An ironic number for this post, of course, as A123 Batteries just lost their chance to supply batteries for the Hail Mary-shaped plug-in electric – gas hybrid Chevy. But one has to wonder: will GM last long enough for Volts to hit the showroom? Speaking to NPR, GM CEO Rick Wagoner put the onus on you, the taxpayer, to make it so. “”My own view is that the opportunity for these [electric cars] to develop into high-volume vehicles is good,” Wagoner told the taxpayer-funded news org. “But to be honest, it’s going to depend on our ability to work on things like getting the cost down and it’s going to be very much dependant on government policies which support the growth of electricity in vehicles.” Whoah, Dude! Does that mean that GM is acknowledging that the Volt is a non-starter? “Wagoner says electric cars are very expensive to make. Even if the Volt rolls out in 2011 or 2012, as a new technology its cost will be ‘significantly more than the consumer will be willing to pay for.’ That means GM will have to take losses on the vehicle in order to advance the technology, Wagoner says.” And who, pray tell, is going to cover those losses? You! The non-Volt-buying, tax paying consumer.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Oh, so if the damn thing costs 48K the B plan is to sell them to the US government? like Cry-sler does now with the Statrus and Charger? So the ultimate goal is tax payers buying these things? So we get to pay thrice for their mistakes?
Rick, I beg you to just stop, just stop and declare C11 before any more money gets spent
It all started with EV1. Volt, a range of 40 miles? Dust off the tooling. C11 please. They need automotive people that work within a budget.
Any of the hybrids GM has done lately are competitor catch ups.
What are we going to do with all those batteries in say in 5 years. I want to see that plan in place befor ethey start putting high volumes of electric cars on the market.
Here’s a cheer lead for ya . . .
Rick, your not getting any more of my money in way of me buying a new vehicle from GM. I have been buying GM my entire life, and I have alot more new vehicles to buy. Your stock was going down B4 any of this happened. I’m not paying twice.
Well, they may lose money on each one, but they’ll make it up on volume. GM has proven that strategy time and again.
So lets see providing incentives for people to adopt a new technology that would be costly initially (remember those $20,000 48” plasmas?) and help America use less oil is a bad thing?
I can think of a lot of other things our government has spent a lot more money on that do a lot less for us as a nation.
I’d rather subsidize Detroit through incentives to customers then just giving GM cash. At least people get something for their money, unlike the billions given to AIG, Citibank and wall street in general.
Rick,
Here’s my plan to help you and your company out of this mess: I will personally commit to buying a Volt if (HUGE IF!) they ever hit the market. All I ask in return is that I can use said Volt to run over your sorry ass! Deal? Have your people call my people and let’s get this thing done.
Regards,
Tex
Right now, it’s minus thirty degrees where I live and Hydro is begging everyone to cut back on their use of power. Imagine what would happen if a whole bunch of electric cars were plugged in as well. The world is nowhere near ready for electric transportation.
Steve_S, Those plasma TVs initially sold in tiny quantities to the rich. The industry brought down prices by scaling up naturally.
Congress custom-wrote a tax credit for the Volt. Wagoner probably dictated it himself. $7500 for a car that meets certain criteria and the only one announced so far that meets those is the Volt. Of course, GM still must build one. Isn’t $7500 incentive enough?
GM’s real problem is, in spite of this custom legislation, other vehicles may hit the market first and soak up the tax credit before GM gets much of a shot at it. And GM plans piddly quantities of the Volt for its first model year and modest quantities thereafter. GM isn’t positioning itself to steal a march on anyone.
Of course, if we look at the problems that we might legitimately address, CO2 emissions, energy security, a $7500 tax credit for a narrow range of vehicles is a very inefficient way to address those problems. Carbon-based taxes (a significant increase in the gas tax, for a start) would not only encourage the development of the Volt and help ensure a market for it, it would ensure the development of any other technology that seems promising AND it would also tend to change consumer behavior. And it would start reducing oil consumption right away, whereas encouraging the Volt has a 2-year lead time. Minimum. For a paltry 10K units that will have almost zero effect on any problems we face.
So, policy initiatives can be used to achieve strategic goals that are invisible to the market but inefficient policy initiatives that pick winners are often a bad idea.
Anyway, never mind the Volt… I found this in the story:
“At the 1997 auto show, Wagoner told reporters he was aiming to gain 33 percent of the market share, but the company is still at 23 percent. But GM has expanded its manufacturing base worldwide during that same period, Wagoner says, and that has put it in a good position.”
That plan surely worked sooo well. Why is this guy still employed?
I think that the Volt’s problem is in GM’s classic approach to new technology. GM never thinks in terms of gradual improvement. It’s always “A great leap forward” or “skipping a generation” or “leapfrogging the competition”.
This approach goes at least as far back as the Vega and possibly as far back as the Corvair.
GM always introduces a new technology and immediately starts pumping it out on a mass scale. This means that any design flaws become instantly obvious to thousands of unhappy customers. GM eventually fixes the problems two or three model years, but it’s too late…. the name of the technology is “Mud” to the American consumer. Think Fiero.
Given this history it’s easy to forecast the Volt’s fate:
1. The fundamental technology is too expensive so
corners will be cut elsewhere to keep price down. Cheap sensors? Bearing? Switches?
