Did this guy just kill the Chevy Volt?

[Noah Harbinger]

Which would be nice if it improved anything that buyers care about.

 

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that maximizing range, efficiency, and power pack longevity weren't of interest to Volt customers. Just because most customers won't understand it doesn't mean they won't benefit from it.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Noah Harbinger

[toyboxrv]

Some items that buyers might care about would be:

 

1) an engine that doesn't require Premium fuel

2) a total range greater than 379 miles

3) something more effiecient than 37mpg in hybrid mode

4) something roomier than cramped 2+2 seating

 

1) My 08 GT doesn't require premium, but gets better mileage using it.

 

2) Mustang's range using EPA numbers isn't any better. No electric to help out.

 

3) The Volt has a 40 mpg hwy rating that most of you conveniently forget.

 

4) It hasn't been a problem for me.

 

Now where are all the Ford people to tell me I bought a stupid car?

 

It amazes me how many people criticized the Volt for only a 40 mile electric range, yet no mention of that deficiency on the Energis.

[Noah Harbinger]

I'm not sure how you're defining "non=trivial" battery banks, but the US Navy's Gato- and Balao-class submarines from WWII used that same diesel->generator->battery->electric motor layout (some of their powerplants were the same as then-current diesel-electric locomotives), and they certainly had what I would consider to be non-trivial banks of batteries.

 

That makes sense, it would be pretty hard to run an engine underwater. If there's a reason why anyone would do the same on a locomotive, I haven't been able to think of it - they certainly don't have the same operating restrictions.

 

But still, saying "nothing in the Volt is new" on the basis of that powertrain schematic ignores a lot of impressive development that went into putting that into a small vehicle.

 

I hate defending Chevy but there are a lot of people here seem bent on criticizing it with far less intellectual honesty than they usually display.

[akirby]

You guys don't get it. Ford could put a bigger battery in the Fusion Energi and it would probably cost the same or less as the Volt (internal cost, not MSRP), get the same range on electric power as the Volt (or more) and get 47 mpg after the battery power runs out.

 

You don't see Ford subsidizing hybrids or EVs with dirt cheap leases. Because Ford is actually trying to make money and they're making the most efficient hybrids and EVs available and they're doing it proftably.

 

The fact that GM is doing ONLY the Volt and not doing regular hybrids and conventional plug-in hybrids just shows that they don't make good business decisions.

 

If GM had all those other vehicles and they were just doing the Volt as a R&D project it would be more palatable.

 

If GM had some unique powerplant that made it more efficient than a traditional plug-in hybrid (like a hydrogen fuel cell) then it would make more sense.

If GM wasn't still trying to recover from bankruptcy it would make more sense.

 

Why would you subsidize leases to sell more cars and lose even more money? It doesn't make business sense.

 

The ONLY thing that's attractive about the Volt (other than the ridiculous lease deals) is the extended EV range. If Ford or Toyota decides to increase the battery power of their plug-ins to match the Volt's range then it's game over.

[RichardJensen]

sales are near 30k in 9 months. How well is that Focus electric doing? How much does it cost?

With incredibly high subvented lease and loan deals.

 

The Focus EV is a 'hobby car', a proof of concept. If Ford loses $8k on every EV Focus and sells 2,000 of them and GM loses $4k on every Volt and sells 50,000 of them, who's in worse shape?

Need to be a bit more realistic on figuring cost difference there RJ. The Volt is 40k before a $7500 rebate the Cmax Energi is 33k before a $3750 rebate.

Know something about those rebates? They're not permanent. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxevb.shtml

[jpd80]

3) The Volt has a 40 mpg hwy rating that most of you conveniently forget.

In fairness, Volt in depleated battery condition gets, 35 city, 40 highway and 37 combined,

The C-max energi in depleated battery condition gets, 47 city, 47 highway and 47 combined,

so in combined driving with depleated batteries, the energi is theoretically 10 mpg better than Volt?

 

It amazes me how many people criticized the Volt for only a 40 mile electric range, yet no mention of that deficiency on the Energis.

