Next voltec, what do you think of the new rumors

That's the same thing some of us have been suggesting for many, many years. Looooong before rollout, the "too little, too slowly" advice was repeated over and over. Only now, that idea of offering choice is finally being embraced.

Do searches on those other websites for "second model". Even just the mention of one-size-fits-all absolutely enraged enthusiasts. They felt any attempt to alter design to widen appeal should be considered a threat to the purity of Volt, since that would make it too much like a Prius.

But now, with the blatant need to lower cost and increase sales, the idea of diversifying is welcomed. They learned that lesson the hard way. Rather then send a message to GM back when it could have really made a difference, they gambled and waited for the sales struggle instead. The very thing warned about...

Calling the situation "better late, than never" is fine. Leveling the playing feel after having to deal with the "vastly superior" nonsense is a nice outcome. After all, those enthusiasts were told countless times the goal is to replace traditional vehicles. Achieving that isn't possible if they don't want to recognize what makes those traditional vehicles so appealing.

More legroom and a fifth seat in back will most definitely draw interest. A smaller battery-pack to reduce cost is an obvious next step. After all, traditional vehicles have offered the choice of engine size for decades. Why shouldn't a plug-in have some type of power variation option too?

 

It sounds like you're maybe talking about the Prius Plugin, right? When did Toyota announce the larger battery pack option?

 

GM still hasn't offered a choice for middle-market. That's how the talk about a second model emerged.

Mainstream consumers already have 2 models from Toyota. They both match the purchase priorities of the masses.

Spin all you want. That won't change the reality of major demograph begin left without an option. It's either buy the one with a large battery pack or settle for a Cruze or Malibu. Nothing in between is a big product gap... which has become quite apparent recently.

Targeting ordinary consumers is a very big deal. Something profitable, without any dependence on tax-credit assistance, must be delivered.

 

Toyota has 1.3 kWh and 4.4 kWh Prius options.

 

Thank you for the Hybrid Cars article.

145,000 vs 23,000 are numbers any of the spin doctors on this forum can not change.

The numbers speak for themselves.

If a ceo is frustrated, basing a product release to the general public on pure emotion = epic failure.

DBCassidy

 

I think price decrease wise the battery option will be one method but other than that I'm not expecting to see a big drop price wise for an equivalent size battery on the next gen Volt right away. I think a few years after that release they'll get to the point of bringing down the costs another $5000ish.

 

There's a plug on the 1.3 kWh?

The main complaint isn't that the Volt is bad. It is that GM doesn't sell a Prius.

To its benefit, Toyota has a head start in regards to hybrids. Honda, then Ford, followed soon after. How well has their hybrid program been doing in comparison to Toyota's? How many times, whether they intended to or not, has one of their products been compared to the Prius?

So lets take off the Prius tinted glasses and look at this from a competitor's point of view. If you hadn't already invested in hybrids during the early days, why would you now? Nearly every hybrid car that you would put out would be compared to the Prius. You never want your product directly compared to the competitor unless you can beat it. That wasn't likely with the Prius. Its EPA rating was on the extreme high end, an outlier, for most of its production run. That was its main selling point, and you had slim chance of beating it. Then you might have to give Paice some money. Would there be enough of a return to make the investment worth it?

Then at the end of the day, hybrids are still a small segment of the market. The majority of Camrys and Fusions sold aren't hybrids. In terms of sales, the Prius is still an outlier among hybrids. Investing to keep your non-hybrid cars competitive will have a bigger pay back. And remember, GM doesn't have Toyota's deep pockets at this time. Same with pick ups, which are an even bigger market than family sedans. There GM beats Toyota in fuel economy.

So GM could make a hybrid. It would make a minority happy. Most of whom wouldn't buy a GM either way. Or they could do what Nissan was doing, and enter a whole segment in hopes of capturing it like Toyota did with the Prius.

Unless there is more to that quote, Lutz wasn't frustrated with the Prius itself, but with what it had done for Toyota's reputation.

Honda had expressed near identical sentiments. They were a company founded by a man trying to make a fuel efficient engine for bicycles during the rebuilding after WWII. Their cars, and likely anything they made with an ICE, were and are some of the most fuel efficient around. They resisted making a V6 because it would use more fuel. They don't make a V8. They don't make trucks. When they bowed market forces and greed, they took car platforms to convert into SUVs.

Then the second gen Prius came out, and Toyota received accolades for being the greenest, most advanced car maker in the world. While stuffing V8s into FSP SUVs, performance Lexus, and the biggest 1/2 ton Pick up sold in North America.

The Prius is most efficient and lowest emission product from a spectrum of ones. That somehow got the public to ignore the products Toyota made at the other end of it.

