# Chevy Volt to get 230 mpg



## Capt Worley PE (Aug 11, 2009)

Too bad the car will cost $40K, but hopefully the costs will fall and the tech will trickle down.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124998537270122333.html

Way to go GM! Now use the mileage offset to bring the Z28 to market.


----------



## snickerd3 (Aug 11, 2009)

I'll believe it when it is actually tested on the road by the real people driving.

I've always sort of wondered how much the house power bill goes up when you plug an electric car in to charge. are you really saving a whole lot?


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Aug 11, 2009)

Snick, I saw in another article that they were expecting a full recharge to cost 40 cents. Seems awful low to me. That's about 4 kW/hrs around here, if I remember my rate structure right.


----------



## z06dustin (Aug 11, 2009)

Capt Worley PE said:


> Too bad the car will cost $40K, but hopefully the costs will fall and the tech will trickle down.
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124998537270122333.html
> 
> *Way to go GM! Now use the mileage offset to bring the Z28 to market.*


AMEN!

10 volts sold for every 136 25mpg corvettes and camaros = more than avg of 39mpg (barry obama’s desired amount).


----------



## Dexman1349 (Aug 11, 2009)

snickerd3 said:


> I'll believe it when it is actually tested on the road by the real people driving.
> I've always sort of wondered how much the house power bill goes up when you plug an electric car in to charge. are you really saving a whole lot?


IMO, it's not about saving the individual any money (but if it did, would be a bonus). It's more about reducing dependence on oil (both foreign &amp; domestic).


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Aug 11, 2009)

Turns out they are calling for 25kW/h for 100 miles. That'd be 2.50 where I live. But since my commute is 25 miles, call it 60 cents per day.

That'd save me less than 2.00/day at current prices. I couldn't justify a purchase of this car, though it is cool.

It's all about the money to me.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Aug 11, 2009)

Capt Worley PE said:


> Turns out they are calling for 25kW/h for 100 miles. That'd be 2.50 where I live. But since my commute is 25 miles, call it 60 cents per day.
> That'd save me less than 2.00/day at current prices. I couldn't justify a purchase of this car, though it is cool.
> 
> It's all about the money to me.


It would pay for itself in a mere 55 years!


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Aug 11, 2009)

BTW, how the hell do you calculate MPG on a car that doesn't burn "G"s of anything?


----------



## snickerd3 (Aug 11, 2009)

Dexman1349 said:


> IMO, it's not about saving the individual any money (but if it did, would be a bonus). It's more about reducing dependence on oil (both foreign &amp; domestic).


Is your local power plant coal or nuclear?

:sharkattack:


----------



## Flyer_PE (Aug 11, 2009)

^ If the idea is to reduce dependence on foreign oil, it doesn't much matter. We aren't importing coal. If they're claiming zero emissions, that's a different story.


----------



## snickerd3 (Aug 11, 2009)

Flyer_PE said:


> ^ If the idea is to reduce dependence on foreign oil, it doesn't much matter. We aren't importing coal. If they're claiming zero emissions, that's a different story.


It's all just a shuffle of resources. All will eventually come back and bite us in the butt. Great we aren't importing oil, but then the domestic issues are then front and center...vicious cycle.


----------



## Supe (Aug 11, 2009)

Flyer_PE said:


> ^ If the idea is to reduce dependence on foreign oil, it doesn't much matter. We aren't importing coal. If they're claiming zero emissions, that's a different story.



I'm willing to bet the initiative has more to do with the latter than the former.


----------



## Flyer_PE (Aug 11, 2009)

It's the unending search for the free lunch. In the 70s, nuclear power was touted as being "too cheap to meter". Didn't quite work out that way.


----------



## MGX (Aug 11, 2009)

GM already killed one electric car and I bet they kill this one too. I'm too skeptical because electric cars kick so much ass.


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Aug 11, 2009)

Here's a little snippet on fuel mileage calcs for the Volt. Keep in mind that the fuel mileage numbers aren't set in stone, yet.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/11/autos/volt...sion=2009081108



MGX said:


> GM already killed one electric car....


Sadly, there wasn't much of a market for an 80K car with a 40 mile range.


----------



## MGX (Aug 11, 2009)

Capt Worley PE said:


> Here's a little snippet on fuel mileage calcs for the Volt. Keep in mind that the fuel mileage numbers aren't set in stone, yet.
> http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/11/autos/volt...sion=2009081108
> 
> Sadly, there wasn't much of a market for an 80K car with a 40 mile range.


Wasn't the EV1 lease only? I seem to remember GM sending the repo man after some so they could be crushed.


----------



## snickerd3 (Aug 11, 2009)

MGX said:


> Wasn't the EV1 lease only? I seem to remember GM sending the repo man after some so they could be crushed.


repo man was sent after them all for crushing, if I remember correctly.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Aug 11, 2009)

Capt Worley PE said:


> Too bad the car will cost $40K, but hopefully the costs will fall and the tech will trickle down.
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124998537270122333.html
> 
> Way to go GM! Now use the mileage offset to bring the Z28 to market.





