Topic: Production Volt

[Sir Osis of Liver]

But it IS NOT READY.

Duh. You put a lot of energy into what is a really pointless argument but you do that in more threads than just this one dontchya?

Didn't you know, there isn't going to be a 2011 Camry, because we can't order one NOW.

There isn't a shred of evidence that the Volt isn't going into production. It's about where it should be given the launch date. This is simply the haters and fan boys slagging on something that doesn't fit their script.

[toolatecrew]

But it IS NOT READY.

Duh. You put a lot of energy into what is a really pointless argument but you do that in more threads than just this one dontchya?

Didn't you know, there isn't going to be a 2011 Camry, because we can't order one NOW.

There isn't a shred of evidence that the Volt isn't going into production. It's about where it should be given the launch date. This is simply the haters and fan boys slagging on something that doesn't fit their script.

Why does everyone need to be on one extreme or the other. Some people term anyone who doesn't drink the Volt Kool aid a "hater" Some people term anyone who says the least bit positive about a Chev product a "fanboy".

I'm not in either category. I don't have an issue with beliving the Volt will eventually make it to production. I thalso belive it will make it to production. I only take issue with people exagerating where it is in the cycle. The Volt is a future product. Not a present one. its not a part of the Chev lineup. The fact that Chev "announces" it will produce somethiing isn't evidence . Its "intent". Why do you think the Volt will be delivered in 2011? Well Chev says it will be!

Chev doesn't have a history a very recent history of saying thiings that turn out to be incredibly stupidly wrong?

The Volt isn't dependent on an as yet unproven battery pack? One that isn't as yet being mass produced ?

I ahev nothing against the Volt. Its a nice niche product. Do I think that Chev is pouring entirly too much effort and taxpayer $s into a product that won't adress their profitability issues anytime soon? I absolutley admit that I do. Will I buy a Volt. Nope.

Good luck to them. I hope they deliver. I hope they do what's needed to become profitable and pay back the money I lent them more though.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

author=toolatecrew link=topic=59146.msg612196#msg612196

Wharrgarbl

The fact that you use the term "who doesn't drink the Volt Kool aid" pretty much identifies you as a hater.

The Volt isn't a huge leap in technology. It's just another form of hybrid. Bigger electric motor and battery pack, smaller gas motor. Nothing to stress over. Li-Ion battery capacity is simply a matter of adding cells, no big deal there. Mechanically it's simpler than the parallel hybrids coming from Toyota and others because it doesn't need a planetary gearset.

All of the statements from GM identify the program as being on track. So why the wild, pulled from your ass, speculation that something is amiss? How about some form of evidence that things aren't progressing according to plan?

Personally, I don't care. Hybrids aren't economically feasible. The Prius is a break-even proposition at best. But they are enviro-halo cars, and politically important at this point. If GM is going to build one, they might as well try to push the envelope, rather than spitting out another copy cat design like Honda did.

[articsteve]

It's just another form of hybrid. Bigger electric motor and battery pack, smaller gas motor. Nothing to stress over. Li-Ion battery capacity is simply a matter of adding cells, no big deal there.

Over simpilication perhaps ...


We looked closely at a range extender architecture for Model S. It ends up costing about the same in vehicle unit cost, a lot more in R&D and a lot more in servicing. Also, although performance is ok when both battery and engine are active at the same time, it turns really bad when the battery runs out and an undersized engine is carrying all the dead weight of the pack. Essentially, a REV is neither fish nor fowl and ends up being worse (in our opinion) than either a gasoline or pure electric vehicle.

An important consideration that people without a technical background don’t understand is that you can either have a high power or a high energy cell chemistry, but not both. Since the battery pack in a plug in hybrid like the Volt has to generate the same *power* as a much larger battery pack in a pure electric vehicle, it has to use a low energy cell chemistry.

That means a 40 mile REV pack is not 1/5 the size of a 200 mile pure EV pack, as simple proportionality would suggest. Another factor is that the REV pack is forced to do three to four times more cycles that a pure EV pack and is (obviously) hit with five times the current per cell during acceleration and regen braking, which forces the REV pack to be derated considerably.

[Leviathan]

It's just another form of hybrid. Bigger electric motor and battery pack, smaller gas motor. Nothing to stress over. Li-Ion battery capacity is simply a matter of adding cells, no big deal there.

Over simpilication perhaps ...


