Volt Will Cost Less Than $30,000

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(kdk84 @ May 19 2007, 10:48 AM) [snapback]445696[/snapback]</div>

I would hope so, but with GM here one day and gone the next. but still dont hold your breath

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Volty @ May 20 2007, 12:14 AM) [snapback]445974[/snapback]</div>

The hardest I ever laughed (other than back to the future humor ... thanks folks! Glad you aren't dumb enough to believe a word Lutz says) was when Lutz topped his own spin. First, he was going to spearhead the Volt ... then he was going to REALLY make it a matter of fiction by introducing (somewhere in the distant future) the VOLT / HYDROGEN model :lol:

Lutz, he crack us up! I wish I could make as much scratch as him, for running a company into the ground. Heck, I'd do it for only half as much!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rangerdavid @ May 19 2007, 10:30 AM) [snapback]445640[/snapback]</div>

The volt will be groundbreaking technology if it is the first plug-in hybrid to market. Lets face it, GM is the only automaker that has publicly stated that they will build a plug-in hybrid. Toyota has pretty much said the next Prius will not be plug-in. Hybrids are nice but they are just conventional cars plus some electronic components to make them more efficient. My Prius still only has one source of energy and that is oil. The Prius is only as fuel efficient as my VW TDI which has a conventional diesel engine designed in the mid 90's.

 

cool! My Prius was built to be a cleaner car with low emissions. The efficiency is just a bonus.

 

600 mile reange sounds excessive to me.
What is the EV range? I thought is was like 50, which means you'd be driving 550 miles on a generator. That has to be pretty inefficient.

The whole point is to have an EV for the 90% of driving in town we do, but have a genset as a backup.

As for the price, it should be scalable and upgradeable. The price of the car should reflect the size of the batteries. My wish, is about 30 miles EV range for about 22,000. For 30,000, I want at least a 60 mile range.

Either way, I am anxiously awaiting it's production. But the longer I have to wait, the more likely someone else will have one first.

 

When the Volt finally gets here, anyone want to make bets it will be for lease only?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ May 21 2007, 07:14 AM) [snapback]446544[/snapback]</div>

It WILL be ground breaking ... so will the time machine ... and hyperspace.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ May 21 2007, 10:13 AM) [snapback]446619[/snapback]</div>

That's right. And if it ever gets here, it will be leased in CA and AZ ONLY ... And like the 2 seater EV1 (less practical) won't generate enough leases, so GM will say, "See? We tried, but there wasn't enough 'buyers' to make it practical"

 

I'm getting the feeling that for many posters here at PriusChat, their sense of identity is tied to the failure of GM. And that these posters fear that they would lose their way in the world if GM is successful. It's the only thing I can think of that could possibly explain their behavior. It's quite a bizarre thing to witness.

 

I don't think anyone here WANTS the Volt to fail. Of course, I don't think anyone here wanted the EV1 to fail, either, but GM went way above and beyond the call of duty to make sure it did.

It's not so much schadenfreude as it is "Why don't they finally do something right?" - being burned a few times tends to have that effect on people.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marlin @ May 21 2007, 10:36 AM) [snapback]446631[/snapback]</div>

I agree with you 100%. The pessimism, rage, and criticism expressed by many prius chatters toward GM is unbelievable. Many of these chatters owned saturns (I own two 95 SL2s) and had very good service from these cars. These chatters keep referring to the electric vehicle EV1, which GM ended up crushing. The car was impractical for most people. The movie, who killed the electric car, was mostly BS. GM had to lease the car because who would pay 50K for a car with such limited capability. IMHO, the CARB members who voted for that zero emmissions/10% rule, which started that EV effort, should have been fired. It was a stupid idea as proven by the results. Not only GM's EV1s disappeared, the other manufacturer's EVs also disappeared. That rule did not advance any technogoly. Dumb, dumb, dumb!!! I believe that two seater roadster, electric, 100K, 250 mile range car is another stupid idea. Who can afford 100K for a toy. It is not a car for the general population. The Volt will be if is built with the promised capability. Built by an American company, American workers, with parts mostly made in USA. Hoorah for America!!!!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ewhanley @ May 19 2007, 04:20 PM) [snapback]445835[/snapback]</div>

Don't he pronounce it JIGAWATTS?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jtmhog @ May 21 2007, 12:04 PM) [snapback]446686[/snapback]</div>

EV1 impractical for most? What brought you to that conclusion? Don't MOST drive alone to work, less than 30 miles?

WKTEC was BS? Isn't that a bit conclusory?

You owned 2 saturns? Why not still? If they are like my daughters Chevy Cavalier, you dumped them because it's too costly to keep them out of the shop.

