# Chevy Volt is for Idiots??



## Andrew*Debbie (Jul 2, 2004)

EnterTheDragon said:


> Oil will remain a big part of the energy pie regardless of how cars are powered


Making the pie much smaller can be done with zero new technology.

My 5 year old GM van has been turning in around 45mpg.

By bringing the Fiesta and the Transit Connect to the US market, Ford is doing far more to reduce the size of the Pie.

If I was the communist king of America, I'd be banning incandescent light bulbs, but that thread belongs in political science.


----------



## spydrz (Oct 1, 2004)

Andrew*Debbie said:


> Making the pie much smaller can be done with zero new technology.
> 
> My 5 year old GM van has been turning in around 45mpg.
> 
> ...


They have been banned...we have to use those horrible fluorescents starting in a couple of years. Pure fascism...government controlling the means of production with private ownership of the means.


----------



## fuz (Feb 6, 2002)

Jakked said:


> I agree with you generally. But there does need to be some test-bed to develop the technology as used in the marketplace. The Tesla was a great start, imho, but too expensive initially and still much work to be done on battery technology. The Volt, while seemingly a pretty crappy car, represents a commitment by a major manufacturer to further develop the technology, packaged in a vehichle with a cost that is somewhat more approachable. I don't think anyone is expecting the Volt to be a "best" effort car, but more of a "first" effort car. The American consumers' wallets will ultimately determine whether Chevy will gain enough R&D money to develop a better second car.


That first effort has resulted in a car that any prudent mind would simply not purchase. The rationale you need to purchase something at near $40k, that performs as limited as it does would really have to be something esoteric. Hence the uncouth idiot comment, which depending on how blind the possible consumer is--could be true.

Being a large company, GM could have afforded to develop it in the long term to produce a much better car at almost certainly a lower price; but management wasn't looking to the future. They were even sitting on previous tech for years but did nothing. As a result, we have this rushed R&D program as a last ditch effort to develop the car in a move I suspect was more PR driven than anything sensible.

Reminds me of the same reaction when they rushed those terrible cars back in the 70s to compete with the cheap import cars flooding the market. They arrived on time to compete, but not in the condition neceesay to succeed. Unless you count success in how easily the occupants could be barbecued.

The Prius and its hybrid ilk, while poorly performing cars initially, still offered a level of performance that did not sacrifice basic duties as severely, nor were they priced out of reach of the ordinary people it was intended for. After three generations, we can see it would only take them a half step to go all electric should the need arise with plenty of built infrastructure and support in place. GM doing so little is something they are (and we are) paying for now.

The Volt, and other modern electric vehicles are reminiscent of early gunpowder weapons. Fickle, unwieldy, unrefined. There is simply not yet a sizable market for them given their current performance. Potential is high, but they have not reached a that critical threshold to really take off as a suitable alternative. The Volt in my mind, just confirms the worst.


----------



## AlboBMW (Feb 5, 2009)

Of course he's not biased or anything.


----------



## swajames (Jan 16, 2005)

fuz said:


> It's like 'hey guys, i run on electricity!' without considering how well it actually does the job. It's not particularly light or aerodynamic. With its short range, I can't even run to the airport and back--likely shortened further by the load of additional passengers and cargo.


You seem to be laboring under the misperception that the Volt has a short range. It has an electric-only range of about 40 miles. After that, the gasoline engine is used to create electricity and the range extends to around 300 miles (the gas engine never directly drives the car). There's nothing wrong with the range.


----------



## fuz (Feb 6, 2002)

The electric only method propulsion is the Volt's claim to fame, and for its supposed efficiency and emissions edge. It's limited range is highly relevant among other factors. They do not even list a highway MPG to see how well it does at higher speeds--something that has always been difficult for hybrids to manage on electric alone.

The gas engine will come on at roughly 30% remaining charge, which is likely less than the stated 40 mile range. It is unknown how well the car performs in the electric charging state as there is only an arbitrary 50 mpg estimation, again city-only. At its estimated mass of 3500 lbs, it's not likely to be very favorable. The .28 drag coefficient isn't going to help either. Cold temperatures, doesn't like them too. Electric only on the highway--could it be as bad as 25 miles before the gas motor kicks in to charge? Not something you want happening often with a tiny fuel tank. Forget about road trips.

If there was a market for it, I'm betting VW could make an ultra-light small engine diesel car that would run in the 70mpg range at econo car prices with minimal development effort, with minimal exotic (and toxic) materials needed for manufacturing. Even the Prius is already exceptionaly well priced, and available now. If the Volt can't play at the current levels shown in the greener car arena, there is little justification for it to be brought to market, much less the mass market their advertising seems to indicate.


----------



## jslstrat (Aug 22, 2009)

*Over population*

I have to chime in. First and fore most I am a guitar player/artsit who chooses not to have kids.
That is my contribution to the world. I have also been a vegetarian for 18 years and counting.
I am 43 so I do not see the above changing. I think this world is so ass back words when It comes to the environment. Over population is killing us and are planet. If you must have a kid please adopt. There are many unwanted kids in the world (put your DNA ego away) Because when your dead it will not matter wether or not the kid you raised has your DNA or not. Does anybody ever stop and take a look at what we have done to this planet in just a little over 200 years? I think it is ****ing scary! Really. Its ok to not have kids. I think that is far more damaging to the environment (over population) Then to worry about cars. It is almost like giving a heroin
addict methadone rather than looking at the real problem. And that is over population....


----------



## fuz (Feb 6, 2002)

That's really out of the scope of this. But given that telling people not to have kids is going to be limited in effectiveness; it's neither super important, nor unimportant to see how more efficiently we can live through other developments.

The Volt poses an argument of whether or not it is really an effective or even viable step in moving to a more efficient lifestyle. Transportation is one of the biggest areas of energy consumption after all, and also has lots of room for technological innovation.


----------



## Andrew*Debbie (Jul 2, 2004)

fuz said:


> If there was a market for it, I'm betting VW could make an ultra-light small engine diesel car that would run in the 70mpg range at econo car prices with minimal development effort, with minimal exotic (and toxic) materials needed for manufacturing.


There is and they do.

Google VW Polo Blue Motion or click the links

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/vehicleDetails.asp?id=20690


> Fuel Consumption - Imperial [mpg]
> Imperial Urban (cold)	57.6
> Imperial Extra Urban 88.3
> Imperial Combined 74.3
> ...


http://www.thegreencarwebsite.co.uk...en-polo-bluemotion-14-tdi-named-greenest-car/

http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/#/new/polo-iv/configure/133/engine-and-transmission/


----------