Maybe if GM would stop referring to it as an extended range electric vehicle,

the people advocating much cheaper Plug In Hybrids like energi would get off its case?

Edited October 15, 2012 by jpd80

[jpd80]

I don't have a problem with Volt, I think it's an example of an early adopter of Extended range EV like GM

being run down by progressive development in extended electric range Plug In Hybrids.

I would expect more manufacturers to Follow Ford and Toyota's cue and develop

more hybrids and Plug In Hybrids, leaving Voltec to GM to sort out...

Edited October 15, 2012 by jpd80

[akirby]

Thumbs up - getting a plug-in hybrid with long battery range to market first

Thumbs down - choosing an inefficient ICE generator that only manages 37 mpg

Thumbs down - putting it in a sedan with only 4 seats

Thumbs down - subvening leases so they can sell more vehicles at an even bigger loss

Thumbs down - not developing cheaper standard hybrids and regular plug-in hybrids and EVs

 

Ford has 4 profitable hybrids (R&D was amortized years ago) and is ramping up domestic battery and transmission production so they can roll out hybrid drivetrains across the lineup.

They're selling limited EVs as they're still in R&D mode.

 

In 3 years I predict Ford will have at least 8 hybrid or plug-in hybrid models (Fusion, C-Max, Focus, Escape) - all profitable and all helping Ford meet new CAFE targets.

GM will still be losing money on a 2nd generation Volt and a couple of spinoffs.

 

From a business perspective, that is an epic fail.

[FordBuyer]

Go figure why you guys keep lamenting Volt's FOUR seats. I can't remember the last time I had five in my Taurus. Four lots of times, but rarely five. Last review of new Fusion I read said it's almost impossible to get fifth passenger in middle of rear seat if he or she expects to use middle seat belt. Hardly any five passenger sedan makes it comfortable to fifth in middle using seat belt. Looks to me like you are really stretching to make your case against the Volt because it's a GM product and GM is the Evil Empire.

 

Furthermore, I would bet that the Volt drivetrain is a long term project, and GM is willing to take losses now, get more people into them, and then expand the line. Yes, I've seen the new EVR, and it is running around with camo around town and at GM Proving Grounds in Milford, MI. Right now, it's important to get this techology out there, get people using it, as gas prices will probably only increase long term, and make a better and better case for plug-ins that go long way on charge only. Supposedly, Tesla has 50,000 orders out there for theirs. So there are buyers of this technoloty out there, and the Volt does very well in particular in CA. GM dealers have said they could sell 50+/month, but are only allocated a small portion of what they could sell. Looks to me like Chevy could sell 2,000/month in CA alone. Especially now with pipeline and refinery problems. Last I heard Chevron refinery out there won't be back onine until sometime in 2013. The Volt then is a breath of fresh air. And AGAIN, the C-Max is production constrained, and GM could build 50,000+ Volts/year if the sales were there. I still say lack of charging infrastructure restricts EV sales. Volt sales are more than double last year, and I expect 2013 Volt sales to double this year. Not bad.

[PREMiERdrum]

Go figure why you guys keep lamenting Volt's FOUR seats. I can't remember the last time I had five in my Taurus. Four lots of times, but rarely five. Last review of new Fusion I read said it's almost impossible to get fifth passenger in middle of rear seat if he or she expects to use middle seat belt. Hardly any five passenger sedan makes it comfortable to fifth in middle using seat belt. Looks to me like you are really stretching to make your case against the Volt because it's a GM product and GM is the Evil Empire.

 

Very, VERY few families who drive Acadias / Pilots / Explorers actually use the third seat other than once in a blue moon, but they likely wouldn't have purchased those with only 2 rows. We are culturally inclined to buy above our actual needs. A missing 3rd seatbelt in the back row, however insignificant to the customer's actual needs, could easily spook some away.

