The Chevrolet Volt can very nearly be boiled down to a single a function: range extension. The Volt’s gasoline range-extender is the car’s major technological advantage over other electric vehicles like Nissan’s Leaf, promising consumers freedom from the terror of range anxiety. But how does it actually work? TTAC’s Volt Birth Watch has long asked the question, and GM has assiduously prevented journalists from describing the Volt’s transition from initial EV range to “generator mode.” Until now. The NY Times‘ Lindsay Brooke recently took a pre-production Volt for a spin at the Milford Proving Grounds, and files this report on the generator mode experience:
It takes a few laps of Milford’s twisty, undulating 3.7-mile road course to deplete the remaining eight miles of battery charge. With the dashboard icon signaling my final mile of range, I point the Volt toward a hill and wait for the sound and feel of the generator engine’s four pistons to chime in.
But I completely miss it; the engine’s initial engagement is inaudible and seamless. I’m impressed. G.M. had not previously made test drives of the Volt in its extended-range mode available to reporters, but I can see that in this development car, at least, the engineers got it right.
When I started writing for TTAC, I could never have imagined the wild ride I was in for. Luckily I’ve been able to draw on wisdom and support of a number of TTAC’s contributors, not the least of whom was my dad, Paul Niedermeyer. He first suggested that I start blogging for TTAC, and his seemingly infinite knowledge of all things automotive has been a constant resource for me. Now, I’m pleased to announce that he will be stepping up to be my Managing Editor. In addition to his twice-weekly Curbside Classic series (and who knows, maybe a few more Auto-Biographies), Paul will be developing new content, blogging stories in his formidable areas of expertise, and filling in for me when my work pulls me away from the keyboard. I can’t imagine a better person for the job, and together we hope to bring TTAC to new heights.
During a recent visit to Houston’s Johnson Space Center, I stood at the business end of the mighty Saturn V lunar rocket and contemplated many things. On the surface, I found myself excited and awestruck at the spectacle of the raw power represented by this engineering landmark, but introspectively, I also felt a twinge of […]
A friend has a 2005 Acura TL which he bought as a certified used car at about 2 yrs and 40K miles on it. He bought the extended warranty to 100K. I recall thinking “its an Acura, why waste the money on an extended warranty?” It turns out he was right: at about 60K, he noticed an occasional judder during transmission shifts. The dealer informs him that the transmission is shot, and that it will be replaced under his extended warranty. After a couple of days, he gets the car back (he did enjoy the RL he got as a loaner) and the car is fine. Until now.
The most expensive Toyota ever made, the $375,000, “totally customizable” Lexus LF-A will not be available for sale to anyone, reports Automotive News [sub]. Not because nobody wants to pay that much for a Toyota though, but because the company is somehow worried about price speculation. “If someone buys it the first month and then decides to sell it, that could be damaging for the ownership experience,” says Lexus VP sales Brian Smith. “If it is not controlled and hits the speculation market, all bets are off. We want people out driving the car and not just parking it in a museum or selling it at an inflated price.” Which is why only 500 models are being produced? At the end of the mandatory two-year lease, customers will have the option of buying their LF-A outright. So how does the world’s largest automaker build such an advanced, limited production machine and not expect speculation and/or hoarding to take place? Moreover, how will they guarantee that LF-As are actually driven during the two-year lease period? One of the greatest sins of the auto industry is the reluctance to admit that a brand belongs to customers. For Toyota, it seems, not even its brand-defining supercar will truly belong to its customers… for two years anyway.
I was wandering the GM Heritage Center with Jaguar designer Ian Callum (yes, a write-up of that interview is coming), when a Cadillac PR man took me aside and offered to have me flown down to Los Angeles to “check out” this new CTS Coupe. My initial reaction was surprise that the offer was made at all. My second was to explain that I couldn’t possibly accept airfare. TTAC has a strict disclosure policy, and our Best and Brightest would doubtless take a dim view of any coverage made possible by an OEM picking up an airfare tab. Especially if I actually like the car, I explained, such a disclosure would create understandable skepticism. Paying TTAC’s way will always be self-defeating. Still, I thought, LA isn’t that far. I remained tempted to make the trip on the TTAC tab, right up to the point where I realized that by “check out,” Cadillac did not mean “drive.” An invite arrived, clarifying that this was an “opportunity to see the car before the LA Show and to visit with Bryan Nesbitt, general manager of Cadillac and Clay Dean, director of design for Cadillac.” No thanks. I saw the CTS Coupe before the LA Auto Show… in a Cadillac advertisement. Thanks for the invitation, Cadillac… but TTAC needs to drive something to drag itself away from the keyboard.