2. The intial introduction will be a huge press event, raising unsustainable expectations. The car already doesn’t look anything like the prototype for example… expect more of the same in early reviews…. Think, “Yeah, but…..”
3. Some annoying faults will impact 1,000’s of cars after 8 – 10 months. Early diagnosis will suck, since the Service Centers are unfamiliar with the underlying technology. Cry’s of “GM can’t fix it” will flood the internet.
4. The internet rumble of “GM junk” will start. CR will do an unfavorable comparison to the Prius, Honda, and Ford….. ranking GM last.
5. Discussion of the impracticality of the basic design will begin on the net. Prius more reliable and economical because (insert reason here).
6. Sales will start to fall off. After six years of production, plans for a second generation will be quietly dropped…. Sales end after eight.
7. GM announces a new ‘breakthrough technology’, leapfrogging the competition, will appear in 2025…. sexy prototype pictures will be leaked.
Toll-ja. The Volt will never see a showroom, because it can never be profitable. GM’s dubious survival will ONLY permit profitable products to be produced, and the Volt won’t qualify.
It was -3 this morning when I woke up. It’s 12 now.
Considering what happens to batterys in the winter, has anyone come up with mileage numbers for winter time driving on batterys alone?
The published figures say 40 miles on battery. After that the gas engine (sorry generator) kicks in to power the electric motor. I’m guessing the the 40 miles was down at a temp. of around 70 degrees.
It might be a tough sell for dealers to move Volts in the middle of winter in northern climates.
@ austinseven — Don’t worry. At -30, BEVs won’t start or run.
Lokki makes a very good point. This company lacks any clear directions or core principles. It feels like a bunch of managers with too much time on their hands fighting over their pet projects. The whole system needs to be thinned out.
TexN asks:
Rick,
Here’s my plan to help you and your company out of this mess: I will personally commit to buying a Volt if (HUGE IF!) they ever hit the market. All I ask in return is that I can use said Volt to run over your sorry ass! Deal?
My missus is from Texas and she says they have a legal defense that works sometimes. It’s the “he needed killin\'” defense. TexN, I think it would work in this case.
I find it ironic that the Volt is supposed to be a Flutie-like hail Mary pass for GM (and the American domestic auto-worker) yet it uses Korean batteries and Austrian engines. The actual Volt-bits made in the USA are pretty basic stuff…frame, interior, that kind of thing. None of the cool gizmos that make the Volt a game-changer (as advertised)are sourced from the States.
Its also ironic that Ford is going to have a fully hybrid Fusion car with Prius-like efficiencies on sale in late summer for God knows how many thousands less than a Volt. Ford will probably make an operating dime when they sell one of those hybrid Fusions vs. the shovel-money-into-coal box “strategy” GM will employ with the Volt. Ford is doing this without Uncle Sugar’s TARP kick-down as well.
It looks like GM (and the US taxpayer) are going to subsidize these lithium-battery packs into high-volume production, which does bring costs down. I suspect companies selling mature hybrid-electric power-trains will find it rather easy just to throw these big and ever-cheaper batteries into their rides at an appropriate time down the road. The only hard part of the R&D with electric cars is the battery really. As they get better and cheaper so will electric propulsion in general.
jolo,
Thanks for the laugh! The missus sounds like a keeper. Have a good one.
Tex
god of Toyota laughs from his mountain top. When things were good, Toyota designed, built, and sold the first Prius. It was done at a loss per vehicle but it was part of a strategic vision. god of Toyota’s belly shakes as he laughs from his mountain top.
@ Lokki :
In 6-7 years I am going to google your post and laugh about how similar your prediction is to reality.
Also for lokki, know that GM must have a mutation in their genes to take different technology to extremes the first year it’s introduced. In 1978 the olds diesel which later was made standard on high dollar cadillacs in 1980, blew up. It damamged the GM large car brand from which they never fully recovered. Fast foreward to now. GM knows damned well that a $40K economy car is an oxymoron (made by morons). You can’t save enough gas to justify the initial purchase price over either a hybrid or a cheaper econobox like a honda fit. Further, for those without garages who park on public streets in bad weather there is no infranstructure to plug in overnight. It’s a similar problem to hydrogen fillup stations. Toyota, honda, & now ford must have imported nuclear physicists to tell them that, because they got it right by going to non plug in hybrids. Just two rules: The car must cost 20 some thou not 40 and the car must be as easy to use and refuel as anything already out there. Hello Lutz and Wagoner.
Here is a future movie title in the year 2017.
“Who killed the Volt”.
Go figure, go figure, go figure.
I think GM enjoys killing these things. Why don’t they try giving them a chance to catch on before they yank it from the market before people haven’t even sat in the drivers eat yet. Psh, whatev.
Letsee, they created then killed the EV1, created the Volt then thats most likely going to die too, later they’ll probably come out with another “groundbreaking” electric/hybrid/plug in thing-car in 2016 only to be canceled four years later due to inefficient technology and lack of demand. MAN GM CAN”T WIN! *sarcasm of course*
round and round we go.
Of course the Volt is a non-starter. It was never intended as anything more than a lure for tax dollars; GM’s new target market.
This is what you get with government ownership. On the positive side, those spy photos of the 2012 Chevy Cossack look promising.