The Chevy Volt - Addressing Your Concerns

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonathan Rohr @ Feb 11 2007, 06:46 PM) [snapback]388638[/snapback]</div>

The fact that the both the hybrid and non-hybrid have the same emission rating is the problem. That's no smog-related reduction at all... hence the environmental concern.

Vue to Vue-Hybrid is the most appropriate comparison. Both are LEV. No improvement is bad.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonathan Rohr @ Feb 11 2007, 07:46 PM) [snapback]388638[/snapback]</div>

I don't get 70 mpg.

But my Prius cost me less than the stripped Saturn Vue. It seats five with room for cargo. And I get 45-50 mpg.

So. My Prius cost less than the Vue, gets better mileage than the Vue and I'll bet my emissions are lower than the Vue too.

Plenty of people can afford a hybrid. If they can afford a new SUV they can afford a new hybrid.

I think you're doing great with the car you have. Someday you will be in the market for a new car. I'd be interested in what your criteria will be for your choice. Mine was mileage, emissions, price, size and style.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonathan Rohr @ Feb 12 2007, 03:03 AM) [snapback]388673[/snapback]</div>

I dont know what you are discussing here? Are we talking about hybrids? (this is Prius forum). If so, of course, with full-time hybrid you get both both mpg and emissions.

If you are on the budget and dont want to spend a lot money, yet you want to get good mpg and have decent emissions, then obviously you dont get the V6 engined car...

I am not even sure what is your original post supposed to mean anymore... is it introducing us to great GM cars? If so, how about first producing an full-time hybrid vehicle and then talk about it.

We all know that GM will have best hybrids "in next two years".


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Feb 12 2007, 02:00 AM) [snapback]388643[/snapback]</div>

thats because Vue shouldnt be called hybrid .

 

Hi Jonathan -

Welcome to Prius Chat. Thanks for coming into the wolves' den. While other details of your post is being debated by others, I'd like to discuss this part:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonathan Rohr @ Feb 9 2007, 03:15 PM) [snapback]387738[/snapback]</div>

I can only hope that you were misled, or do not have the facts at your disposal. I want to believe that you are not trying to deceive anybody with the above comment. There is nothing necessary "to note" about Toyota, Honda, and Nissan all doing the same thing. Because they did not. Or to be accurate, the only thing they did the same as GM was to cease production of EVs once the ZEV mandate in CA was gutted. The *differences* are significant. I'll get to them in a moment.

Let me briefly introduce myself. I am an EV customer of GM's of Toyota's and of Ford's. I also have close ties with past lease holders of Honda and Nissan EVs. I had front-row seats at the significant events that surrounded the entire EV situation of the late 90's and early 2000's. I'm well acquainted with the folks behind Who Killed the Electric Car, and my vehicles and I are even in the film. Howdy - I'm a volunteer EV advocate.

Now to the meat of the matter. I will VERY briefly list the significant points of what several car makers did with their programs, and you can decide if this constitutes "doing the same thing."

Honda (EV+) - After the ZEV mandate was gutted and production stopped, lease holders were allowed to extend their leases month-to-month until such a time when the cars required "significant" service to keep them operational. Lease holders were allowed to keep the vehicles well beyond the original lease agreements, and well beyond the termination of production.

Ford (Ranger EV) - After the ZEV mandate was gutted and production stopped, Ford asked for the vehicles to be returned at the end of the lease periods. Many of the vehicles were subsequently crushed. The crushing stopped when some vigilant EV owners made themselves heard. Ford then offered to SELL the Rangers to past lease holders at a very reasonable "refurbishing" price. (I assume you were speaking of the Th!ink when you mentioned Scandinavia. I'm talking about the full-featured Ranger EV. A highway vehicle. They were kept here in the US where many of them are still operating, and demanding steep sales prices when they come up on Ebay.)

Toyota (Rav4EV) - After the ZEV mandate was gutted and production stopped, Toyota began collecting lease return vehicles and crushing the ones they considered "not fit for duty." But before the mandate was gutted, Toyota SOLD brand new Rav4EVs to any California customer willing to pony up the cash. Almost all of these retail Rav4EVs are still privately owned, and still on the road today. Many of the past leases have also been converted to ownerships.... and are still on the road today. 4-year-old Rav4EVs command an average of about $50k in Ebay these days. One recently sold for $67.5k).