> Henderson conceded the cost of building a Volt will be expensive, about $40,000 per vehicle


$40k is how much it COSTS GM to make the car...I'm sure the cost to the consumer will be higher than that.



MGX said:


> Wasn't the EV1 lease only? I seem to remember GM sending the repo man after some so they could be crushed.


Rose-Hulman had an EV1 while I was there for research. I'm not sure if they ever did anything with it. Every time I saw it, it was parked in the same room collecting dust.


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Aug 11, 2009)

MGX said:


> Wasn't the EV1 lease only? I seem to remember GM sending the repo man after some so they could be crushed.


It was lease only in Cali and Arizona. GM estimated the 80K sales price (which I'm betting was far less than they cost to build) early in the program.

They were all taken back at the end of the leases and, except for a few, crushed due to legal concerns.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Aug 11, 2009)

The Wikipedia article answers a bunch of EV1 questions...



> The GM EV1 was an electric car produced and leased by the General Motors Corporation from 1996 to 1999.[1] It was the first mass-produced electric vehicle of the modern era from a major automaker. It was the first GM car designed to be an electric vehicle from the outset. Born as the GM Impact concept car of 1990, a production version came about as a result of a California Air Resources Board mandate that made the production and sale of zero-emission vehicles a requirement for the U.S.'s seven major automakers to sell cars in that state. The EV1 was initially available in the U.S. cities of Los Angeles, California and Phoenix and Tucson, in Arizona, under a limited lease-only agreement.[2] EV1 lessees were officially participants in a "real-world engineering evaluation" undertaken by GM's Advanced Technology Vehicles group, as well as a market analysis and study into the feasibility of producing and marketing a commuter electric vehicle in select U.S. markets.[3][4] The cars were not available for purchase, and could be serviced only at designated Saturn dealerships. Within a year of the car's release, leasing programs were also launched in San Francisco and Sacramento, California, along with a limited program in Georgia.
> While customer reaction to the EV1 was positive, GM viewed the program as evidence that electric cars occupied an unprofitable niche of the automobile market, evidenced by their ability to lease only 800 units in face of production costs of US$1 billion over four years.[5] An alliance of the major automakers fought the CARB regulation in court, resulting in a slackening of the ZEV stipulation, permitting the companies to produce super-low-emissions vehicles, natural gas vehicles, and hybrid cars in place of pure electrics. The EV1 program was subsequently discontinued in 2002, and all cars on the road were repossessed. Lessees were not given the option to purchase their cars from GM, which cited parts, service, and liability regulations.[1] All repossessed EV1s were crushed, save for a select few examples which were delivered to museums and educational institutes with their electric powertrains deactivated, and under the agreement that the cars were not to be reactivated and driven on the road. The car's discontinuation remains controversial, with electric car enthusiasts and environmental interest groups accusing GM of self-sabotaging its electric car program due to its negative profitability, while also blaming the oil industry for conspiring to keep electric cars off the road.[1]
> 
> In 2008, amidst an automotive industry crisis due to rising fuel prices and the global financial crisis, GM's Chevrolet division presented the production version of a new electric vehicle, the Volt plug-in hybrid, with the promise that it would be available for sale beginning in 2010.[6] The Volt, a four-seat compact car (in contrast to the EV1's two seats) will be capable of driving under fully electric power for 40 miles before its range-extending gasoline-powered generator is activated, about a third of the range that the final generation of EV1s were capable of driving under optimal conditions.


----------



## csb (Aug 11, 2009)

Plug in your electric cars! My state needs to sell more coal!


----------



## Dleg (Aug 11, 2009)

Dexman1349 said:


> IMO, it's not about saving the individual any money (but if it did, would be a bonus). It's more about reducing dependence on oil (both foreign &amp; domestic).


Yeah, but.... probably less than 1% of the US population will do something that cost more, for the sake of "the greater good". To really make anything like this work, it has to directly benefit people: by costing less, in most cases.



snickerd3 said:


> It's all just a shuffle of resources. All will eventually come back and bite us in the butt. Great we aren't importing oil, but then the domestic issues are then front and center...vicious cycle.


Not really - it's a long-agreed fact that running an electric by charging it "from the grid" is more energy efficient overall than running an internal combustion engine. If everyone was driving electric cars, our country would be using less energy. And if our energy is primarily produced from domestic sources (nuclear, coal, "solar and wind"), then our use of petroleum from the Middle East is obviously reduced.

But yeah, we'd then have to produce more domestic energy = more coal burning, more nuclear, etc., which would doubtless create one hell of a NIMBY storm.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Aug 11, 2009)

Dleg said:


> NIMBY storm.