The fact that the EV1 ended w/ a disasterous result, was because GM (and Ford, etc) lobbied so hard to have it over turned. If it wasn't for the fact manufacturers were forced to develope battery technoloby cars, the Volt (if it ever even comes into existence) would be even farther away from their production.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jtmhog @ May 21 2007, 12:04 PM) [snapback]446686[/snapback]</div>

It is good to see that there are still many GM fans out there to hold the flag. I just saw "Who Killed" last night and it did not make me happy to see the behavior of the oil companies and auto manufacturers, that talked from both sides of their mouths. Top story of every news broadcast, "gas prices on the rise", anyone seen that energy policy that will make up for 30+ years of facelifts on "old paint"?
I do hope that GM will give the bright minds of this country the freedom to save us from running in circles.

 

The GM bashing does seem a little excessive. After all, GM is the ONLY company actually planning a production PHEV at the moment. Scepticism is warranted, but to downright call BS is a knee jerk reaction that is unwarranted. If GM is the first to provide a reasonable EV (Read: not a golf cart), then I will support the bleeding edge technology. Just as I supported the bleeding edge technology called the Prius. I wanted to speak with my dollars and I did. GM appears to be listening and pursuing the Volt heavily. Toyota has stated they have no plans for a PHEV.

I only fault GM for selling the NiMH patent to Chevron.
There's no real way to know who wins the PHEV race, I have a feeling that their is some heavy back door politics involved here, which would explain the silence from Toyota. I'd predict they'll wait for GM to move first, but will secretly be ready to follow up with their own version.

 

Mr. Lutz in his illustrious career has produce a few great cars. But I will believe that GM will build the Volt when it is sitting in the Chevy showrooms.


Mr. Lutz in his illustrious career has produce a few great cars. But I will believe that GM will build the Volt when it is sitting in the Chevy showrooms.

 

From Spring, 1962:

"Chrysler Corporation engineering and styling staffs are now designing a turbine car which will be entirely new in appearance and which should become available for sale in the latter part of 1963.

Details of the revolutionary engine development were revealed here today to newspaper, radio and television news representatives.

Chrysler Corporation has for some time been conducting an evaluation of consumer reactions to the turbine and a thorough analysis of manufacturing processes and costs to determine the technical and financial feasibility of putting a turbine- powered automobile into limited production.

On the basis of this evaluation of the consumer response to the turbo cars, top management at Chrysler Corporation is satisfied that a market does exist for turbine-powered automobiles...

Public enthusiasm and excitement over the turbine was overwhelming.

The “pocketbook†benefits of the turbine were of uppermost interest to the people who saw the turbo cars and filled out turbine questionnaires.

One out of every two persons considered the fact that the turbine will burn any fuel and that it promises less maintenance and less failure as the two most important advantages of the new engine, Thirty-nine per cent voted for no tune-ups and 34 per cent for no oil changes as the top important features of the turbine.

When asked, “II this car were offered for sale to the motoring public, do you think you would buy one?†30 per cent of the turbine viewers said “yes†they would definitely buy one and 54 per cent answered they would think seriously of buying one.

When asked, why should we want to put turbines in automobiles? Chrysler’s research scientists reply:

The answers to this lie in the turbine itself, the most fundamental one is the simplicity of the turbine, and it has only about a fifth as many parts as the piston engine. These parts rotate smoothly on simple sleeve bearings. This makes the turbine smooth, practically vibration-less.

The turbine has a clean, cool exhaust, no carbon monoxide, no unburned carbon, and no raw hydrocarbons. In other words, it does not contribute to smog nor does it go down the street pouring smoke into the atmosphere like a diesel.

Nevertheless, it win run beautifully on peanut oil, gasoline, kerosene, alcohol, furnace oil, French perfume, or practically anything that is available as fuel, that will run through a pipe and that will burn with air.

The turbine engine has no distributor and breaker points to re-tune seasonally. It has only one spark plug and that is used only to start the engine. It has the simplest ignition system possible. The turbine needs no anti-freeze and it has never been necessary to change oil in any of the Chrysler-built turbines -- fill them up once and the oil lasts for the life of the engine."

--------

Plug in hybrid? Forgettaboutit--I'm still waiting for my turbine car!

 

OK, I've just got to ask . . .

JUST WHO IS VOLTY???? :huh:

Is he a shill for the Chevy Volt Forum?
Is Volty an alter ego for malorn? (does malorn want his own sandbox to play in? One HE can control? :blink: )

Volty joined PriusChat on March 30 and almost immediately started hyping the Chevy Volt Forum . . .
9 of 14 of his posts so far mention the Volt site . . .
http://priuschat.com/index.php?act=Search&...s&highlite=
a forum that gained its first two users just that day - and only one of them posted . . . pointing out a mistake. <_<
http://www.chevyvoltforum.com/index.php?act=members

In fact, the root user started the site just three days earlier. :blink:
He then posted the first 6 posts on March 29, and then 14 more on March 30.
http://www.chevyvoltforum.com/index.php?showuser=1

So just how did Volty find this site, and why did he start hyping a site with not much info or users there?

Inquiring minds want to know . . . just who is Volty.

So which is it? A shill . . . or is that you malorn?

Oh, and P.S. - efusco joined the Volt forum on April 2 and is user #9 . . . so, maybe it's not such a bad site . . .
although, like most, he only posted once so far . . . just in line with the vast majority who posted once or not at all.