GM (EV1) - GM is almost single-handedly responsible for gutting the ZEV mandate. GM sued the state of CA, and the result was the end of all production EVs from the big car companies. When GM quit the EV business, everybody got a "get out of jail free" card. GM recalled every last EV1 on the road, disabled each one, and crushed the vast majority. (Aluminum frames and bodies - a HUGE loss to any EV conversion fan, etc - sob)A few went to museums and schools. Absolutely ZERO are in private hands today (at least that I'm going to tell you about!), and no retail lease holder was allowed to extend his lease. GM was fighting to destroy the mandate AS THEY PRODUCED the cars. GM was the first one into the game, and the first one that wanted out.

So... while all the car makers closed their respective EV programs when the mandate was torn down, the other car makers did NOT go out of their way to destroy the mandate. They did NOT crush all of their perfectly-functioning cars. They did NOT keep them from paying customers. And this is why GM is the poster child for "Who Killed the EV."

Please note that I'm not in the "GM haters" club. I've been lied to by Ford. I've been lied to by Toyota. And most blatantly lied to by GM. I owned a Ford EV. I still own and drive a Toyota EV. The GM EV1 was the best car I've ever operated, and I didn't have a chance to own it. My EV1 looked and operated like new when it was destroyed (for my own good, apparently). I do have a special place in my heart for GM. I don't hate them however, and do wish them the best with the Volt. But I have heard these promises before. I've seen the show cars. Hell, I got to DRIVE what I consider a prototype for many years. But what "green" do we really have on the road from GM? A lot of promises, and very little product. Can you blame me for being skeptical? While companies like Toyota have not been truthful with me or with the public about their EV program, I am *still driving my Rav4EV* ever single day! Please don't for a minute think that there are no EVs on the road. The only ones completely missing are the EV1s!

Remember back just a year ago when GM was going to be the first to put 1 million Fuel Cell cars on the road? I mean this was going to start in 2010! Well gosh, that's just around the corner, and the bloom has fallen off that rose, hasn't it? Where did all that hype go? Well, now it is all on the Volt. At least the Volt CAN be built. I've got my checkbook... let's see if GM WILL build the thing.

Yours in typo's and misspellings,

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonathan Rohr @ Feb 11 2007, 07:46 PM) [snapback]388638[/snapback]</div>

Do you have some real inside information on the Chevrolet Volt, or are you just here to do astroturfing for GM? I'm sure their quality is up, but after the experience of my last two GM vehicles (yes, I even went back and bought another one after the clusterphuck that should have been a clue to run away screaming) it would take a lot to get me back. And by a lot, I mean something like a PHEV. J.D. Powers numbers, or how good your Pontiac is doing is not going to impress me that much. If they don't have a PHEV, I don't see anything in the GM lineup that Ford, D-C, Toyota or Honda doesn't do better.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonathan Rohr @ Feb 11 2007, 07:46 PM) [snapback]388638[/snapback]</div>

Don't pretend to believe that 10k difference is just because of the extra performance. Compare side by side the standard features.

Most noticeably are Vue's rear drum brakes and lack of Front and Side air bags. Vue is also smaller and anemic in towing capability.

Dennis

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Feb 11 2007, 09:41 PM) [snapback]388664[/snapback]</div>

I want to second this. I am a graduate student on a small research stipend. My wife is a low level near-entry level human resources employee at a large national bank and a graduate student. We are only about 24 years old, our combined income is quite a bit less than the household average for the area, and even though we don't have kids we do have significant education costs. However, we are able to buy a Prius, in fact, I was a little surprised about how easy it is for us to afford a Prius. Finance a near base price Prius at 4.9% over 60 months (which you can do in most parts of the country now) and your payments are near 450 dollars a month with no money down (we did a shorter loan because we could still afford the payments). I understand that you (Jonathan Rohr) probably can't afford one right now and every one has unique financial situations, but don't make the mistake of thinking only wealthier people can afford a hybrid; in fact, I would argue that a small majority of people can afford a hybrid.