Somebody on here introduced me to BANANA (I think it was JR or Supe). Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything. People are now "protecting" the back yards of others.


----------



## ElCid03 (Aug 11, 2009)

I was at a BANANA location today. Electricity was reregulated in Virginia about two years ago and we have been Dominion Resources shareholders since 2005. The technology in the volt is nothing new. Locomotives have been powered by electric motors for years, and the diesel engine in them just powers the generator that recharges the batteries. Think about it like this, not only can you help the environment by owning an electric vehicle, but you can also collect a dividend check from the power company every quarter.

A lot of utilities allow to buy their stock directly from them. Plant a little seed capital while the market is down, and let everyone else's Chevy Volts recoup your investment and them some. Our grandchildren will need more, reliable electricity than we can currently comprehend.


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Aug 12, 2009)

Dleg said:


> Yeah, but.... probably less than 1% of the US population will do something that cost more, for the sake of "the greater good".


I openly admit that I wouldn't, unless there was a less nebulous goal. "Lessening dependance on foreign oil" and "reducing your carbon footprint" don't do it for me.

BTW, the EPa is backing away from GM's claim of 230 mpg.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/11/epa-bac...0-mpg-for-volt/


----------



## Supe (Aug 12, 2009)

wilheldp_PE said:


> Somebody on here introduced me to BANANA (I think it was JR or Supe). Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything. People are now "protecting" the back yards of others.



I think it was JR, but I loved the term when he first said it. Unfortunately, it's all too true, as proven by my residence for the next few years. I am indeed nowhere near anything.

I will second CSB's sentiment. We need to build at least a couple more coal plants so I can mix things up in 2012, rather than me being knee deep in our Nuclear work 100% of the time!


----------



## csb (Aug 12, 2009)

Thumbs up on BANANA from me too...if the state of California could go back to solving their own problems and quit trying to muss with everyone else, I'd be happier.


----------



## Flyer_PE (Aug 12, 2009)

Supe said:


> I think it was JR, but I loved the term when he first said it. Unfortunately, it's all too true, as proven by my residence for the next few years. I am indeed nowhere near anything.


The scenery for my drive to work at the nuclear plant was: corn field...........corn field........bean field............corn field...........big friggin power plant.


----------



## snickerd3 (Aug 12, 2009)

Flyer_PE said:


> The scenery for my drive to work at the nuclear plant was: corn field...........corn field........bean field............corn field...........big friggin power plant.


Are you sure you aren't in IL?


----------



## Flyer_PE (Aug 12, 2009)

^I'm most definitely in Illinois. The plant is one of ComEd's (Now Exelon) finest. Clinton is near you and is pretty much the same, as is Duane Arnonld in Iowa, Wolf Creek in Kansas, Cooper Station in Nebraska........


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Feb 23, 2012)

Has anyone seen one of these on the road yet?


----------



## Flyer_PE (Feb 23, 2012)

No sighting here. Not sure I'd notice it if I had though. Looks just like any other little econobox tin-can to me.


----------



## humner (Feb 23, 2012)

question: How do you convert coal / electric energy to miles per gallon?


----------



## Ble_PE (Feb 23, 2012)

I saw one for the first time this past weekend. Like Flyer said, I wouldn't have noticed it if I hadn't been behind it and saw Volt on it.


----------



## Master slacker (Feb 23, 2012)

I laugh at the concept of electric / hybrid cars being worthwhile. When the batteries crap out and aren't covered under warranty, I'll have to foot the bill AND have the stealership install them. When I run out of juice, I won't be able to walk to the gas station and get a gallon of gas to limp in for a full fill-up. When something no longer works, I have no choice but to bring it to the stealership to diagnose the problem and fix it. I can replace an engine, heads, radiators, etc... I cannot translate the mess under the plastic cover in the motor compartment of these "green" cars.

/rant


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Feb 23, 2012)

humner said:


> question: How do you convert coal / electric energy to miles per gallon?


The EPA has some formula, no doubt, but I think it is more realistic to calculate cost per mile.



Master slacker said:


> I laugh at the concept of electric / hybrid cars being worthwhile. When the batteries crap out and aren't covered under warranty, I'll have to foot the bill AND have the stealership install them. When I run out of juice, I won't be able to walk to the gas station and get a gallon of gas to limp in for a full fill-up. When something no longer works, I have no choice but to bring it to the stealership to diagnose the problem and fix it. I can replace an engine, heads, radiators, etc... I cannot translate the mess under the plastic cover in the motor compartment of these "green" cars.
> 
> /rant


You know the hybrids can all run on gas, even with no batteries, right? They just aren't as efficient.


----------



## csb (Feb 23, 2012)

Well, I imagine I'd gain SOME efficiency, once the giant battery is taken out of the back.