We looked closely at a range extender architecture for Model S. It ends up costing about the same in vehicle unit cost, a lot more in R&D and a lot more in servicing. Also, although performance is ok when both battery and engine are active at the same time, it turns really bad when the battery runs out and an undersized engine is carrying all the dead weight of the pack. Essentially, a REV is neither fish nor fowl and ends up being worse (in our opinion) than either a gasoline or pure electric vehicle.

An important consideration that people without a technical background don’t understand is that you can either have a high power or a high energy cell chemistry, but not both. Since the battery pack in a plug in hybrid like the Volt has to generate the same *power* as a much larger battery pack in a pure electric vehicle, it has to use a low energy cell chemistry.

That means a 40 mile REV pack is not 1/5 the size of a 200 mile pure EV pack, as simple proportionality would suggest. Another factor is that the REV pack is forced to do three to four times more cycles that a pure EV pack and is (obviously) hit with five times the current per cell during acceleration and regen braking, which forces the REV pack to be derated considerably.

Volt Exec: EREV is a Hard Configuration to Make Work

Many people ask us why there aren’t others following us in droves in developing EREVs. It’s a very hard configuration to make work. Once an engine is burning it changes the game, and we have non-intentionally thrown some agencies for a loop, like EPA and CARB, because their existing rules don’t apply. A lot of regulatory compliance stuff goes along with it not to mention the pleasability, the noise, the efficiency of the operation and the maintenance of it.

Therein lies the challenges associated with it and why maybe some companies never made the leap, because its hard.

[safristi]

..when is the LUNCH DATE!?  as a taxpayer i own 1.1,000,000th of the thing......so wot do i get a .............a mini weiner onna stick and a Coke ZERO ..............

[toolatecrew]

author=toolatecrew link=topic=59146.msg612196#msg612196

Wharrgarbl

The fact that you use the term "who doesn't drink the Volt Kool aid" pretty much identifies you as a hater.

The Volt isn't a huge leap in technology. It's just another form of hybrid. Bigger electric motor and battery pack, smaller gas motor. Nothing to stress over. Li-Ion battery capacity is simply a matter of adding cells, no big deal there. Mechanically it's simpler than the parallel hybrids coming from Toyota and others because it doesn't need a planetary gearset.

All of the statements from GM identify the program as being on track. So why the wild, pulled from your ass, speculation that something is amiss? How about some form of evidence that things aren't progressing according to plan?

Personally, I don't care. Hybrids aren't economically feasible. The Prius is a break-even proposition at best. But they are enviro-halo cars, and politically important at this point. If GM is going to build one, they might as well try to push the envelope, rather than spitting out another copy cat design like Honda did.

No YOU define me as a hater because I don't share your view.

The posts above give all kinds of eveidence that GM says producing the Volt does require a huge leap in battery technology to be cost effective and commercially viable. Their own engineer says :

We are right on track to where we need to be in terms of the next stages of development we need to do to meet our target. Is it commercial right now, no,

If its so simple why don't they have a commercially viable product yet? I'm not talking about a product with a price and delivery date. I'm talking about a COMMERCIALLY viable product. They say NOT YET. How can that be if its so simple?

All of the statements from GM identify the program as being on track.{/quote]

And this is why some (i'm not into labels) would call you a fanboy. Why is the Volt on track? BECAUSE GM SAYS IT IS!

GM even created their own website for this stuff. GM Facts and fiction. He are some of the things GM said were true on the site:

1.It isn't going bankrupt ("GM has a robust plan for weathering the downturn").
2. It doesn't have too many brands (currently 12 worldwide).
3.GM isn't looking for a government bailout (the "federal direct-loan program is a powerful and appropriate incentive").
4.The Volt isn't vaporware ("we can assure you, the Volt is for real").

Now you tell me why statment 4 has credibility?

[Sir Osis of Liver]

It's just another form of hybrid. Bigger electric motor and battery pack, smaller gas motor. Nothing to stress over. Li-Ion battery capacity is simply a matter of adding cells, no big deal there.

Over simpilication perhaps ...


We looked closely at a range extender architecture for Model S. It ends up costing about the same in vehicle unit cost, a lot more in R&D and a lot more in servicing. Also, although performance is ok when both battery and engine are active at the same time, it turns really bad when the battery runs out and an undersized engine is carrying all the dead weight of the pack. Essentially, a REV is neither fish nor fowl and ends up being worse (in our opinion) than either a gasoline or pure electric vehicle.

An important consideration that people without a technical background don’t understand is that you can either have a high power or a high energy cell chemistry, but not both. Since the battery pack in a plug in hybrid like the Volt has to generate the same *power* as a much larger battery pack in a pure electric vehicle, it has to use a low energy cell chemistry.

