Will they or won't they sell it by 2010? It seems every day there's another version of when Chevrolet's plug-in electric – gas hybrid Volt will hit the streets. In March, GM Car Czar Maximum Bob Lutz said GM would have a running prototype by the end of 2007. The septuagenarian also said The General had "an internal target of production in 2010." Last month, Lutz said, "well, maybe not." This month, GM CEO Rick Wagoner said, "well, maybe not." The very next day, Bob Lutz said "oh yes, we will." Aware that GM's served-up more waffles than IHOP, Autobloggreen wants to set the record straight. "When a product program is still three or more years from production and contains technology that may or may not work, [the chairman] has to equivocate." Why "even the outspoken Lutz has never actually said that GM 'will build' the Volt by the end of 2010." So, never mind Maximum Bob's November promise at the LA Auto Show that GM would have the Volt on the road by November 2010. In conclusion, Autobloggreen tells Volt watchers "Depending on what happens between now and then [the end of the decade], the Volt will be produced 'on time' or not, but you won't hear it officially until much, much closer to that time." And there you have it (or not): we'll see the Chevrolet plug-in gas – electric Volt in some form some day. Eventually. Maybe.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
The Volt with either crash and burn magnifcently in honor of a good Bruckheimer film, or pass with flying colors and be an amazing win, forcing the authors here to eat their words.
Either way, I can’t wait to see what happens.
Can someone please tell GM to slow down on getting this thing built? If it does by some miracle appear in 2010, Toyota will still be ahead by 13 years with the first generation Prius. Yay for GM vapooware!
brettc ???
Reading between the lines, the yes/no/yes/no indecisiveness would seem to indicate that even if they miss the 2010 timeframe, it won’t be by much.
GM knows they need to get this one right. They do have the advantage of having the EV1 under their belt so it’s highly unlikely it will go down in flames. The “easy out” with the battery technology issue helps.
SkiD666 reading between what lines. The only thing I get from it is this company has no clear plan for ANYTHING.
I personally think GM will go bankrupt before this thing ever sees the light of day. But if I’m wrong on that I hope it take at least 4 years for them to make this or they will for sure be dead shortly after. From zero to production in 2 years is a scary thought for any manf. coming from GM it’s a damn nightmare scenario. They can’t even get a normal car done on that time schedule. You want to sign up to buy on of the most complex engineering feats done in a rush because of some unrealistic timeline created by some idiot management.
Plug-in vehicles are not the way to go. Fuel is more efficiently used in a car then in an electrical generating plant. Generating plants are not efficient. The mpg cost of plug-ins ignores the cost of the electric generation, transportation and infrastructure maintenance losses. Electricity is not free. A gallon of fuel is more efficiently spent in a hybrid vehicle.
Like many of you I am completely skeptical of GM’s ability to deliver on the promise of this vehicle. autoblog.com recently posted news regarding the styling of the Volt. I pointed out that whatever this thing looks like is completely inconsequential to what moves the wheels.
If GM and whatever partner supplier(s) can actually deliver a workable PHEV that does what their BS press releases say it’ll do then it will be absolutely revolutionary. I suppose I can understand GM wanting to crow about it, but it really is putting the horse before the cart.
Unlike others around these parts, I am not actively rooting for GM to fail. I’d love to see them deliver on this, but all the hype is not helping.
Go here and you can read the breathless excitement! Along with a couple of silly TTAC naysayers …..
http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/archives/2008/01/happy_birthday.html
Lutz has been able to do some very signficant things within a styfling GM bureaucracy, still I wonder about the motivation behind his public declarations about the Volt.
Is he trying to use public scrutiny to ensure that the bean counters and others naysayers within GM, those who would interfere with development, are neutralized? Renember, GM continues to lose tons of money, it can’t be easy to allocate the necessary resources to Volt’s development. How do you ensure that no one gets cold feet, that the necessary resource allocations are made? Public declarations and high visibility may be what it takes to see this through.
And don’t forget. They have already built a very viable electric car, and they also have hybrid technolgy ready to go (Vue Greenline Dual Mode Hybrid). They can go with whatever battery technology is available in 2010(?), upgrade to the next great thing in batteries later.
There have been two significant breakthroughs in battery technology which might very well see the Volt through.
The first are LiFe batteries, which are used in the OLPC laptop. They have only about 2/3rds the energy density of LiIon, but they are good for 4x the lifespan and don’t have nearly the fire risk.
The second are Toshiba’s newly announced battery design, which is a LiIon battery for industrial/automotive use which can charge to 90% in 5 minutes!?!
barberoux : I’m afraid you are wrong.
Power plants are very efficient. Combined cycle gas turbine plants are nearly 60% efficient.
Nuclear power is even better, although not as “efficient” per se, the energy density is outrageous from uranium.
Compare with a gasoline engine which is 35% at the most efficient range, with a lot of time spent in the 20% efficiency range.
