lump everything with "lithium" in one, there are several different types of lithium batteries out there ( both primary and rechargeable ) and new ones are continuously developed.

BOY THIS BLOG IS SLOW AND TIRED. GOING ON 9 DAYS NOW WITH THE SAME OLD TOPIC, NOT EVEN BY LUTZ or LUTZ'S SECRETARY.
SLOW. TIRED. BOGGED DOWN. LETHARGIC.
Sounds like the GM bureaucracy, doesn't it?

Jasmine, 6/13, 8:39 AM:

Alas, how true.

I, along with several others, made a similar comment a few days ago, which drew a sarcastic response from Mr. Lutz. So, just let me clarify.

I follow this blog because the fate of GM is important to me. I commented on a simlar time lapse between posts, and the time it takes to get comments up. Pretty weak in the blogosphere as we know it.

I did not mention the name Lutz. I, for one, don't care if Bob Lutz, or his secretary, ever post here again. But, if GM is to have a credible blog here, someone - engineers, designers, product planners, whatever - needs to keep up a stream of information.

Otherwise, just shut it down and don't embarrass yourselves.

altfuels said:

Your proposed "battery-less electric vehicle" would be less efficient than an ordinary hybrid, precisely because it lacks a battery (plug-in or not).

You are of course correct Sir. I was being hyperbolic in suggesting a "battery-less" vehicle with a diesel-electric power pack.

The vehicle would of course need a battery, but not the large battery (400 - 600 lbs) of the Volt as its primary power source. It would use a smaller battery to serve as a buffer between the diesel-electric power pack and the electric traction motors.

The buffer battery would provide a surge of current when accelerating, and also serve as a temporary reservoir to store current from the regenerative brakes.

One reason present diesel engines are so heavy is that they must be built to stand the severe stress of power surges and acceleration. A smaller constant-speed diesel wouldn't need to be built to stand those stresses, and would be lighter than a typical diesel engine.

It could be optimized for the RPM at which it would spend most of its time running, offering great efficiency and extreme fuel economy.

Generating the electricity at the point of use is perhaps the biggest advantage a diesel-electric power pack would offer. There would be no need to generate the electricity at a power station tens of miles away, and then push those electrons at high voltage through energy-sapping copper cables to get them to the car.

Best regards,

Gary Dikkers

Brian said:

You are talking about the equivalent of "well-to-wheel" efficiency I think. If you are going to take the power plant into account when calculating the efficiency of an electric-drive vehicle, then you have to take the refining and transportation of gasoline into account in order to be consistent.

Brian,

I'm not talking about taking the powerplant into account, but instead the line losses that happen when pushing electricity long distances through powerlines.

I'm talking about how much energy leaves the powerplant, compared to how much arrives to charge a Volt's battery.

If you live across the street from a powerplant that percentage will be very high. If you live 120 miles from the powerplant, perhaps as much as 30% of the energy will be lost en route to the car.

Think of it this way:

I'm suggesting the EPA will have to figure out how to take that loss into account when computing the equivalent fuel mileage of a battery electric car.

Regards,

Gary Dikkers

GM's strategy on going green is solely focussed on North American and Europe to a certain extent. What about Asia which is the largest future auto market?

I understand that Phoenix Motorcars is planning on making enough income on their EV's by selling their ZEV credits that they will be able to see their vehicle for $45,000 and make a significant profit.

Will GM be able to use any of your ZEV credits to reduce fines for not being able to meet CARB minimums, will you earn any credits by selling the Volt, or will you be able to use the sale of the Volt to reach a general reduction of your mpg average?

Personally I don't think GM would be able to manufacture sufficient Volt vehicles to satisfy the market, so will you be able to control the dealers so that they don't place astronomical additional markups on the vehicle?

Hi All,

In my opinion, one of the worst moves from a PR perspective would be for GM to draw attention to the Volt, and then not produce it FOR SALE in a timely manner in NA. I think the Triplets was a bad PR move for a similar reason.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, it would be like GM saying, "Look what we could do if we wanted to. IF we wanted to." If GM waits until all of the bugs are worked out of the Volt, they have waited too long and missed a huge opportunity. The Prius is not perfect - but look at what is has done for Toyota in terms of PR.

Thanks,
Chris (Toronto)

There are 2 series hybrids in Ontario today. They've been here since 1914- one in Oshawa at the auto museum and another in the Toyota plant in Cambridge. I have photos and descriptions.
Too bad the Galt electric hybrid isn't for sale- something like the Volt but at least they exist. Not really high tech Mr Lutz. In fact a friend of mine is building a series hybrid with an electric start generator and battery operated pick-up.

