Well, you didn’t really expect the Presidential Task Force on Automobiles (PTFOA) to highlight and delete GM’s electric/gas Hail Mary Chevy Volt without a bit of bailout-scented blowback, did you? As TTAC hath foretold since the artist once known as the world’s most profitable corporation latched onto Uncle Sam’s bounteous breasts, GM’s now a political football. While the PTFOA correctly identified the Volt as a four-wheeled turkey—expensive, unproven and late— its green-tinged supporters are legion. Bloomberg’s “person” provides the heads-up that the PTFOA’s death knell was actually a call to arms for those who resurrect the electric car.
The administration’s concerns about the Volt were offset by its belief that GM needs cleaner, fuel-efficient vehicles to succeed in the long term, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the task force’s deliberations are private. GM’s problems may mean the company won’t meet its timetables for producing and selling the Volt though, the person said.
I call bullshit. This is a perfect example of the media making a logical assumption, and then assigning the prognostication to a non-existent, unidentified source. I’m surprised that Bloomberg went down this route; it’s been a signature of The Wall Street Journal‘s Motown bailout coverage. Remember their “person” who predicted a GM–Chrysler merger? (That was us too, but we labeled it as pure speculation.)
As for the Volt’s future non-termination, not so B.S. In fact, the plug-in hybrid is a rolling litmus test. There is no business case for this car; GM doesn’t have the time to amortize its development under federal sponsorship. I hope. But it is exactly the sort of hope-mobile Barack Obama has been plugging (so to speak) since he traded in his Chrysler 300 for a Ford Escape Hybrid.
Definitely one to watch.
This story is an interesting litmus test.
How will the Volt project stand up against the “Good GM Vs Bad GM”?
It’s good, in that, it shows GM trying to make more relevant cars, but it’s bad in so much that it’s overpriced (so far), it’s hasn’t been proven and it doesn’t have a real loyal fanbase (I’ll come to that in a minute).
Toyota’s 2010 Prius has some truly brilliant numbers attached to it, not to mention VW’s Jetta TDI, both cars have appeal to different market segements and have a REAL following (I mean, how can one have a following if one doesn’t exist?)
So, how can the Volt compete 2 established cars?
I think the government should file this one under “Bad GM” and license the hybrid technology from Toyota or develop a clean diesel like the Jetta TDI. If VW can make and sell a diesel which is “50 state compliant”, GM should be able to.
P.S. Bob Lutz once claimed that bringing diesels to the US isn’t viable because they would need a urea compartment to elminate the NOx fumes which is costly. VW managed it without a urea compartment. Which echoes the “We can’t meet these 1970’s emission regulations without adding a catalytic convertor!” days.
It’s not that GM hasn’t made cars that are “more relevant.” They have, all along. One of GM’s many problems was that their “relevant” cars haven’t been competitive. So their potential customers shopped elsewhere, consistently, while their die-hard customers, those who would buy only GM-labeled cars, continued to buy GM.
The Vega was “relevant,” just as the Aveo is still “relevant.” The problem is now, as it was when the Vega was new, there are much better cars you can buy for about the same money.
Calling a car “gas-friendly” is like calling a person “food-friendly”
The Volt’s real problem is that it’s been oversold to a lot of people, both in business, government, the media and the general population (or at least that slice of it that holds GM in it’s good graces).
You have to eat psychological crow—a lot of it, if you’re a Volt fan—to admit that it isn’t a) a game-changer, b) nearly as good, cheap, hot and fast as GM has been saying and/or c) that it suffers from GM’s never actually intending to make the thing.
I’m sure it’s a decent car and all when it finally arrives, but it was being benchmarked against the secondish-generation Prius. I can’t help but wonder if GM ought to have spent the money addressing cost and packaging issues with Two-Mode. Of course, incremental improvement isn’t really a GM thing.
Some funny truth hiding in the Amazon description of the pictured Burago model:
This 1:32 scale die cast by BBurago is the first and only replica of the exciting Concept Chevy Volt.
…
They are not be [sic] available in stores.
I agree that -toad or not- the Volt will live through whatever happens to GM.
Nobody in GM (and for that matter, nobody in a Democratic Administration) wants to be named in this movie-
“Who killed the electric car – TWICE?”
Unlike mid-engined Corvettes, the Volt isn’t a design that GM can flash at the public and then put away forever…. the true-believers have taken it into their hearts…. and the heart always wants things that the brain would reject.
I’m reasonably confident it will be an overpriced POS when it finally reaches showrooms (it’s a GM tradition to ruin great showcars on the way to production), but reach them it will.
The volt will be strung along until it’s politically safe enough to can it. The government doesn’t want the greens and/or the media gumming up the impending bankruptcy proceedings with “Who Killed The Electric Car II” hysteria.
When the PTFOA separates the “Good” GM “Bad” GM, Volt will go in the “Good” pile, along with small cars and the UAW.
What if the “Bad” GM actually ended up with the profitable vehicles and a profitable business model?
VW managed it without a urea compartment. Which echoes the “We can’t meet these 1970’s emission regulations without adding a catalytic convertor!” days.
Mercedes-Benz’ NAIAS display included a tank of a yellow liquid used to keep their diesels clean.
Production is due to start in late 2010. That means they’ll want to start some sort of accelerated build mid 2010, add 3 months stuffing around, gives you march 2010, and it takes 6-9 months to build a big production tool.
That means that if they are serious about that date the orders for long-lead production tooling (big chunks of steel for bumper skins, IP, and external body panels) should be being placed around now, or preferably 6 months ago. These are the big-bucks commitments for a conventional program that tell you if the program is on time.
The June 2009 proto build should be off soft tooling and will not be suitable for making saleable units.
Then overlay the new powertrain, electronics and batteries on that timing.
I disagree: there is a business cases for the Volt.
But it’s a case for a patient, deep-pocketed corporation. And that’s not GM these days.
The business case is that indeed, there are forces that are making an electric vehicle more appealing both to buyers, and to auto-makers. To buyers, because people believe in green-ness, whatever its practical merits, and they’ll pay for it. And to automakers, because of CAFE standards, and the need to project green-ness.
So kuddos to GM for throwing its hat into the ring and being willing to step up and lose buckets of money establishing itself as the premier maker of plug-in hybrids. Years down the road, this will pay off in a superior market position in the plug-in business, and the more immediate halo effect it will offer their other cars.
But GM can’t afford it. They can’t, in their current delicate condition afford to lose money on a car for 5-10 years, while the costs come down.
So yes, there’s a business case. But not for GM. That won’t, however, stop the Obama administration from making darned sure there’s an American leader in the green race.