Chevy Volt
04-01-2007, 10:22 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Chevy Volt
anyone see the new GM hybrid? i thought it was really interesting until i read it isnt coming out for another 3 years...way to miss the boat, chevy!
http://www.evcarforum.com/blog/ :
http://www.evcarforum.com/blog/ :
04-02-2007, 08:40 AM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look at the technology in the car you will understand why it's not coming out for several years. This drive system is different than any on the market at this time. It holds a lot of promise and a lot of risk. Are you suggesting that GM should skip out on it's development?
04-02-2007, 09:41 AM
#3
GM management is still only giving 50% odds on the possibility of a release as it still requires a breakthrough in battery technology. It is a reasonable approach as batteries with very large capacities are not likely in the foreseeable future, but improvements in weight, safety, and cost are still needed.
04-02-2007, 10:12 AM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Improvement? GM had the EV1 10 years ago until Execs thought that idea was stupid because it would kill the SUV image.
The same NiCD battery in the EV1 that powers the Rav4EV are still running strong on the street, some over 100k miles on original batteries. And GM is using A123Systems battery system, which is light years ahead in weight, size, capacity, longivity, and safety. The only reason GM brought the Volt up is to keep shareholders happen and milk them.... and hopefully sell a few more SUV at this time without retooling.
In fact, forget the Volt. GM could just bring the EV1 back with A123Systems battery and still be more successful than the Prius campaign from Toyota. But we all know GM has no balls for doing the right thing (or having business sense either).
The same NiCD battery in the EV1 that powers the Rav4EV are still running strong on the street, some over 100k miles on original batteries. And GM is using A123Systems battery system, which is light years ahead in weight, size, capacity, longivity, and safety. The only reason GM brought the Volt up is to keep shareholders happen and milk them.... and hopefully sell a few more SUV at this time without retooling.
In fact, forget the Volt. GM could just bring the EV1 back with A123Systems battery and still be more successful than the Prius campaign from Toyota. But we all know GM has no balls for doing the right thing (or having business sense either).
04-02-2007, 10:52 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 4,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is that a blog you started today bridow? I notice everything is from this month, which we are only 1.5 days into, and there are no comments or linked news stories. I think you need to actually examine how blogs are done, because you aren't meeting some of the basic criteria.
As far as GM is concerned, the EV1 may have been a great first step, and GM wrong to get rid of it, but saying they should've kept it available (with a 70 mile range) for the last 10 years is just a tad ignorant of the realities of business.
Your mention of the RAV4 EV is a point of contention as well, since Toyota also started crushing those vehicles after their lease period. Everyone criticizes GM for this, but Toyota is exempt? Also, the RAV4 didn't sell like wildfire; they sold 1575 of them (less than double the current known production of the EV1). And, the RAV4 EV's range didn't even double the EV1's. Additionally, Toyota cut the program once it was no longer legally required for them to continue, so we ain't exactly talking about all-out egalitarianism here.
I recall reading about the EV1 back then and thinking the range was more than a bit of a problem. Now, it would be a great car for retired seniors that need to get about but don't go far from home, and on top of that they could "refuel" from the safety of their condo or home. The RAV4 EV would be decent for bussing kids to and from school. But therein lies the problem: for an electric car to be truly effective as consideration for a full-time vehicle, the range must top 300 miles (or even more) for larger numbers of people to A) buy it in place of a gas/diesel vehicle, and B) not have to own a gas car for some things and an electric for others. At the moment the Tesla is the only one that comes close, and for that you need to be making around $150,000 a year to afford it. Right now people would have to choose gas+high range vs. electric+in-city range in a price-is-no-object contest. Unfortunately, price kills the whole discussion.
Personally my weekly to-and-from for work is just under the Tesla's total range, so I'd love it (especially the form factor), but I am not in the financial position yet to be able to afford it. And this is without any sort of cargo considerations (which in my case are pretty light actually, though this is obviously not true for everyone else).
I think the argument for electric cars becomes stronger as time progresses, and our technology now exceeds that of 10 years ago, but there are still major challenges. To date I think the best high-mileage high-range car out there is a VW TDI. Pretty much nothing touches its total range per tank of fuel, nor gets the kind of consistent MPG as it does.
As far as GM is concerned, the EV1 may have been a great first step, and GM wrong to get rid of it, but saying they should've kept it available (with a 70 mile range) for the last 10 years is just a tad ignorant of the realities of business.
