Volt Will Cost Less Than $30,000

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 21 2007, 12:57 PM) [snapback]446727[/snapback]</div>

Your right that as a sole vehicle the EV1 has limited appeal but the majority of families do not only have one vehicle. Most families have at least 2 vehicles if not more. For 5 years my wife and I got by just fine with a car and a motorcycle. I used the motorcycle to commute to work every day and she used the car. When we had to pick up something large or travel together we would take the car. Every car you have doesn't have to be able to do everything that your family might possible do.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priussoris @ May 19 2007, 04:34 AM) [snapback]445607[/snapback]</div>

It's not a question of what you are going to do with the leprechan; it's a question of what the leprechan is going to do to you when he discovers that you've stolen his gold.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ May 21 2007, 07:13 AM) [snapback]446619[/snapback]</div>

The word "when" in this sentence serves exactly the same function as the word "when" in the sentence "When did you stop beating your wife?"

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jtmhog @ May 21 2007, 09:04 AM) [snapback]446686[/snapback]</div>

All the people who had leased it and wanted to buy it when the leases ran out!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 21 2007, 09:57 AM) [snapback]446727[/snapback]</div>

Most families only need one car capable of travelling more than 100 miles. With one EV and one gas-burner, one of them is commuting on electricity. They would then be burning less than half as much gas as before, since the one with the longer commute uses the EV.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ May 21 2007, 10:05 AM) [snapback]446733[/snapback]</div>

What in the world gives you the idea that GM is planning a PHEV??? GM is certainly blowing plenty of hot air about the imaginary Volt. One of our GM enthusiasts posted a link to a picture, which showed about 4 guys pushing what was supposed to be a Volt prototype. But the fact that they had to push it, and could not drive it on electric power, means that what they were showing was merely a shell.

GM has no intention of building the Volt. They could build it today if they wanted to. The technology is available now. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts, however, that a PHEV Prius is already in the engineering stage at Toyota. But Toyota never releases information about upcoming cars until it's ready to actually begin marketing them.

 

I have little doubt that GM will make the Volt. I wouldn't put money on it, but they've hyped it so much that even they (hopefully) realize what idiots they'll seem like if they don't follow through with SOMETHING.

However, I've said it more than once, and I'll probably say it a few more times: the question isn't WILL GM will screw it up, but rather HOW will GM screw it up?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ May 21 2007, 10:27 AM) [snapback]446707[/snapback]</div>

Indeed he did. I just couldn't bring myself to spell it as such. On the other hand, I did have a professor in a geophysics class that pronounced it "jigawatts." However, he was from China and spoke with quite an accent.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 21 2007, 05:21 PM) [snapback]447004[/snapback]</div>

What you said, Evan.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 21 2007, 05:21 PM) [snapback]447004[/snapback]</div>

What you said, Evan.

 

I've a hard time believing that all that was learned with the EV1 (or the Rav4 EV or the Ford Ranger EV) has been unlearned and the blueprints trashed and hard drives erased. C'mon. Emissions? Battery management/chemistry? Crash tests? Car companies have been working on all these things for years...DECADES! Is it really all that 'new' after 10 years? When does 'new' translate into mainstream? Car companies have found loopholes in lots of mandates and gov't laws. Why should they stop now.

Sure will be interesting when someone else comes out with a volt-like vehicle before GM. I'll eat my hat if GM does pull this off...but, again, how many are gonna line up and buy 'untested' technology? The same few early adoptors of hybrids? GM will take that as "see, no one wants them" and not follow thru. Toyota could have done the same, but lucky for us, they continued the program, crushing just SOME of their EVs. GM is not willing to hang in there with this type of technology. If they were, why did they sell the NiMH tech to an OIL company? Maximize profits, look 3 months down the road, never see gas prices going above $2/gallon. Sheesh, I get madder every word I type here!!

The sooner GM goes under, the sooner the Prius and other efficiency vehicles can get produced. How's that for GM bashing. If the marketing is so good at GM, why are they floundering? Maybe...just maybe, the consumer knows best...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(finman @ May 22 2007, 08:51 AM) [snapback]447241[/snapback]</div>

GM does not prevent other automakers from building the Prius or other efficient vehicles. Were is Toyota on building plug-in hybrids? If I recall their stance is "That's interesting, well look into it". At least GM has said they plan to build one.

Oh and GM has gone from loosing billions per year to making a profit the last 2 quarters. They are rapidly expanding in China and quite profitable there. (BTW, China is expected to be the number one market for automobiles by 2015) The only place the are having problems is in the US and that business has greatly improved in the last year. I'm not a big fan of GM, but floundering they are not.

 

Well, the past track record at GM is not what I call stellar. they are playing catch-up and the market seems to decide many companies fate. Behind in the count, it is a tough way to operate. Time will tell if they have the strength to keep up with a fast-paced business. To me, to be behind like they are...and it could be my perception...it's too little too late. China's a great market to sell quantity...but the US is just as important in quality.

Really, the more I look at it, GM had their chance, crushed it, and now wonder why the efficiency monster has eaten them. Now, if they could crush some other models, then I'd say they are "moving forward".