That means a 40 mile REV pack is not 1/5 the size of a 200 mile pure EV pack, as simple proportionality would suggest. Another factor is that the REV pack is forced to do three to four times more cycles that a pure EV pack and is (obviously) hit with five times the current per cell during acceleration and regen braking, which forces the REV pack to be derated considerably.

First of all I do have a technical background.

Second, Elon as a competitor is placing his own spin on the technical issues. They can't do this type of hybrid because they can't afford to. Hybrids are necessarily more complicated than IC or battery powered vehicles. What he's saying about the battery pack is essentially true, but it's true for batteries in the Prius, Altima and Fusion hybrids also, and they seem to hold up quite well. The programming for the charging systems is the key.

The Volt itself isn't a huge departure in the sense that it has a small IC engine powering a 53kW generator that charges a 16kWh battery pack (compared to 1.3kWh in the Prius) that in turn sends it's power to a 111kW (149HP) electric motor. The fact that the power system is in series actually makes it less complicated than the parallel systems used by Toyota and others.

 To maintain road speed on the highway, most cars only require approximately 15HP or so. The genset will have no problem maintaining a minimum charge.

The on sale date is still scheduled for November 2010. I still haven't heard anything that would put that in doubt.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

We are right on track to where we need to be in terms of the next stages of development we need to do to meet our target. Is it commercial right now, no,

If its so simple why don't they have a commercially viable product yet? I'm not talking about a product with a price and delivery date. I'm talking about a COMMERCIALLY viable product. They say NOT YET. How can that be if its so simple?

Framed in this manner, none of the current hybrids are viable ie, they don't actually return a profit for manufacturers. That doesn't mean that they haven't been produced.

Everything else here is simply wild speculation that I'm not going to get too excited over.

[Leviathan]

No YOU define me as a hater because I don't share your view.

Uh, no, it is the irrationally negative posts that do you in. Bring in rational thought with links and be part of the discussion.

The posts above give all kinds of eveidence that GM says producing the Volt does require a huge leap in battery technology to be cost effective and commercially viable. Their own engineer says :

We are right on track to where we need to be in terms of the next stages of development we need to do to meet our target. Is it commercial right now, no,

If its so simple why don't they have a commercially viable product yet? I'm not talking about a product with a price and delivery date. I'm talking about a COMMERCIALLY viable product. They say NOT YET. How can that be if its so simple?

Simple? It isn't simple and if you'd read the links provided you would see that.

Commercially viable will take a generation (or two) as GM has been saying all along. It took the Prius quite a while to become commercially viable no? Did $60 DVD players just happen when DVDs came out? Have name brand 40" LCD 1080p TVs always been under $800?

All of the statements from GM identify the program as being on track.

And this is why some (i'm not into labels) would call you a fanboy. Why is the Volt on track? BECAUSE GM SAYS IT IS!

SirO is a "fanboy" now? That's rich. Why not provide tangible evidence that the Volt is not on track instead of insulting posters? (Your speculation does not count BTW)

GM even created their own website for this stuff. GM Facts and fiction. He are some of the things GM said were true on the site:

1.It isn't going bankrupt ("GM has a robust plan for weathering the downturn").
2. It doesn't have too many brands (currently 12 worldwide).
3.GM isn't looking for a government bailout (the "federal direct-loan program is a powerful and appropriate incentive").
4.The Volt isn't vaporware ("we can assure you, the Volt is for real").

Now you tell me why statment 4 has credibility?

Uh, no. The onus is on you to prove that the Volt is not for real. 

Listen, no one is denying that the Volt may not be built ever. There is strong evidence such as the integration vehicles being put through their paces on public roads and the plants being outfitted with tooling for production though. No one is denying that if and when it does get built that it will be pricey.

[Honda Owner]

Framed in this manner, none of the current hybrids are viable ie, they don't actually return a profit for manufacturers

This may have been the case when the first Prius was introduced. It is not the case now. Toyota makes $3100 on each Prius now, a very nice per vehicle profit. Honda also turns a profit on the Insight.

http://green.autoblog.com/2009/04/28/honda-toyota-make-3-100-profit-on-each-hybrid-sold/

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Framed in this manner, none of the current hybrids are viable ie, they don't actually return a profit for manufacturers

This may have been the case when the first Prius was introduced. It is not the case now. Toyota makes $3100 on each Prius now, a very nice per vehicle profit. Honda also turns a profit on the Insight.

http://green.autoblog.com/2009/04/28/honda-toyota-make-3-100-profit-on-each-hybrid-sold/

I'd really like to see that substantiated. It's pretty much impossible to really know unless you're on the inside.