 

Furthermore, I would bet that the Volt drivetrain is a long term project, and GM is willing to take losses now, get more people into them, and then expand the line. Yes, I've seen the new EVR

 

The Cadillac Volt will be called "ELR", and interestingly enough, wasn't an initial part of the program. As the numbers for the program started to get more and more red, it was decided that additional variants would be required. A Volt MPV and the then-called Cadillac Converj were penned. Right now there are minimal efforts to introduce VolTec into other ranges, as the battery packaging makes it extremely costly to work into existing platforms. VolTec applications going forward will remain Delta II based.

[akirby]

I can't remember the last time I had five in my Taurus. Four lots of times, but rarely five. Last review of new Fusion I read said it's almost impossible to get fifth passenger in middle of rear seat if he or she expects to use middle seat belt. Hardly any five passenger sedan makes it comfortable to fifth in middle using seat belt. Looks to me like you are really stretching to make your case against the Volt because it's a GM product and GM is the Evil Empire.

 

People want utility with their hybrids/EVs. The best selling Prius is a hatchback and can seat 5 in a pinch. It matters to buyers as was already pointed out earlier which you chose to ignore:

 

My wife was really interested in the Volt until she found out it only had 4 seats (we have 3 kids). I bet that and the price are the two biggest reasons for the poor sales.

 

 

GM dealers have said they could sell 50+/month, but are only allocated a small portion of what they could sell. Looks to me like Chevy could sell 2,000/month in CA alone.

Volt sales are more than double last year, and I expect 2013 Volt sales to double this year. Not bad.

 

Of course they're selling great - they're practically GIVING THEM AWAY with ridiculous lease prices. You can sell anything if you price it low enough.

 

Now please explain why it's great for GM to "get more out there" by selling a vehicle that already loses money at MSRP by throwing even more cash on the hood of each one?

 

Do you not understand how GM went bankrupt in the first place? Or do you just not care?

[FordBuyer]

People want utility with their hybrids/EVs. The best selling Prius is a hatchback and can seat 5 in a pinch. It matters to buyers as was already pointed out earlier which you chose to ignore:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of course they're selling great - they're practically GIVING THEM AWAY with ridiculous lease prices. You can sell anything if you price it low enough.

 

Now please explain why it's great for GM to "get more out there" by selling a vehicle that already loses money at MSRP by throwing even more cash on the hood of each one?

 

Do you not understand how GM went bankrupt in the first place? Or do you just not care?

 

Yeah, I understand why GM and Chrysler went bankrupt when they did. YOU CAN'T SELL BIG TICKET ITEMS THAT COST $30,000 WHEN CREDIT MARKETS ARE FROZEN. Get it finally? Ford was on the ropes too, but bet the farm and used everything including the logo to keep going. If the financial crisis had never happened, GM would not have gone bankrupt. And yes, Ford is better managed than GM. Not arguing that point. Like it or not, many of use have not forgotten the financial crisis of 2008 so easily. 9/11 and the Financial Crisis are fresh in my mind along with the attack of Iraq.

[NickF1011]

Go figure why you guys keep lamenting Volt's FOUR seats.

 

The lack of seating was kind of the reason the guy this thread is about got rid of his Volt, or did you not read the original article? Obviously it matters to some of their owners.

[fordmantpw]

Yeah, I understand why GM and Chrysler went bankrupt when they did.

 

No, you don't understand. What you just stated is not it at all.

 

 

YOU CAN'T SELL BIG TICKET ITEMS THAT COST $30,000 WHEN CREDIT MARKETS ARE FROZEN.

 

Then how come Ford, Toyota, Nissan, etc. managed to stay afloat?

 

 

Get it finally? Ford was on the ropes too, but bet the farm and used everything including the logo to keep going.

 

Yes, Ford did. But, had they not turned things around, they never would have been able to pay that money back.

 

 

If the financial crisis had never happened, GM would not have gone bankrupt.

 

BS! They were in horrible shape, and the financial crisis was the final nail in their coffin (not to mention, a good excuse to beg for money). GM was going down regardless of the financial collapse, and it was a storm that was brewing for years. You can't continue to sell vehicles at a loss and expect to ward off bankruptcy.