I'd like to reiterate what I said in 2009...buy electric cars! If we sell more coal, I might get a raise!


----------



## engineergurl (Feb 23, 2012)

humner said:


> question: How do you convert coal / electric energy to miles per gallon?


I read somewhere that it's like about 34 kilowatt hours=1 gallon of gasoline... if that means anything...


----------



## envirotex (Feb 23, 2012)

Capt Worley PE said:


> Has anyone seen one of these on the road yet?


Yep. I have seen a few...pretty non-descript. The ATX was one of the "demo" cities, so we have several cruising around town.

ATX likes to claim they're "green", sometimes I think it's in name only, but now they are passing a plastic bag ban ordinance that is way out of control...


----------



## mudpuppy (Feb 23, 2012)

engineergurl said:


> humner said:
> 
> 
> > question: How do you convert coal / electric energy to miles per gallon?
> ...


That conversion is correct, 1 gallon of gasoline contains approximately the same amount of energy of 34 kWh. But it does not take into account the differences in efficiency between gasoline propulsion and electric. There will be some losses in the eletric motor and battery, but much much less than the gasoline engine.

Anyone have hard data on these efficiences? I would gues at absolute WORST, the electric drive is twice as efficient as the gasoline, but I wouldn't be surprised if the ratio is much better than that. If I did the math right, that means the electric propulsion costs about half that of gasoline, and perhaps a lot better than that.


----------



## Master slacker (Feb 23, 2012)

Capt Worley PE said:


> You know the hybrids can all run on gas, even with no batteries, right? They just aren't as efficient.


Very aware.

&lt;--- Car junkie

Hybrids still have expensive battery packs not covered under warranty, expensive, and cannot be done by a non-stealership. Under the hood is still a fustercluck of mess that the average Joe can no longer tinker with.


----------



## cdcengineer (Feb 23, 2012)

The volt was accused of bursting into flames after impact (days later) recently wasn't it? Not that you'd sit in the car for days following a crash.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Feb 23, 2012)

cdcengineer said:


> The volt was accused of bursting into flames after impact (days later) recently wasn't it? Not that you'd sit in the car for days following a crash.


Yeah, and in response, GM has assembled teams of experts that travel to shops/junkyards after crashes to properly disconnect/drain/etc. the batteries to avoid it. I wonder how many people they will have to hire if they meet their goal of 60k Volts this year.

There ya go...Obama is creating jobs!


----------



## Dexman PE PMP (Feb 23, 2012)

Master slacker said:


> Capt Worley PE said:
> 
> 
> > You know the hybrids can all run on gas, even with no batteries, right? They just aren't as efficient.
> ...


Not that there are many non-hybrids being sold now that are easy to work with anyways. The computer and electronics of most gasoline engines are a big PITA to work on.


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Feb 24, 2012)

mudpuppy said:


> engineergurl said:
> 
> 
> > humner said:
> ...


That must be about right, because the 16 kW hr battery is good for about forty miles, and I *think* it discharges to only 60% capacity.



Master slacker said:


> Hybrids still have* expensive battery packs not covered under warranty,* expensive, and cannot be done by a non-stealership.


Volt and Prius have a battery pack with a warranty of at least 100K miles. I'm almost positive the other hybrids are the same because it counts as an emission system.



cdcengineer said:


> The volt was accused of bursting into flames after impact (days later) recently wasn't it? Not that you'd sit in the car for days following a crash.


Yeah, if stored upside down for three weeks without the batteries drained, it _may_ catch fire. Of course, cars catch fire every day (Toyota just had a huge recall for doors that catch fire), but you don't hear much about that.


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Feb 24, 2012)

Here's the NHTSA report on the Volt fire.

http://www.nhtsa.gov...nal_Reports.pdf

And the final closing report:

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/defects/results.cfm?action_number=PE11037&amp;SearchType=QuickSearch&amp;summary=true


----------



## snickerd3 (Feb 24, 2012)

Capt Worley PE said:


> .
> 
> Yeah, if stored upside down for three weeks without the batteries drained, it _may_ catch fire. Of course, cars catch fire every day (Toyota just had a huge recall for doors that catch fire), but you don't hear much about that.


heck my crv had a recall for chance of fire in the door because the seal on the power window button wasn't right and water and cleaner was getting to the motor.


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Jun 12, 2013)

> General Motors has cut the price of the 2013 Chevrolet
> 
> Volt by $4,000 to boost stalling sales.
> 
> ...




http://www.freep.com/article/20130610/BUSINESS0101/306100100/

maybe this means reale values are dropping like a rock. I hope so. I'd still like a used one in a few years.


----------



## Krakosky (Jun 13, 2013)

I was very tempted to lease one a few months back. The monthly payment would've been about what I am currently paying in gas and I would be able to charge it for free here at work. I just didn't want to put down 2k for the down payment on a lease.


----------