Bob Lutz on NPR's ON Point on Wednesday, 6-Jun-07

For those who didn't hear it, you can listen on-line at NPR's On Point

It's hard to understand what "Maximum Bob" is talking about, or if he even knows what is happening within GM's German subsidiary Opel.

(Neither car was a mini or an econobox, which Mr Lutz implied to host Tom Ashbrook are the only kind of cars that can get that high of mileage.)

So my question for Mr Lutz: If Daimler and VW have been able to market comfortable, diesel-powered cars that get fuel economy in the high 40s, and that if a division of his own company can do the same, what exactly are you talking about when you says there is no technology out there that will get 40 or 50 mpg?

Respectfully,

Gary Dikkers

I'm a 2007 Prius owner.

I can't wait to swap it for a Volt.

If you really want to pull a marketing coup, get a list of Prius owners from the DMV and make 'em an offer they can't refuse (which won't be hard).

Picture it, you could arrange a mass Prius "Trade-in-athon!"

Denise Gray,

It's great to see that GM has recognized the value that suppliers bring to the table. I just hope GM pays them for the good work that will enable the Volt to get its legs. With these technology agreements, suppliers are involved early in the game, GM learns all they can, and then shops the completed ideas out for the best price. How is that fair or ethical? And it happens ALL THE TIME.

I only hope the the battery suppliers have some smarts in dealing with your beancounters, or they will see some cheap knockoff company from China stealing their business away.

And you call this progress?

GM needs desperately to learn how to be a fair and equitable PARTNER instead of treating their supply base like a disposable commodity. You'll never have the best ideas or technologies as long as you continue this practice. Why should anybody want risk their future earnings to do business this way? Bo are you listening? Talk is cheap....

Gary Dikkers, 6/16, 4:46 PM:

Right, as always.

One really wonders what is the point of all of this transparent spin? Spin all you want, it doesn't alter the sales figures.

It seems like a rear guard action to delay the inevitable, without really changing the end game. Why?

A recent article mentioned that Mr. Lutz walked away from Chrysler with $25 million when it was sold to DB. Evidently, Eaton & Co. were similarly compensated. Does this kind of plan apply here?

"I am not, about to buy a Toyota, at least not yet. I am just saying that this is a viable market." - Noel

Dear Noel,

of course the Prius earned a lot of money for Toyota in the US so far. But if I am not mistaken, there already had been offered incentives on the Prius in the meanwhile, at least I could read about that. Despite our 6.50$/Gallon you rarely watch a Prius over here. Instead of this I can see more Aveo's on our roads, even if you consider its mileage as not outstanding. Why? The calculation is easy: Before I am going to pay 26.000 Euros for a relatively small car like a Prius, I could get an LPG-fueled Chevrolet Epica (Daewoo Tosca) with a 142 HP 6-Cylinder for the same money. This car offers about the same roominess like (e.g.) a VW Passat, lots of comfort- and safety-features and is not really more expensive to fill up than a Prius over here. An LPG-fueled Aveo even is available for clearly under 20.000 Euros. Referring to the costs a Prius simply can't compete with it. As I could read at the "Auto Bild"-magazine, Chevrolet Germany even is going to outsell Smart in the meanwhile on our market. It's too sad, that this alternative fuel doesn't seem to get popular in the US.

Noel --

I'm not so sure Gary is always right. I've seen him refuted around here quite a few times. I myself haven't the engineering knowledge he seems to possess, but I do know a thing or two about marketing and public relations.

Do yourself a favor and read the semi-recent issue of Wired that explores corporate blogging. The writer describes a new receptiveness to corporate interactivity, an attitude sweeping public relations and marketing departments everywhere.

Blogs are on the cutting edge of public relations, which, by the way, is a typical business function for most firms large and small. Nobody in his or her right mind would criticize a firm for spinning news. All firms do it, even your cherished Toyota.

And say what you want about GM's perceived intentions with this blog; they are just that: perceived intentions. Any attempts to assign these posts a negative, ulterior motive are pure hypotheses, and biased, unscientific ones, at that.

At least GM does all this in an interactive forum that allows you and others to post not only constructive points, but hearsay and conjecture that casts GM in a bad light. To me, that's stand-up company policy right there.

Let's say GM were to be a "closed company," one that didn't grant its current and potential constituencies (i.e., the consumer) to interact. I'm willing to bet the house you and others like you would be criticizing top management for that, too. We'd just have to go elsewhere to find out.

Cheers,
-Brent Skinner

Denise: Thanks for the update on the battery contracts. Perhaps you can give some of the blog readers an idea of how long something less technical takes to develop, test and implement into a production vehicle (like the new 6-speed automatics or some other new driveline).