PS apparently, the Prius battery is the largest allowed in a car via the patent on NiMH that GM sold to Chevron. So THAT tells me they DID limit others manufacturing more efficient cars...or even EVs. It's just sad...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ May 22 2007, 08:29 AM) [snapback]447258[/snapback]</div>

I assume by "profit" you mean a first quarter loss of $305 million. Yes, they are profitable in Asia and Latin America, but they lose more money here than they gain there, and the only reason they made any money at all last year was from the one-time selling off of Suzuki.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ May 22 2007, 10:02 AM) [snapback]447280[/snapback]</div>

That article you quote is more complicated than you understand. The $305 million first quarter loss you speak of is actually GMAC's first quarter loss, not GM's loss. GMAC is the finance/lender division of GM and includes a home mortgage division, which is where the losses occured. The title of the article, "GM profits dive 90% after subprime losses" should have given you a big hint that the article was about home mortgages, not auto manufacturing. "subprime losses" refers to subprime home loans.

See the first sentence of the article:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE("The article")</div>

 

I realize that. But GMAC is a division of GM; a loss is a loss, even if it's totally unrelated to automobiles.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ May 22 2007, 11:12 AM) [snapback]447320[/snapback]</div>

That's weak. Weren't we talking about GM's car making ability and decisions, not their home loan decisions?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marlin @ May 22 2007, 10:37 AM) [snapback]447333[/snapback]</div>

I wasn't talking about either. I was just correcting someone who stated GM made a profit the last couple of quarters. It doesn't matter why they were bleeding money last quarter, the fact is they were bleeding money.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(finman @ May 22 2007, 07:01 AM) [snapback]447279[/snapback]</div>

I would believe that it is the patent holder (a subsidiary of Chevron) that will not allow (license) the patent use for larger batteries. Economic or governmental pressure could possibly be employed if the case were made that limiting the use of the patent was not in the national interest.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 22 2007, 11:57 AM) [snapback]447351[/snapback]</div>

What IS safe to say, is that GM HAS slowed their money bleeding. The sad part is the tourniquet they used was plant shut downs, outsourcing to Mexico & Canada, layoffs, slashing med insurnce, etc. It would be GREAT if the losses of the past years would have been due to tons of capitol investment into cars that got us off our fossle fuel crack addictions. Hind sight is 20-20. Toyota, on the other hand COULD have become #1 long ago, but for the fact they DID pour $$$ into the Prius (. . . all the while GM poo poo'ed it). Now, Toyota is reaping the reward they deserve, in part, because they kept (albeit reluctantly) their EV's on the road. THEY are the company with all the on going experience of large battery performance.

One post above said the Volt (if it ever come into production) will be an "American" car? (whoope !!! was the theme) Er, American car?what's that? Maybe thinking Volt will be 'American' is a simple understanding of how multinational corporations work? And how naive is it to think that a 'Volt' concept car WON'T be made in Mexico ... Canada ... or even China?

To the post above complaining of all the negativity re GM? Well GM can't have it both ways ... knocking our great cars, that they poo poo as a fad, or gymic or novelty ... then expect what ... joy from the folks who love their Prius?

And YES, I noticed VOLTY never posts on the same threads that malorn posts to. yea, just a coincidence.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 22 2007, 10:57 AM) [snapback]447351[/snapback]</div>

How much of GMAC's mortgage loss is due to unemployment from GM the automaker? The bottom line is a loss of stockholder equity. To the stockholders does it really matter whether it is from the finance or manufacturing side of the business?

The fastest way to profitability with the Volt would be for GM to build the manufacturing plant in China (with its partner) where they can get a dedicated work force cheap and not have the environmental overhead. The downside is that in a year or two the Chinese will become so good at producing vehicles they will either copy it or put on a second shift, one for GM, one for the Chinese.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ May 21 2007, 04:16 PM) [snapback]447002[/snapback]</div>

We each have our own opinions, of course, and this is just opinion. But just as the Prius is Toyota's flagship for its newest technology, I am of the opinion that the Volt is GM's marketing strategy for promising futuristic technology it never intends to actually build. It's a way to stave off bad publicity. "Why don't you make a hybrid?" "We will, but we're still working on it."

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 21 2007, 04:21 PM) [snapback]447004[/snapback]</div>

If my statement is not the entire story, yours exaggerates the difficulties. All of the above is what car makers do. And GM has an enormous budget for it. If they really wanted to build the Volt, they could have done everything you list long ago. They built the EV1 a very long time ago.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hschuck @ May 22 2007, 09:07 AM) [snapback]447357[/snapback]</div>

NiMH technology is rapidly becoming obsolete for cars. The Prius battery is fairly near the limit of the weight that you'd like to have in a car. Sure, you can double or triple it, but at a significant weight cost. With lithium batteries going into conversion cars now, and likely to be in production cars very soon, the NiMH patent will soon be irrelevant.

But if there is an issue over the patent, the real issue is that GM decided to sell the patent rather than use it in a car. This adds evidence to my assertion that they do not intend to build any hybrid or EV.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ May 23 2007, 09:52 AM) [snapback]448112[/snapback]</div>

Meanwhile, Toyota is NOT tooting its horn about what they are / aren't doing w/ PHEV's. Knowing how Toyota has performed historicly, it may very welll be they are simply holding their cards close to their chest, if you know what I mean. B)