Your mention of the RAV4 EV is a point of contention as well, since Toyota also started crushing those vehicles after their lease period. Everyone criticizes GM for this, but Toyota is exempt? Also, the RAV4 didn't sell like wildfire; they sold 1575 of them (less than double the current known production of the EV1). And, the RAV4 EV's range didn't even double the EV1's. Additionally, Toyota cut the program once it was no longer legally required for them to continue, so we ain't exactly talking about all-out egalitarianism here.
I recall reading about the EV1 back then and thinking the range was more than a bit of a problem. Now, it would be a great car for retired seniors that need to get about but don't go far from home, and on top of that they could "refuel" from the safety of their condo or home. The RAV4 EV would be decent for bussing kids to and from school. But therein lies the problem: for an electric car to be truly effective as consideration for a full-time vehicle, the range must top 300 miles (or even more) for larger numbers of people to A) buy it in place of a gas/diesel vehicle, and B) not have to own a gas car for some things and an electric for others. At the moment the Tesla is the only one that comes close, and for that you need to be making around $150,000 a year to afford it. Right now people would have to choose gas+high range vs. electric+in-city range in a price-is-no-object contest. Unfortunately, price kills the whole discussion.
Personally my weekly to-and-from for work is just under the Tesla's total range, so I'd love it (especially the form factor), but I am not in the financial position yet to be able to afford it. And this is without any sort of cargo considerations (which in my case are pretty light actually, though this is obviously not true for everyone else).
I think the argument for electric cars becomes stronger as time progresses, and our technology now exceeds that of 10 years ago, but there are still major challenges. To date I think the best high-mileage high-range car out there is a VW TDI. Pretty much nothing touches its total range per tank of fuel, nor gets the kind of consistent MPG as it does.
04-02-2007, 11:16 AM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The original EV1 used lead acid battery, so range was about 70 miles. The second year got NiCD and range doubled. Just imagine if GM put in the A123Systems' Lithum battery, try doubling the range to 280 miles with less weight. The reason the EV1 ranger is better than the Tesla because of the Cd is a lot lower.
Don't let GM/Toyota tell you that they did not sell. Its Marketing campaign to hide the truth (some of the public knows about this lie now, and not others yet). Both Toyota and GM had 2 years waiting list. And to trim the waiting list, GM went on about convincing potential owners they are not a good candidate to buy one. They try to convince potential buyers until the consumer tell them to shut up and hand over the car already. The only reason it did not "sell well" because the automakers did not make them for the public, not that it did not have potential buyers.
If you seen the "Who Killed the Electric Car", one of GM's EV1 top sales woman was fired because they wanted to get rid of their best sales people to prevent potential buyers from buying.
Don't let GM/Toyota tell you that they did not sell. Its Marketing campaign to hide the truth (some of the public knows about this lie now, and not others yet). Both Toyota and GM had 2 years waiting list. And to trim the waiting list, GM went on about convincing potential owners they are not a good candidate to buy one. They try to convince potential buyers until the consumer tell them to shut up and hand over the car already. The only reason it did not "sell well" because the automakers did not make them for the public, not that it did not have potential buyers.
If you seen the "Who Killed the Electric Car", one of GM's EV1 top sales woman was fired because they wanted to get rid of their best sales people to prevent potential buyers from buying.
04-02-2007, 12:10 PM
#7
Registered User
well, even with NiMH batteries the EV1 would have substantial range as the capacity per pound has probably quadrupled since its time. NiCD batteries suck and have a very limited lifespan. Plus, the NiMH batteries could probably use the NiCDs electronics and charging systems as the terminal voltages are the same.
NiMH has an excellent lifespan; the first Prius' packs are still going strong even after 10 years. The reason? Toyota keeps them at mid-charge where they will last a long, long time. I think only a handful of packs have had to be replaced. Of course, they won't last forever in a car like the EV1 where they will be charged and discharged often.
I don't think the A123Systems' Lithiums are a good choice for a pure electric. They are expensive and won't last long, especially in the south. Heat KILLS them. I think the Tesla's batteries will suffer from a similarly short lifespan. Cost of replacement? I don't want to know (definitely $10K+). You'd have to have some way to keep them cool...and use a lot of energy killing range becase driving a freon/R134 compressor takes lots of energy.
I know one of the original criticisms of Hybrids was the batteries, but since only a handful have been replaced over the last decade I don't think its an issue. Since NiMH is cheap, an aftermarket could have definitely stepped in offering replacements (with more capacity) for probably under $1K. The "thousands of dollars" criticism was based on Toyota having to come up with a list price of the whole thing on the spot...it could be done for much, much less. Heck, many Hondas use D cells, which could be replaced by a technically competent owner!
