Next voltec, what do you think of the new rumors

Interesting position.
When you add capacity you need to increase the size of the battery pack, possible upgrade electronics and wiring and consider the increase in weight.

I would think it would be easier to downsize the size of the pack and supporting electronics and automatically pick up further gains of lower weight.

Could you share your logic as to why it is easier to increase the size of the pack, rather than decrease it?

 

My observation of some people enjoying debate has been well confirmed here. We've been through this several times before. Want to discuss options for Prius, again, start a new thread. Keep evading the topic of Volt gen-2...

On a parting note, I find it quite interesting how different websites, forums, and blogs, state different wants & needs for Volt. Those mixed messages should have long since been resolved by now. They were an impairment to the gen-1 and will continue to be unless goals are finally clearly stated. I suggest starting with: Who?

 

First, Voltec is the 4th gen 2-mode hybrid. It started out with Precept concept but was sold in hybrid bus configuration. Then the 2 mode trucks. Then Saturn Vue FWD plugin that never made it out. The simplified FWD got adopted to become Voltec.

After so many years and so much government incentive, Voltec still need incentive to sell. The hope is, gen 2 would be so good and offered in different configuration that the debate would end.

I think the bailout actually gave more resources to Volt because it became the top priority project.

 

You may hate the man but no where in the article did Uchiyamada-san say that. Your troll level has reached a record Bob Lutz high. We know

The information is not new, as that and much more information is available in the book.

http://www.vfaq.net/docs/Prius_that_shook_world.pdf

$20k retail price certainly disagrees with you. Sure, Echo was much cheaper but he saw the potential of HSD (THS back then). Came gen2 and a bump to mid size and bang it took off.

The question is, does Volt with $40k has the same potential? Possible but not probable, especially after Envia battery hoax.

 

Isn't it interesting that EREV suddenly became a taboo or something?

Energi gas engine will come on when you floor it. It is something a typical Volt buyer will be disgusted with **.

** Exaggerate but you get the point.

 

Its' not John 1701, you are forgetting: GM came out with the Volt to "be a Prius fighter"

Well, based on that the Volt has failed. The Volt has not caught on with the middle class, has not even come close to the Prius 2013 sales total.

So, GM appears to consign the Volt to be a "niche" item.

DBCassidy

 

Ahem, with much higher tax incentive which was geared toward the battery size and nothing to do with efficiency nor emission.

Volt is as clean as a 42 MPG gas car per EPA using average grid mix. It is better than average but surely not a game changer.

 

Solutions for the masses: Prius, Prius C, Prius V, and Prius Plug-in. All are affordable and advailable.

Volt - even GM does not know where it fits in the market.

DBCassidy

 

It is harder to make the best of both fuel sources with respect to efficiency and emission. It is easier to go brute force with add more approach. That's how Volt ended up at 42 MPG equivalent with much higher tag, compact interior and overnight daily refuel time.

Increasing the size of the motors and power electronic is easy (relatively). Battery pack does need room so it needs to be planned ahead.

Downsizing is harder because you need a smaller battery pack that can provide the same power rating at lower cost, pretty much non-existence. The real nightmare trying to cut cost and raise efficiency to lower emission in a bloated initial design.

It said 22% drove PiP and 17% drove Volt.

 

Volt, gen 2 must stand on its' own feet, no tax incentives, priced to appeal to the masses, and marketed by GM as such.

Potential Volt buyers need to be informed about the product and informed before purchasing.

DBCassidy

 

"Volt’s 4ET50 transmission is a complicated device. It contains a planetary gear set, three clutches and a final gear reduction set. The advantage of the 4ET50 transmission is that it allows the Volt to operate in two modes during extended range mode: pure series and power link. The advantage of power link is that it increases mpg in extended-range mode by mechanically connecting the internal combustion engine (ICE) to the wheels."

That's a quote from a strong supporter of Volt, one who cared about being straight forward with what the next-generation design should feature. He wasn't afraid to go into great detail explaining how Volt is indeed a successor to Two-Mode. He also pointed out how Volt doesn't fit the EREV definition coined for it. He didn't waste time feeding rhetoric.

That's a stark contrast to the posts here.

 

So I ask for you to support your position that it is more difficult to cut down on the size of the battery pack than to increase it. And you are now done without responding?
If you made, and supported this before, a link would be sufficient.

 

2 mode FWD simplification went from 3 PSD to 2 PSD. Voltec finally drops another PSD but retains the clutches.

Green Car Congress: GM Simplifies the Two-Mode Hybrid Transmission, Maintains Functionality for FWD Application

 

How is this? Just need to add PiP.

Prius Generations | PriusChat

 

Huh? I don't understand what you are saying.

As for the Energi, it is less likely to start the gas engine during modest acceleration but even it starts to get weak above 40mph without the gas engine when accelerating.

 

I am saying people want Volt because it has "full**" EV power to accelerate until you run out of EV miles. Those bought into EREV marketing and are into deep electric fetish. They will want 20 EV miles with full EV power with half the battery cells. See the problem?

** Not true as Volt is faster with gas engine on.

 

I read his article that you quoted above. The link is: My Vision of Gen 2.0 Volt.

It's true that GM sensibly reused the transmission case and many of the parts from the FWD 2-mode design they did for the Saturn SUV that got cancelled during the economic meltdown.

But, the Volt transmission is about as complex as a Prius transmission except for the 3 simple clutches which are commonly used in ordinary automatic transmissions. Bowers thinks GM could simplify Volt 2.0 by adapting the Spark EV motor transaxle but then that means designing a new generator to pair up with the gas engine for series hybrid mode. Bowers thinks it's no big deal to lose the ~10% efficiency gain from a parallel hybrid design because 80% of the miles of the voltstat.net fleet are on EV mode. He neglects to mentions that OnStar's much larger fleet data shows that about 65% of the miles are EV mode, not 80%. So yeah, gas hybrid efficiency matters.

I did not see anything in the article about the Volt not fitting the definition of EREV. Do you have a link where Bowers says that?

When I've seen people make the claim that the Volt isn't EREV it has been based on a mis-reading of the definition in GM's SAE paper. Those people think the paper's definition requires that the EV and extended range mode must have identical power and acceleration. They get their knickers in a twist because the Volt accelerates a bit faster in extended range mode. But, the paper's definition does not have such a requirement (nor would such a requirement be sensible).

 

That actually come from Volt fanboys in order to differentiate it from PiP.

PiP can be an EV in city cycle as it used no gas in EPA city cycle. It can also use gas to extend the range in higher speed driving. In that case PiP is an EREV.

Volt fanboys also said EREV does not alternate or blend fuels because EREV will use up EV miles first (unlike PiP ICE kicking in) and then use gas later to extend range. This is also a problem because Volt ICE will come on depending on temp and mandatory fuel maintenance. Addition of Mountain mode to use gas before EV depleted, at the last min also contradicted EREV definition.

 

Aha! I was just pointing out this bogus EREV definitional claim....

There is no such requirement that "full" power EV mode have identical acceleration and power as the extended range when the gas engine is running. This originates from a misreading of the EREV definition.

The GM SAE paper defines an EREV as:

Some folks get hung up on the "full-performance" part of "full-performance battery electric vehicle" and think it is defined relative to the extended range performance of the same vehicle but that's clearly wrong. The GM SAE paper contains a citation to a California ARB report which contains the definition. The report can be found at:

http://www.lifepo4.info/Battery_study/Batteries/zev_panel_report.pdf

The ARB definition is on page 9:

It goes on to define FPBEV relative to the slower categories of city (CEV) and neighborhood (NEV) electric vehicles.