Lutz isn't talking about making a Prius beater, but something that would get GM some of that green, high tech halo.

 

2013 sales numbers say it all.

Facts are facts.

DBCassidy

 

They already brought it down $5000. We won't hear any details on the next gen until 2015 it appears. If the steady rate of cost reduction continues for lithium batteries, we can see some reductions there. Plus, reductions in streamlining production.

Improvements in batteries may allow a fifth seat without reduction in EV range. Though, I think most people would be happy with a 4+1 seating arrangement. That can serve a growing family well in the beginning. By the time such a family needs 5 seats, they are going to opt for, if not a minivan, a large car/crossover.

 

GM is competing with itself. Stop trying to change focus to other automakers. Face the facts, here are February's:

21,836 Cruze
21,587 Equinox
17,448 Malibu
12,008 Impala
7,586 Sonic
6,211 Camaro
2,576 Spark
2,438 Corvette
1,210 Volt

And remember, Prius outsells Camry in Japan.

 

John, thank you for the input. The numbers you quoted reinforces the Volt will, at best, always be a niche product.

Yes, GM, as usual, competing with itself. It was hoped that with shedding Hummer, Saturn, Pontiac, and Oldsmobile, GM would be more able to actively compete with other manufactures.

Presently, this is clearly not the case.

DBCassidy

 

They dropped selling PRICE, not production COST. There's a big difference.

Remember in April how the CEO stated Volt wasn't profitable yet? How could the situation have changed so drastically just 4 months later?

 

How is having a range of products equate to competing with itself. We here might think Buick should have gone the way of Mercury, but it does real well in China.

What does that matter to GM when they have as much chance of doing well in the Japanese market as any outside company. I don't know how well hybrids do in India and China, but they aren't doing well in Europe.

North America is the next biggest market after Japan for hybrids. Around 7000 Prii sold last month. As I said before its sales are an outlier for hybrids. The next most sold hybrid in February was the Fusion at 3000. Less than half of what the Prius sold. Most of the time, the difference is greater. In the same time, 25000 non-hybrid Fusions were sold.

Realistically, a GM hybrid car would selling in the same range as the Fusion, Prius c, and Camry hybrid at best. It would switch a few more non-hybrid buyers over, but it won't be selling much better than what Volt is doing. What would its development cost get GM that the Volt isn't already doing?

 

Do you have any evidence that the production cost hasn't dropped, or if CEO's statement is accounting for the R&D costs or not?

Accounting for R&D, the Prius didn't turn a profit until the second generation.

 

When you (GM) are selling a LEMON, you gotta think LEMONADE or meringe PIE, not DIAMONDS (wink,wink).

 

That's the point. Where is a 5 seater Volt with no plug?

 

IMHO, the GM and Toyota NUMMI separation was more of a 'rape/divorce' than an 'amicable/separation.' Which is sorta evidenced by their TOTALLY different approaches to engineering & marketing:

• GM still thinks they're '...too big to fail..." while Toyota "...constantly strives to get better..."
• Toyota DEVELOPS something and then "...makes it WORK (and become profitable)..." while GM "...boldly throws new STUFF at the market; then timidly drops it if it's not immediately profitable..."
• GM squeezes evermore HP from old designs...Toyota develops everymore EFFICIENT designs.

 

I thought I explained that.

Resources aren't unlimited.
Chances are a Chevy Prius would be selling in the 2000 to 3000 per month range. Around a 1000 more than the Volt, but also 14000 less than the Malibu.
Why be 4th or 5th among others when you could be first in a new segment with the chance of capturing it like Toyota did in hybrids with the Prius for a little more cost?

GM should come out with a hybrid, and if not for the recession, we might be seeing one by now. Long term the Volt was a better choice to do for GM. But why the rush? The Prius was on sale for 13 years before Toyota even offered a plug. I see the PPI is still only available in certain states too. Why is slow and steady acceptable for Toyota, but GM has to be now, now, now?

 

...because, as I alluded to above, Toyota is old-school "...earn their trust..." while GM is wall-street new-school (millenials) "...gimme, gimme, gimme..."

...or, in simple, one-word, analysis: FOCUS -- Toyota is longterm vs. GM is short·term.

Toyota follows longterm "technological honor" while GM chases quarterly stock-holder whims.

 

They was no rush back then. Gas was dirt cheap ($1 per gallon), we were encouraged to guzzle (remember, good for the economy), there was no worry about oil dependency, global warming was just a joke, and people didn't understand hybrids.

Toyota has already diversified from all that. They responded directly. Now they are refining.

Just because GM resisted, then dragged its feet doesn't mean it should continue to.