The $3100 claim is alleged to be gross profit, so price minus cost of production. Doesn't include R&D, marketing etc etc.

$3k is more than they make on compacts. Take a Corolla then add $10-15K worth of power electronics and batteries. Not much left for profit. The main reason Toyota has been dithering on the use of lithium ion batteries is cost. Everything I've heard suggests the Prius is a break even proposition at best.

One of Subaru's executives let it slip that Toyota doesn't make money off of the Prius. He wasn't long in being shut up.

[toolatecrew]

Framed in this manner, none of the current hybrids are viable ie, they don't actually return a profit for manufacturers

This may have been the case when the first Prius was introduced. It is not the case now. Toyota makes $3100 on each Prius now, a very nice per vehicle profit. Honda also turns a profit on the Insight.

http://green.autoblog.com/2009/04/28/honda-toyota-make-3-100-profit-on-each-hybrid-sold/

I'd really like to see that substantiated. It's pretty much impossible to really know unless you're on the inside.

The $3100 claim is alleged to be gross profit, so price minus cost of production. Doesn't include R&D, marketing etc etc.

$3k is more than they make on compacts. Take a Corolla then add $10-15K worth of power electronics and batteries. Not much left for profit. The main reason Toyota has been dithering on the use of lithium ion batteries is cost. Everything I've heard suggests the Prius is a break even proposition at best.

One of Subaru's executives let it slip that Toyota doesn't make money off of the Prius. He wasn't long in being shut up.

Since you can't prove its not true then its true until you prove its not..right?

Back in 1997, Toyota lost about $10,000 on every Toyota Prius produced. Next year, thanks to economies of scale, hybrid part costs for the Toyota Prius will be cut in half, enabling Toyota to both decrease Prius prices and increase profits. Noriyuki Matsushima, analyst at NikkoCitigroup in Tokyo, told NewsWeek "the new Prius is going to be hugely profitable." And Toyota sees even greater hybrid production cost cuts throughout the next decade.

http://www.hybridcarblog.com/2008/09/next-prius-hugely-profitable-and.html

IF Toyota syas its profitable its profitable until it proves otherwise I guess..

[Sir Osis of Liver]

It's as I said:

I'd really like to see that substantiated. It's pretty much impossible to really know unless you're on the inside.

I guess reading comprehension isn't your forté. Fine.

I'm speculating based on the estimated net profit of a similarly sized car, plus the cost of batteries,  plus the cost of the power electronics. There simply isn't that much cost to be cut in producing batteries and power electronics.

But it is speculation.

Much like everything you've been saying about the Volt

[rrocket]

^^^^All car companies are coy about what they make per vehicle.  Doesn't matter if you ask Ford about their Taurus or GM about their Corvette.  However, I had read that Toyota lost money on all 1st Generation Prius'..the one's that were originally sold 1st in Japan, then as a 2000 model in North America (the sedan).  It wasn't until their 2nd Generation Prius (the hatch) that they started making money on it.  How much?  Good luck getting a straight answer from Toyota (or any car maker for that matter).

[toolatecrew]

Not only will the Volt not be profitable but just think how much of taxpayers money is in each one. That doesn't even take into account the taxper funded "rebates" that will be used to sell the Volt when /if it hits the market.

Meanwhile the vehicle that is supposed to actually start help GM start to pay back the $ the Cruze has been delayed yet again.

[Leviathan]

Not only will the Volt not be profitable but just think how much of taxpayers money is in each one. That doesn't even take into account the taxper funded "rebates" that will be used to sell the Volt when /if it hits the market.

Oh you are a worrier aren'tchya?

Meanwhile the vehicle that is supposed to actually start help GM start to pay back the $ the Cruze has been delayed yet again.

The Cruze was brought forward and then dropped back to original NA date IIRC. Don't recall a good reason why its intro is so long after the rest of the world though. But this thread isn't about the Cruze is it?

[toolatecrew]

Not only will the Volt not be profitable but just think how much of taxpayers money is in each one. That doesn't even take into account the taxper funded "rebates" that will be used to sell the Volt when /if it hits the market.

Oh you are a worrier aren'tchya?

Meanwhile the vehicle that is supposed to actually start help GM start to pay back the $ the Cruze has been delayed yet again.