Back on the subject of GM. I have driven GM cars since highschool. My last car was a 1992 Chevy Astro minivan. I drove it to 190,000 miles which is a lot of miles. My dad drives a 1996 Chevy Suburban with 390,000 miles (no typo), and my mom drives a 1999 Chevy Tahoe with 140,000 miles (My parents are killing the planet ). They also have a 1988 Bonneville with 120,000 miles. I know GM vehicles can handle a lot of miles, which is notable. However, those cars only have so many miles because they are on constant repair and have been since they have had about 40,000 miles and my dad refuses to let a car go 'before its time' no matter the costs of repairs. I don't think GM has the worst quality vehicles, but the company has a long ways to go before I will respect them

 

Standing by for more clarification (I'd hate for my big 'ol post to go to waste!"

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarkMN @ Feb 12 2007, 09:52 AM) [snapback]388846[/snapback]</div>

Not only that, but we're getting to the point where there are used gen 2 Prii out there. Every year there will be more as people trade up for a newer model with maybe a higher package. They're still scarce and it takes some work to find one, but they're out there and there will be more each year.

I normally keep my cars for a decade, but I'll be getting a new Prius when it has either LithiumIon or Plug-in option or both. If that's 2009, some lucky Californian is going to get HOV stickers for two years.

$20,000 for a car isn't expensive or unaffordable. That's what I paid in 1996 for my Saturn SC2 coupe and it's what I paid in 2005 for my Prius.

 

Mr Rohr, welcome to PC. How much were you paid to post so much spin?

 

Hmm, Going with chevys build quality. I see alot of parts that may prematurely break or worse the dreaded squeeks & rattles..... <_<

This is the Volt Concept Car.









Becides fuel economy I looked at roominess there doesn't look like there's much trunk space in a volt. Thats why I chose the prius over honda roominess....

 

I haven't followed the discussion but this car looks very promising to me. Especially if they are able to deliver it within a couple of years. If we assume the rumors about the next gen prius is true (higher MPG, but likley not plug-in and no real EV range) compared to the VOLT (40 miles EV range, plug-in, Lithium Ion batteries) then I'm MUCH more interested in the VOLT. That said I'm positive we will see an improved Prius next year but I (unfortunately) HIGHLY doubt we will ever see this car.

If the Volt makes it out within a couple of years then I'm willing to pay a premium for it. I'm also willing to be a "free testing ground" for GM, as long as they truly try to improve.

I've been thinking about plug-ins in general. All the suggested ones have barley adequate miles for many people commute. This is not a bad thing. But if I'm cruising home, 5 miles left, batteries almost drained... how do I stop it from starting the engine? I mean I would like to tell the car "listen, if you can make it to my destination then I promise to plug you in".

It would be cool if they integrated the "start engine" with the GPS so that if I have a close target set it would judge if it made sense to start the ICE or not.

I wonder what control they will leave to us users!

Man I want a VOLT now!

/

 

I still have not seen any photos under the bonnet.

Anyone has one?

 

I could care less about plug-in vehicles as stated in soooooo many previous posts. I would like to see a car get 100miles to a gallon of gas and still drive on the interstate & have some room, and not be blown off the road when a truck passes by, like in my old vw bug. You know more bang for your buck...!

 

I care deeply about plug-in or pure EV cars. I'm tired of having to go to the gas station and I'm deeply concerned about the environment as well as international affairs. Cars proprelled by electricity opens up many possibilities for where and how we generate the "gasoline". To me that is important.

A car like the Volt would eliminate almost all my need for gasoline. I rarely travel more then 40miles/day, maybe once a month. I think for us people living in cities this would be a very attractive car.

If I drove more I would perhaps care less and look at alternatives like bio-diesel. I think the Volt is a great car for certain people. I think there is enough of us to create a true market.

And I also hate haering the ICE in the prius. It's soo loud, noisy and vibrating.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SomervillePrius @ Feb 13 2007, 03:43 PM) [snapback]389691[/snapback]</div>

Gee have you thought about buying a GEM?