Putting new technology into a production vehicle that will be used in a variety of extreme loads, climates and variations in maintenance by their owners takes time to do correctly.

Production vehicles that must be reliable, fun to drive, cost effective and above all safe. For those unfamiliar with the development and production timelines GM may seem to be moving slowly, but for those of us who have gone through the trials and tribulations of this process are impressed with your progress.

Keep up the great work and it was good to hear that GM assigned 500 engineers to this program. Thanks for you and your teams hard work and I look forward to your next update.

Gereon,
I think another reason the Prius doesn't sell well in Europe is because Europe already has many cars that get 40-50 MPG using readily available diesel. In the US, most cars that are deemed fuel efficient might get around 25-35 MPG. So while some in Europe might see the Prius as not being such a dramatic jump in fuel economy, the same can't be said for the US.

That in itself isn't the real reason Priuses sell well here. They do so because just like Ipods and Blue Jeans, they became fashion statements. The Prius was first sold in California, which has a large environmentally concerned... liberal population. Being seen as environmentally concerned is very important to many of these people. So what better way to advertise your political leanings than drive in a car that says it for you? Once the Prius gained that reputation and blind following, the trick was done and Toyota could sell them like hot cakes. I look at the Prius as more of a marketing success than a technological breakthrough.

If GM can do the same thing, they'll be in great shape.

Hi Edvard,

I think you are absolutely right.

As I expect that GM actually will produce the Chevy Volt, I seriously would consider buying one, even if I would have to get this car from an import-specialist for US-Vehicles. My current dealer already is experienced in that kind of business. But for now my LPG-fueled Alero is still very pleasant to drive.

GM should consider making the Volt available in different models, such as, a 40 mile range, a 60 mile range, and a 80 mile range Volt for the different commute needs the public might have.

I love the Volt. I will purchase 4 Volts when they come out (different colors). One for myself, one for my wife, and one for each of my kids. I currently drive a Ford, my wife drives a Chrysler, and kids drive Toyotas. I spend a fortune each year on gas.

gereon and brent:

Thank you for responding to my poor comments.

I think that we are all looking for the same thing here, which is for GM to survive and prosper.

I am just sick to death of reading unending articles in the press about how
Toyota is gaining market share and profitably by providing the small, fuel efficient, cars the public wants, and
GM is struggling to sell its larger vehicles. I am not making this up - just read the papers.

If I was that much in love with the Prius, I would be driving one. Instead, I am grinding my teeth in frustration waiting for GM to come up with something BETTER.

Hi Noel,

at least as I could read, the market-share of GM seems not to drop any further, due to promising new models. Just look at Saturn. I think the Astra also will take a big chunk of the cake, despite of the unfavorable Euro/Dollar-exchange-rate. I repeatedly was driving an Astra during the last weeks at my company. It's simply great. I think the Asian competition will wonder. Best regards.

"Toyota is gaining market share..." - Noel

Dear Noel,

just one annotation. On the one hand people and media are telling that GM (and other domestics) significantly lost market-share. That's correct when you look back to the past decades.

BUT:
As I repeatedly mentioned, people should maintain the relation, when they talk about this issue. GM's market share currently has stabilized at about 25%, despite of cutting rental-sales. This means, GM's market share still is about 6% higher than Volkswagen's (Europe's number one) market share in Germany! VW holds about "only" 19%, despite fuel-efficient models and a good reputation among really numerous drivers over here. I think, if VW would get 25%, these Gentlemen in Wolfsburg would freak out.

Dear Gereon:

Thanks. I did look up the Astra on the Opel website. It seems like it will be a big step in the right direction. Alas, it looks like they offer some exciting engine options in Europe which won't make it here but, even so, it must be progress.

I think that GM just underestimates the interest in very high mileage vehicles here. If they have an engine package with better mileage potential than the 1.8 Ecotec, I thnk that many potential customers would be interested in it even if it was a bit slower. I am painfully aware of the problems with getting diesels certified here, but the clearly need to bear down on that as well.

For about the 100th time, I would be happy with an Aveo which could equal or better the mileage of the Yaris. According to Consumer Reports' supposedly more real world mileage test cycle, the Yaris is the next highest mileage car offered here, after the Prius and the Civic hybrid.

They rate it at about 34 mpg combined, if memory serves. If the Astra can do that, I think it will really sell. The Yaris is really starting to take off here in L.A. Clearly, many people will give up the last bit of mileage to get a simpler, cheaper , car.

The Aveo is the right size. According to Rick, it is actually lighter than a Yaris. The Yaris only has a 4 speed automatic, or a 5 speed manual - same as the Aveo. So what is so impossible about making the Aveo meet or beat the Yaris' mileage? Come on guys, if you can finish second in class and sixth overall at Le Mans, that should be child's play. Show me an Aveo that gets even 1 mpg more than a Yaris, and I am there with the cash.