[fordmantpw]

Go figure why you guys keep lamenting Volt's FOUR seats.

 

Explain to one of my kids why they would have to stay home by themselves instead of going with my wife and I and our other 2 kids...

Edited October 15, 2012 by fordmantpw

[akirby]

Yeah, I understand why GM and Chrysler went bankrupt when they did. YOU CAN'T SELL BIG TICKET ITEMS THAT COST $30,000 WHEN CREDIT MARKETS ARE FROZEN. Get it finally? Ford was on the ropes too, but bet the farm and used everything including the logo to keep going. If the financial crisis had never happened, GM would not have gone bankrupt. And yes, Ford is better managed than GM. Not arguing that point. Like it or not, many of use have not forgotten the financial crisis of 2008 so easily. 9/11 and the Financial Crisis are fresh in my mind along with the attack of Iraq.

 

You exhibit such a complete and utter lack of understanding about how businesses operate that it's comical. You think market share and stock price is more important than turning a profit.

 

Ford, GM and Chrysler were all losing money while the imports were making money (most of them). All 3 had too much overhead, were overproducing products that weren't desirable and giving them away just to keep the plants running. Before Mulally and before the financial crisis none of them were willing to do what needed to be done - cut production and cut overhead and match production of vehicles to what people were willing to pay for at some level of profit.

 

Mulally obtained the loans as a way to finance the radical changes he was introducing - closing unneeded plants, killing unprofitable vehicle lines and moving to global vehicles and global engineering to save money AND at the same time come out with more desirable vehicles. That is what saved Ford - not the loans. And that's what killed GM and Chrysler.

 

Why can't you understand that?

[FordBuyer]

You exhibit such a complete and utter lack of understanding about how businesses operate that it's comical. You think market share and stock price is more important than turning a profit.

 

Ford, GM and Chrysler were all losing money while the imports were making money (most of them). All 3 had too much overhead, were overproducing products that weren't desirable and giving them away just to keep the plants running. Before Mulally and before the financial crisis none of them were willing to do what needed to be done - cut production and cut overhead and match production of vehicles to what people were willing to pay for at some level of profit.

 

Mulally obtained the loans as a way to finance the radical changes he was introducing - closing unneeded plants, killing unprofitable vehicle lines and moving to global vehicles and global engineering to save money AND at the same time come out with more desirable vehicles. That is what saved Ford - not the loans. And that's what killed GM and Chrysler.

 

Why can't you understand that?

 

You are so blinded by Ford is good and GM is all bad that you don't see clearly at all. Ford was doing no better than other domestics in pre 2008 market. In fact, all the domestics were losing market share throughout the first decade of new century. We all felt it here whether it be Dearborn, Warren, or Auburn Hills. We were forgotten by Washington, and then given tongue lashing when Repubs screwed up credit markets and froze them. Comparing Ford to GM all the time is a game for losers also. As long as both go around bragging how one is better then other, then neither will do well in long term. If all Ford can say is that's it's better than Chevy and Cadillac, then that isn't saying a whole lot as the Asians and Germans go back to chewing up market share as GM and Ford remain flat to falling. I prefer Ford to GM and my history of buying vehicles prove that, and my next daily driver will be a Ford, not GM, but I can see more clearly than you and thus don't see GM and Chrysler as the Evil Empire. I'm for a healthy Detroit based auto industry, and that includes GM and Chrysler along with Ford.

[FordBuyer]

Explain to one of my kids why they would have to stay home by themselves instead of going with my wife and I and our other 2 kids...

 

Wow, I didn't know everyone was married and had three kids. Millions unmarried, millions married with no kids, and millions of baby boomer empty nesters. you are too self absorbed to view auto market clearly.

[NickF1011]

Wow, I didn't know everyone was married and had three kids. Millions unmarried, millions married with no kids, and millions of baby boomer empty nesters. you are too self absorbed to view auto market clearly.

 

Even as an unmarried guy with no children I discovered many years ago that a 4-seater was unacceptable as my only vehicle.