The chevy volt? I don't think the thing even exists. I hear the concept car was just a shell. They definitely didn't dream up the plug-in concept. Many Prius owners do just that after they put in more batteries to triple the capacity. Toyota has examined their handiwork but don't seem all that interested in installing the system in later Priuses.
NiMH has an excellent lifespan; the first Prius' packs are still going strong even after 10 years. The reason? Toyota keeps them at mid-charge where they will last a long, long time. I think only a handful of packs have had to be replaced. Of course, they won't last forever in a car like the EV1 where they will be charged and discharged often.
I don't think the A123Systems' Lithiums are a good choice for a pure electric. They are expensive and won't last long, especially in the south. Heat KILLS them. I think the Tesla's batteries will suffer from a similarly short lifespan. Cost of replacement? I don't want to know (definitely $10K+). You'd have to have some way to keep them cool...and use a lot of energy killing range becase driving a freon/R134 compressor takes lots of energy.
I know one of the original criticisms of Hybrids was the batteries, but since only a handful have been replaced over the last decade I don't think its an issue. Since NiMH is cheap, an aftermarket could have definitely stepped in offering replacements (with more capacity) for probably under $1K. The "thousands of dollars" criticism was based on Toyota having to come up with a list price of the whole thing on the spot...it could be done for much, much less. Heck, many Hondas use D cells, which could be replaced by a technically competent owner!
The chevy volt? I don't think the thing even exists. I hear the concept car was just a shell. They definitely didn't dream up the plug-in concept. Many Prius owners do just that after they put in more batteries to triple the capacity. Toyota has examined their handiwork but don't seem all that interested in installing the system in later Priuses.
Trending Topics
04-02-2007, 02:47 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oops... my mistake... I meant NiMH, not NiCD.
The NiMH used in the Rav4EV is the same used for the Prius. And they do not have the restriction as the Prius has. They are still going strong for most of the EV owners. The reason the Prius has that restriction is to minimize risks for profit.
A123Systems' battery are good for about 10+ years. They are the next gen Lithum battery, not same ones used in the Tesla.
Another long life Lithum is NanoSafe. PhoenixMotors are using them in their EV Trucks. PG&E just bought 4 for trial. And if it works great, PG&E has an agreement to buy 400 total.
Battery tech is here, just that Auto companies do not want to let us know about them.
The NiMH used in the Rav4EV is the same used for the Prius. And they do not have the restriction as the Prius has. They are still going strong for most of the EV owners. The reason the Prius has that restriction is to minimize risks for profit.
A123Systems' battery are good for about 10+ years. They are the next gen Lithum battery, not same ones used in the Tesla.
Another long life Lithum is NanoSafe. PhoenixMotors are using them in their EV Trucks. PG&E just bought 4 for trial. And if it works great, PG&E has an agreement to buy 400 total.
Battery tech is here, just that Auto companies do not want to let us know about them.
04-02-2007, 03:17 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rockville,
GM should not be complaining about MPG averages from the Japanese companies and then bring an even bigger gas guzzler the next year to replace the old ones.
If that is call good business case, I am glad I am not a shareholder.
Battery cost are dropping. The Prius battery in 2004 was supposed to be 5000. They are less than 3000 now for the same battery.
If you can drive an EV for 10 years and replace equilvant KW/hr battery 10 years later. That battery will be probably at 1/10 the cost. So a $15k battery is only $1500 battery. A 10 year old tranny replacement cost about the same.
There are customers willing to pay for the car, just that GM has no incentive to do so (Even so called green companies like Toyota and Honda). Imagine you guying an EV car, no oil change, filter, or anything else other than tires and brake pads. Even brake pads replacement cycles are reduced. You can see how little return of investment the dealers and parts suppliers get in return. That is where most of the money for the auto industries are made, not purchase of the auto.
GM should not be complaining about MPG averages from the Japanese companies and then bring an even bigger gas guzzler the next year to replace the old ones.
If that is call good business case, I am glad I am not a shareholder.
Battery cost are dropping. The Prius battery in 2004 was supposed to be 5000. They are less than 3000 now for the same battery.
If you can drive an EV for 10 years and replace equilvant KW/hr battery 10 years later. That battery will be probably at 1/10 the cost. So a $15k battery is only $1500 battery. A 10 year old tranny replacement cost about the same.
There are customers willing to pay for the car, just that GM has no incentive to do so (Even so called green companies like Toyota and Honda). Imagine you guying an EV car, no oil change, filter, or anything else other than tires and brake pads. Even brake pads replacement cycles are reduced. You can see how little return of investment the dealers and parts suppliers get in return. That is where most of the money for the auto industries are made, not purchase of the auto.