Plug ins also work very well when you consider the non-baseload sources (wind, solar, etc) which are beginning to proliferate and will continue to grow. EG, once you add realtime pricing, your car could charge when the sun shines and the energy is cheap.
barberoux,
Not quite. The electric grid is under-utilized late at night. Off-peak charging of EVs, with appropriate incentives, makes much sense.
And, if we ever get solar power going in a big way, daytime charging (i.e., when parked at work) might also make a lot of sense.
The use of electricity is fairly peaky and the off-peak times are ideal for charging something.
I’ve looked at my electric bill in the past and have not seen where they break it down. Peak and non-peak seems to be rolled up in a single reading that takes place once a month. How can we tell that we are paying more during the day and less at night? It’s not obvious to me.
I cannot square GM’s timeline with typical development times in the industry.
Redesigning an existing product, testing the revision and getting it to market typically runs over two years.
An article a read recently (in Auto Design & Production? can’t remember) pegged development time for an all new conventional vehicle at over four years. Development of a new engine can run seven.
This estimate seems to go well with a recent estimate that GM gave for the HCCI engines they are developing. They are expected to be on the market in 2015.
I have lost track on the Camaro development but it seems to be longer than the Volt “projection”.
I think 2013 would be an early date for the Volt.
New platform with an all new drivetrain with new tech (even if the battery tech is solved that is a loooooong way from a consumer ready drivetrain)?
If they get it there as soon as the HCCI engine they will be on a realistic target.
My thoughts.
Bunter
Here’s a more circumspect article on the Volt just published by the Financial Post:
The electric car reborn
In one area, I agree with GM, this all comes down to batteries nothing else here is much of an engineering challenge.
I still think 2010 might be a bit soon to have a 40 mile range battery that will last a required 8-10 years, and doesn’t cost a fortune.
Once we have the good batteries the floodgates will open on electrics and PHEVs.
But I still think it might be some time before the battery energy density, life span and cost factors are all in place.
To do peak/non-peak pricing requires a special meter. Not all companies offer it but electric cars might provide the incentive to make it more widely available.
One way or another, during the late night/early morning hours, the grid IS underutilitized and a lot of new load could be put on at thos times without additional capital investment.
Gm, isn`t it time to use tritium batteries? At least pretend. Otherwise, redbarchetta- you nailed it!
Bunter1 +1. GM isn’t going to set a personal best design to production time with new technology never mind the time it takes to go from concept to production.
guyincognito-
Exactly, it would be an ambitious schedule for a totally conventional new platform vehicle.
Personally I think Lutz probably shot off a ridiculous number one day (“No! Not Bob!”)and GM is trying to save face as long as they can.
I don’t think anyone can put out a totally new vehicle with untried technology, regardless of how plausible, and have it truely durability tested and consumer ready on that schedule.
I only think that because no one has.
Shoot, how long have GM, Chrysler etc. been working on the dual mode hybrid system?
Finally, a positive “Watch” series with a finite end!
October 2009. We hope.
What happens Oct. 2009?
Bunter1 I think the Ford GT had an accellerated timeline not to far from Lutz’s fantasy. And that was a $140,000, low production car that had it’s fair share of problems and it used existing technology for the most part. Wasn’t the engine a suped up V8 from somewhere in the Ford family. Can anyone verify the GT timeline I’m not usre now.
I was hoping someone with a little more knowledge about the car and the industry to explain this imaginary $30,000 price tag for the far in the future Volt.
Are they insane this far out from having a real car to even put a number like that on it. And I’m not talking about the batteries when I ask this, those will add on another breifcase of cash to the cost. Are they just hoping material costs, energy costs, labor costs, etc. wont increase in that time. Not to mention they have no idea if any suppliers will be able to meet their component costs projections for parts that dont exist yet that far in the future. How can THEY even know when they haven’t designed it yet. Then add in the development costs that need to be added in to the cost of the car to recoupe the investment. I really think we are looking at a $50,000 car without them even making a profit. If they can do the Volt(brand new technology, fast timeline, high development cost) for $30,000 shouldn’t the Corvette(platform tweeks, mild body changes, proven powertrain with added hp, moderate development costs, tons of existing suppliers) be costing around $20,000?
The Pruis wasn’t as ambitious as this when it came out 10 years ago and it was near $30,000 back then with little to no profit until they started to make volume.
Add in the fact that this car is the “Next Best thing” savior of the company. So it has to sell at least at a modest profit with a high volume to do any good for them. In order for it to sell at a high volume the car has to be perfect, I mean PERFECT, especially with GM’s past, or people will stop buying the $50,000 family sedan with rental batteries. We will be kissing GM goodbye after that for sure because the losses on this car will be HUGE if it’s not a smashing success.
Am I wrong? Can someone with a better grasp of the costs involved break it down?