Does GM REALLY want to phase out the Volt?

When will Volt become a mainstream vehicle?
.

 

I meant that people using the share price to measure the US Government's profit or loss on the bailout are completely missing the point. It's like saying the Prius is good for the US economy because of reduced petroleum imports, while completely ignoring the $20,000 balance of payments deficit from the purchase.

 

Um so you realize the government asked GM not to make the Volt right? GM had to convince them to let them build it. You realize Toyota is dependent on tax credit with the PiP as well. Toyota also got help when they originally developed it and it did not sell that great either compared to cars of similar size back then.

 

It will become mainstream when its price is significantly reduced and when its becomes better understood by John Q Public. The price is a function of volume and a business decision on GMs part. JQP is not really focused on the environment or efficiency, its price and performance. The Volt does pretty well on the latter, just has to get the price in line.

But it does not have to be mainstream to be a great car now!

 

GM went through over 100 battery suppliers and only two were left at the final stage. A123 System and LG Chem. You seem to think there is a higher quality cell that GM missed.

Power density and cost are two of the criteria. There are many others (life, volume, weight, packaging, etc.) that needs to be met that you are obviously ignoring.

BTW, I praise Ford hybrids and Energi models as well. I believe power-split hybrid and plugins are the best.

 

It was my calculation in the back of my head which turns out to be inaccurate (off by 2-3x, sorry).

120 kW x 9 seconds = 1,080 kWsec / 3600 sec = 0.3 kWh consumed. Using 12.9 kWh / 10 hours recharge, 0.3 kWh / 12.9 kWh x 10 hours x 60 = 14 mins

My point is still valid. 9 seconds of full EV acceleration would cost you 14 mins recharge. That's not even an extreme example. There are many situations when it is wise to avoid using the battery and use gas instead.

My guess would be in measurements of tea spoons. The time to refuel that would take split seconds.

Volt is about 1/3 ton heavier than Prius PHV so it'll need more energy to accelerate. 0.3 kWh consumed by the Volt would require 0.77 kWh of energy if we include the fuel production efficiency (39%).

Volt use the equivalent to 0.02 gallons (15 teaspoons) of gas if we also include 84% gasoline production efficiency. I am sure Prius PHV would use less than that in 10.5 seconds.

There are two main reasons, from my understanding.

1) Torque: ICE torque to the wheels is greater in the power-split (Prius) setup. More torque means more mechanical power at the wheels without the conversion.

2) With or Against: For Volt, the main motor (MGb) spins against the ICE to compound output power to the wheels. For Prius, both the ICE and the main motor (MG2) spins in the same direction.

 

Despite what you said, Prius PHV still meets eAT-PZEV. The tailpipe emission depends on the duration the gas engine is running. Prius PHV minimizes the duration with constant RPM and optimal load to result in 42 seconds.

How long does the Volt take to complete the warm up process?

Don't be so defensive. Go back and read my post in the context I was replying to. I was pointing out the nature of two different power sources -- how one is superior than another in different scenarios.

 

They also added a clutch so the gas engine can turn the wheels mechanically through the planetary gearset to gain efficiency. It appears their goal is to NOT drive like series hybrid and more like a parallel.

In recent news, Mr. Akerson lied under oath to the House Oversight Committee during the battery fire investigation, claiming that the gas engine is only used to generate electricity and there is no mechanical drag. See the video at 20:32.

 

When I pull into traffic on my way home today.

When will the pip become a mainstream vehicle?

 

That's the point of becoming mainstream... the vehicle then sustains itself.

PiP will achieve that well before the tax-credit expires (simply due to it only being a configuration difference rather than an entire vehicle) which is why the monetary help is offered.
.

 

So, gas is better because it takes less time to fill up. I bet the people who have taken the step to plug in are already aware of this, and they have accepted this limitation.

Hard acceleration and high speed, specially when repeated and maintained, will reduce EV range. The same driving will reduce fuel economy for the ICE. I know the gen2 will only get about 38mpg while pulling 80mph on the highway. A friend somehow managed 21mpg with a gen3 on a test drive. Under full ICE acceleration many cars go out of loop and will even dump extra gas into the cylinder for additional cooling.

Perhaps it's better to use gas at higher speeds, but under the heavy load of this example neither gas or electric will be efficient.

 

More "it's worth it" support, not a plan of any sort.

Remember the push for 60,000 in year 2 of production?
.

 

Some will spend more than twice that much on a small car, if it provides sufficient benefit. While I cannot claim to be "in [my] right mind" I was willing to pay whatever it took to drive an electric car. OTOH, I certainly would not have spent that much for an "electric" car with a gas engine!

 

IMHO congressman kelly, and other volt haters have put out some kind of mythology about the bailout. The bailout was about jobs, not making money on gm stock or getting the volt produced.

IIRC CBO at the time of the bailouts estimated that unemployment and work training costs would be around $28B, and the bailout would cost $40B. 60% of those polled were against the bailout. The actual cost of the bailout is now less than half of CBO estimates, while there is greater employment, so from a short term budgetary point of view, the bailout was good for the government. I like many americans believe in moral hazzard of bailing out bad companies, which is why I still feel the bailout was a bad idea for the long term economy. The government can now sell out its gm stock, so losses or gains should be carried against this government investment not the bailout. GM currently has a forward pe of 6, tm a forward pe of 30, which may be why the government may be keeping its investment, but this is not in the traditional idea of American government.

The US government has subsidized all automakers. They subsidized the toyota plants in mississipi and texas, which are now doing the work of the closed NUMMI plant. Which means the US government paid toyota to shift UAW jobs from California to non union jobs in other states. The intent of this was to build prius in mississippi, but toyota changed their minds, but the government still provided the money. Cash for clunkers also went to all auto companies, toyota got the biggest share. As a taxpayer, I don't believe the government should be taxing me to pay these mega corporations.

Both prius gen III and volt are compound, as mg2 is geared in both. The volt allows the gear ratio to change at speeds for its traction motor which is more efficient. The gen III prius and prius phv require ice assist, and the ice, in the prius is more efficient thant the ice in the volt. This means that even though transmission efficiency is lower, overall gas efficiency is higher.

 

Not in the Gen III Prius ICE. EGR cools it so it wouldn't need to waste gas and also lower emission.

 

Push ? No. I just remember GM spouting BS, as usual.

 

That is generally true, but all of them were in deep doo doo. And I mean all. The collapse of the financial system really threw a loop into the whole economy. We are very lucky we have gotten off as easy as we have so far. What I am saying is that all companies are not equally culpable for the catstrophe. GM was already in a bad place due to poor decisions on their part, but they were not responsible for the chaos that caught them up. It would have been better if they had declared bankruptcy earlier though.

As far as government(s) giving money away that happens all over. Whether it is good or not is a separate discussion.

 

But full load is still at the ICE's lower efficiencies.

 

Not much. You are nit-picking now. Taking 5% hit is much better than 14 minutes recharge time. Volt would have similar efficiency hit (if not, more) from the high current as well.

 

Why does recharge time matter? Who cares if it takes 14 minutes?