The Cruze was brought forward and then dropped back to original NA date IIRC. Don't recall a good reason why its intro is so long after the rest of the world though. But this thread isn't about the Cruze is it?

not a worrier. Why worry about somthing I can't change. The government lent them Billions I thought was a terrible idea  but they don't ask me, GM has focused on the Volt which won't help profitability anytime soon terrible idea..but no one is going to ask me. Doesn't mean I can't be critical of decsions I think are dead wrong. I certainly don't buy the idea my opion doesn't have validioty becuse I'm not "in the know" like GM managment. They have proven in the past that they don't know what's best.

As for the Cruze it does have to do with the Volt in that they have finite reasources (and $s well at least till they go to the trough again) They are putting the majority towards a Volt launch for NEXT November.Meanwhile the Curze was launched in Europe nearly 7 months ago. & months after launch they realize that the car isn't quiet enough or doesn't shift right so they push the US launch back 3 months. Think they might have caught these issues in development over the last 5 years had they put sufficient reasources behind it and kept their eye on the short term critical car rtaher than the Volt's future?

It sounds all warm and fuzzy:

“We’re using that time to make sure we have a flawless launch,” said Klaus-Peter Martin, a Chevrolet spokesman.

But what it has to do with the Volt is this is exactly why I am so skeptical of them meeting their launch date. This is still an unproven technology. If they think its crucial that the Curze launch be smooth that's nothing compared to the intense scrutiny the volot is going to get. If they roll out the first few 1000 and have issues like Camaro did they will be crucified. My prediction is that they discover some issue be it with the batter pack or other that causes them to make a choice between missing the launch date or launching a flawed product. I don't have proof . its just a prediction based on past behaviour.

[safristi]

  No need ta put a "CURZE" on it .......................seems the $1.6Billion GM just lost is Boogah Boogah enuf!!!??...................................re_VOLT_ing say i..........

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Not only will the Volt not be profitable but just think how much of taxpayers money is in each one. That doesn't even take into account the taxper funded "rebates" that will be used to sell the Volt when /if it hits the market.

Oh you are a worrier aren'tchya?

Meanwhile the vehicle that is supposed to actually start help GM start to pay back the $ the Cruze has been delayed yet again.

The Cruze was brought forward and then dropped back to original NA date IIRC. Don't recall a good reason why its intro is so long after the rest of the world though. But this thread isn't about the Cruze is it?

not a worrier. Why worry about somthing I can't change. The government lent them Billions I thought was a terrible idea  but they don't ask me, GM has focused on the Volt which won't help profitability anytime soon terrible idea..but no one is going to ask me. Doesn't mean I can't be critical of decsions I think are dead wrong. I certainly don't buy the idea my opion doesn't have validioty becuse I'm not "in the know" like GM managment. They have proven in the past that they don't know what's best.

As for the Cruze it does have to do with the Volt in that they have finite reasources (and $s well at least till they go to the trough again) They are putting the majority towards a Volt launch for NEXT November.Meanwhile the Curze was launched in Europe nearly 7 months ago. & months after launch they realize that the car isn't quiet enough or doesn't shift right so they push the US launch back 3 months. Think they might have caught these issues in development over the last 5 years had they put sufficient reasources behind it and kept their eye on the short term critical car rtaher than the Volt's future?

It sounds all warm and fuzzy:

“We’re using that time to make sure we have a flawless launch,” said Klaus-Peter Martin, a Chevrolet spokesman.

But what it has to do with the Volt is this is exactly why I am so skeptical of them meeting their launch date. This is still an unproven technology. If they think its crucial that the Curze launch be smooth that's nothing compared to the intense scrutiny the volot is going to get. If they roll out the first few 1000 and have issues like Camaro did they will be crucified. My prediction is that they discover some issue be it with the batter pack or other that causes them to make a choice between missing the launch date or launching a flawed product. I don't have proof . its just a prediction based on past behaviour.

The Cruze is not the answer to profitability. That doesn't mean they shouldn't bother, indeed uncompetitive small cars hurt them last year, but it isn't critical at this juncture to rush it into production. Very little profit exists in small cars in the US. Vehicles like the Enclave, Traverse, Acadian are where the money is in the US. The new Equinox and SRX are another area. The Malibu is selling quite well, not to mention the Camaro.  The new Lacross and Regal look very, very promising. The Volt is simply another product, a high profile one granted, but hardly the only thing GM has been working on. It's simply not the Hail Mary Pass strawman you're making it out to be.