[FordBuyer]

Even as an unmarried guy with no children I discovered many years ago that a 4-seater was unacceptable as my only vehicle.

 

So you bought a Mustang that is 2+2 at best. The Volt is downright roomy in comparison and doesn't use a drop of gas most of time if average driver. And many electrics are dowright fast like S Model doing 0-60 in 4.4 seconds. Anyone who runs model trains and pulls 50+ consist knows how much torque an electric motor has and what it will do. There is room for EV's and the market for them will grow in time, even if "only" four" seater as the GM bashers grasp for straws.And again as I know the bashers love to take posts out of context.....I hope the Ford hybrids and engergi models do well and garner more than 4% of market.

[fordmantpw]

Wow, I didn't know everyone was married and had three kids. Millions unmarried, millions married with no kids, and millions of baby boomer empty nesters. you are too self absorbed to view auto market clearly.

 

Pot, meet kettle! I didn't realize everyone lived in Metro Detroit and hauled fewer than 5 people in a 2002 Ford Taurus with a Porsche Boxter as a toy.

[fordmantpw]

So you bought a Mustang that is 2+2 at best.

 

Did you miss the part where he said "only vehicle?"

 

Selective reading?

[akirby]

You think market share and stock price is more important than turning a profit.

 

In fact, all the domestics were losing market share throughout the first decade of new century. We all felt it here whether it be Dearborn, Warren, or Auburn Hills.

 

You just don't get it, do you? Market share without profit is meaningless. Detroit was buying market share at the expense of profit by building too many vehicles and then giving them away at a loss.

 

How long do you think a company can operate at a loss? And if you're losing money on the vehicles you're selling, selling even more just makes you lose more money and makes you go out of business even faster.

 

Are you really that dense? Do you think GM and Ford could have continued to operate the way they did before the financial crisis? What did lack of credit have to do with turning a profit on the vehicles that were being manufactured?

 

I don't even know why I keep trying. A box of rocks is being too kind.

[NickF1011]

So you bought a Mustang that is 2+2 at best.

 

Exactly. And it hasn't been my only vehicle for the past 8 years. If I could only afford one vehicle, the Mustang would not be it for me today. It was okay when I was younger and could borrow mom & dad's SUV whenever I had to move something large, but those days are in the past.

 

The Volt is downright roomy in comparison and doesn't use a drop of gas most of time if average driver

 

But downright cramped compared to most other traditional hybrids and Ford's upcoming Energi models.

 

And many electrics are dowright fast like S Model doing 0-60 in 4.4 seconds.

 

Did you really just try to leverage the Tesla Model S to defend the Volt?

 

There is room for EV's and the market for them will grow in time, even if "only" four" seater as the GM bashers grasp for straws.

 

Nobody here has said there is no room for them!!! We've just said that it's pretty narrow-minded of GM to try to fill the demand for alternative fuel vehicle with one model that doesn't seem to appeal to a whole heck of a lot of people.

Edited October 15, 2012 by NickF1011

[FordBuyer]

Pot, meet kettle! I didn't realize everyone lived in Metro Detroit and hauled fewer than 5 people in a 2002 Ford Taurus with a Porsche Boxter as a toy.

 

Sorry that Ford is the number one selling logo in Metro Detroit and Fusion is number one selling car. Didn't mean to upset you with this fact on Ford forum with so many Ford only lovers and GM haters. Really, this forum can be for Ford lovers without being just as much about GM bashing. Yesterday was interesting day....Porsche autumn tour and loved attacking tight curves with hard charging Porsche behind me and one in front of me on 80 mile trek up to Frankenmeuth from Clarkston, MI, and then on way home in evening on freeway, wish I had my Taurus as it started raining and a better cruiser. Yeah, it's great to own a great highway cruiser/daily driver, and a great high performance sports car that can attack a curve and accelerate out like no other. Even my girl friend that hates cars so much she bought a Toyota Rav 4 loved the experience and loves driving in the Porsche with top down and enjoys the g-force pull on tight curves.