I wish they made the old steamer autos agian..

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dipper @ Feb 13 2007, 03:14 PM) [snapback]389666[/snapback]</div>

I couldnt get them to post

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonathan Rohr @ Feb 13 2007, 09:47 AM) [snapback]389548[/snapback]</div>

No worries. We all get busy. And if you're keeping your head above water in O-Chem, then you've got my respect. I damn near gave up college after being humiliated in O-chem!

There is only so much you can do in an under-two-hour movie. Chris (the director) says that the original outline had 2x as many "suspects" and there just wasn't time to do half of them justice. Obviously TONS of information had to be left out of the movie to fit into the time constraints. GM was highlighted for many of the reasons I gave above. They were first to prove that battery EVs were viable, and they were first to scrap their program, and made it their mission to torpedo the clean-air efforts of CA. And just the title of the movie alone leaves many people believing that we have ZERO production EVs on the road today - which obviously is not true! In fact we had some "Not Dead Yet" flyers printed up to hand out to people after the movies.

I use the SSR as an example many times when folks tell me that GM did the right thing by taking all the cars back after it was "proven" that nobody wanted them. What of the SSR? Did GM call the few of those back that actually sold? Take them off the market? Nope, they offered huge incentives just to get a few sold, and did everything they could just to have people drive them off the lot. Contrast that with the EV1 drivers BEGGING - with cash in hand - to keep their cars. Nope. Not even lease extensions... and certainly no sales! The pathetic reasoning is that they'd have to keep parts on hand for these few cars. Well, guess what - they'll have to keep parts on hand for the few SSR's (if they wish to support them, but there is no law saying they have to after the warranty), but that doesn't seem to bother anybody. And yes - to take the undisputed lead in ZEV design and just throw it away? Amazing. Then to cap it off, they complain about how much the program cost them - instead of captializing on that lead.

They spent million$ of stock-holder money to take these cars back and "recycle" them. Every vehicle that went to a museum or school was completely disabled. No drivetrain. Just a rolling shell. They could have made millions by selling the cars to willing buyers (a small group of us ponied up enough money to buy every one of the cars ever made - the check was rejected of course). Instead they spent millions to destroy both the mandate and the vehicles. One reason they gave was "safety" of course. As if they can guarantee the safety of ANY of their vehicles once out of warranty.

None of the production EVs had anything like what we think of as a transmission. Just a single gear reduction box. Direct drive, single ratio. And that's all that's needed for a retail vehilce. The Tesla has a two-speed transmission ONLY because buyers are exptected to be excited about humiliating exotic gasoline cars at the track. With no trans, the car would top out below 120mph well before the 1/4 mile, so the trans is there just to allow the car to accelerate all the way through the 1/4. For my money, I'd be happy with the 120 and forgo the 1/4 mile times, the complexity, the weight and cost. But for some reason the folks at Tesla didn't ask for my input.

Though that is obviously very important, I actually consider the original source of energy to be MORE important. An EV does not need to be powered from a coal plant. Electricity is the ultimate flex fuel and can be generated by any fuel. Or sunshine, wind, water, etc. So while it is easier to clean up a few power plants than millions of cars, EVs offer the option of not even having to clean up the power plants to be favorable! V2G systems can even make existing power plants more efficient as they help shave peaks on demand. But I digress...

Only by supplying a bit of footage and consultation. I wouldn't call myself "involved." Let's say I was "close" to the folks who were involved. I know the director and all the "stars" quite well. We're a pretty tight little group, us EV drivers. I was most definitely involved in the whole drama that the movie depicted though!

Well, yes I am. Barely. I was even supposed to be in the credits, but that's a long story. I'm in it twice, and my Rav4EV is in it at least once. But we're talking just for a few seconds here. Nobody has asked for my autograph.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Feb 13 2007, 12:16 PM) [snapback]389667[/snapback]</div>

Groovy! How were you planning on achieving this in the near-term without PHEV technology? If this is what you want, you'll need to get behind some sort of technology that can get you there.

But I still have to wonder... why do you want to use gasoline at all?