Of course, as you have said so many times, an LPG conversion would be even better.

I went to the Compact Power, Inc. link above. What do you think it says on the first page, in big red letters?

"The Future Is Now!"

How much did the oil companies pay GM to take the EV1 off the market and destroy the existing EV1's that were one the road being driven?

Hi Noel,

I think you can't compare the Yaris to the Astra, since the Astra provides vastly more room.

Recently I was looking for LPG-Pumps in Palm Beach County, FL, where my brother lives. I was surprised, actually there seem to be opportunities to fill up an LPG-fueled car. At least in urban areas of the USA, as I could imagine, there may be companies, which can retrofit vehicles for LPG-Use, either. Well, it would take some research, but maybe this would be a chance for you, also to get the benefits from LPG-Use. It's the very most common alternative fuel in Germany, applied on more than 100.000 vehicles over here in the meanwhile.

Put solar cells on the car where ever possible. Possible apply solar
electric generation in the paint/finish. I never washed my Toyota
1984 Tercel one time with any kind of soap, just cold water and a
soft brush. It still had the factory wax shining like a new car when
I gave it away in 2002.
Perhaps First Solar (FLSR) is developing the photovoltiac paint
that would charge the batteries for the Volt, perhaps at least
enough to get back to plug in. Surely there will be plug in stations
sheltered under solar paneled roofs at mall parking, etc.
Good luck! Ann in Chicago

I'm getting a chuckle on how important some on this blog think they have become to the survival of GM. You are but a sorry handful of enthusiasts with nothing better to do but sit in front of your computer daily and write some long winded diatribe about nothing. Get out and drive.

Jon Dailey, 6/26, 6:56:

Well I don't think that anyone who has been following this blog for any length of time has any illusions as to how much attention GM management pays to us. My best estimate is zero, or maybe some negative number.

You are right, I am proud to call myself an enthusiast. I think that we enthusiasts can see the handwriting on the wall for GM, and for the United States of America. Refer to Professor Chalmers Johnson, whose name I have invoked here several times.

At least when the thing finally goes down for the 3rd time, we will be able to say that we tried our best to raise our puny voices in warning.

I think that it's about time for a new vehicle like the volt. Personally, I could use one right now. If you need anyone to test one out before you start real production, let me know. We definately need to reduce our indepence on oil and the countries that seem to control us. We also need to quit polluting our earth or we me not be around to much longer.

Build it and I'll buy it.
Congratulations on the battery progress. We need a Chevy Volt now so keep this project on track and get us a car asap.
Thanks.

You people act like electric car technology is new. I'm with Mike who posted above about the EV1 project that GM buried. Electric car technology that is production worthy and practical for everyday use has been possible for decades. Its the fact that the government, the automakers and the oil companies dont always do the right thing, they do whats profitable for them. Why do you think they are building hybrid vehicles instead of vehicles that don't run on any type of petrolium based fuel at all. The answer is simple, because the oil companies pay them to.

GM (& Ford),

We need you to move quickly on this 'Electric car'. The technology is available. Please use your collective 'might' to start production much sooner than 2010. We need a car in the drive by Spring 2008. Send notice to the oil countries, that there days are numbered -and those artificially raising the price of fuel. I feel comfortable that GM and Ford can get this going. This will also help with employment, and the reopening of some recently closed plants - hopefully in Michigan.

Well GM is on the right track with this one! And they should go even further. Using this technology as a base they should make it available in a car composed of composites. Then they could capture public attention by adding all sorts of electronic features i.e anti collision radar, carbon graphite roll cage, drive by wire electronic steering that allows you to program a route, heads up display etc. As a matter of fact GM should spin off a small subsidiary that would only make real autos (at first just for collectors) but by using the latest technologies i.e. from Aircraft, biotech etc and then if it generates enough excitement then release limited editions in different states, then.... well you understand what I am getting at. Lets give the japanese a run for their money! This is no time to rest.

L Marcus

This D-Cycle engine looks interesting for the range extender. It's a double acting 4-stroke which gives power on every stroke. It has the power of a standard 4-stroke in half the size. Take a look http://www.yanengines.com/ Imagine making this an HCCI for a more complete burn and greater efficiency.

Denise,
is GM testing other batteries considering thermal events and other safety and performance issues that have led GM to say the battery development is behind the rest of the volts programs. If you cannot comment on this, are you free for dinner!

Denise,
One more comment, how come only one domestic battery supplier is on the short list. I know of one out of Austin, Valence tech, that has safe systems ready to plug into anything GM has within 6 months.