For weeks now, the only realistic bid for Volvo has has come from the Chinese automaker Geely. They’ve been Fords’ “preferred bidder” for about a month ago, and last week, Geely’s management were in meetings with Volvo’s unions, and with Volvo AB (commercial vehicle company) about the Volvo trademarks – which are owned 50/50 between Ford and Volvo AB. At the same time time, Ford seemes to be in no hurry to sell Volvo, leading many to speculate that Ford was dragging their feet waiting for new and improved offers. We’ve been posting about the two other possible bidders, Consortiums Jakob and Crown earlier, and reports in Swedish media today say that Crown are now ready to make an offer, to be presented this week.
No, General Motors is not paying back the taxpayers, nor will it ever fully… it’s more like a partial refund. That’s not exactly fresh news around here, but the Grey Lady called wanting the breakdown. So here it is. Just don’t ask how they misspelled the byline.
China’s car sales can’t go on forever growing at a 50 percent to sometimes 100 percent clip, auto execs agree at the Guangzhou auto show. All are convinced that the growth will continue next year at a more – what’s the buzzword?- sustainable rate.
The Guangzhou auto show opened today. In case you’ve never heard of Guangzhou, it is a city of around 10m (nobody knows for sure,) and the main manufacturing hub of the Pearl River delta. Formerly known as Canton. About 30 percent of China’s GDP is produced in the South. The opening of the show prompted some major announcements. Here are some of them: (Read More…)
Ford illustrates the ugly side of social media-based advertising: exploiting and promoting baseless prejudices by reprinting ignorant opinions. Like this misguided and misleading “thank you” posted at Thefordstory.com.
I am here today because 5 years ago, I was driving my 1993 Ford Ranger XL. Thats a midsize truck, but not midsize in saving my life. I have not ever written about this before, but I thought Ford (and all its engineers) would benefit in knowing that they have been instrumental in saving my life. The reason I can say this with certainty, is because of the nature of my car crash. I ask you, if you were broadsided at 60+ ( I was on a highway in Ca) and all that saved you was your vehicles chasis..if you were driving say, a Honda..would you be here reading this?? Maybe, but not likely. All that happened to me was, I had a heck of a bent truck frame (rear suspension) and a minor seat belt bruise! I almost tipped the truck over on its side, I was hit that hard..but luckily, she righted herself in time! (I know its silly, but you got to name your trucks) This was my first Ford, and god willing not my last. I may have lost traction, due to the road being wet..but I tell you I would not be soo lucky driving anything other than a Ford. Thank you for all your hard work and dedication. I just thought it would be nice to tell someone. Thanks..I could never be more grateful for your company, God bless you.
Your friend,
Rose
[Note: the Ranger pictured above is not the one from the wreck]
Despite already having some of the highest incentives in the game right now, Chrysler is joining GM in putting more cash on the hood to clear out year-end inventory. Automotive News [sub] reports that Chrysler will be adding $1,000 to $1,500 in incentives per vehicle, on top of October’s $3,219 per vehicle average (as calculated by Edmunds). According to the same Edmunds analysis, the average industry incentive is $2,468 per vehicle. This continued reliance on incentives contradicts a number of Sergio Marchionne’s statements at the presentation of Chrysler’s five year product and business plan, in which he argued that Chrysler could not rely on incentives to push volume. Marchionne claims to believe the incentive-based volume chasing is “insane,” but his commitment to a sustainable business plan is about to be tested. For Chrysler’s five year plan to succeed, its sales need to turn around fast, making 2009 the trough year indicated on this graph. But with no new product (and by new product, we mean refreshed product) due out until the fourth quarter of next year, such a turnaround seems impossible without huge incentives. And yet Chrysler also showed graphs projecting a direct relationship between volume and profit, meaning there is little to no wiggle room for profit-sapping incentives. Rock, hard place, I’d like you to meet Chrysler Group.
Reuters reports that Tesla is planning an Initial Public Offering, after postponing planned IPOs in 2008 and 2009. Tesla reportedly hopes to capitalize on the recent success of battery developer A123 Systems, on the assumption that the A123 IPO has raised interest in electric auto firms. According to one of Reuters’ sources, Tesla’s IPO filing could be made “within days.” And the Silicon Valley startup, which currently has only one product, the $100k+ Tesla Roadster, will most likely have to hurry. Both Nissan and General Motors plan to enter the electric car market this year, marking the initial entries by established auto OEMs into the American EV market. Both of their initial products, the estimated $30k Nissan Leaf and the estimated $40k Chevrolet Volt, will cost considerably less than Tesla’s estimated $50k Model S sedan and will beat it to market by at least a year. Acquiring funding after cheaper competing models go on sale could be extremely challenging for a boutique automaker like Tesla.
Ford were mighty relieved when it managed to off-load it’s British marques, Jaguar and Land Rover, to Tata. Now after 1 year and 9 months of ownership, causing the normally profitable Tata Motors to fall into a £41 million pound loss and falling sales, how do you think Tata are feeling about the purchase of JLR? Sad? Depressed? Suicidal? According to steelguru.com, Ratan Tata is surprisingly optimistic.
If we assume that the global meltdown is a phenomenon that will be over in the near term, I think we will look back and say that these are very strategic and worthwhile acquisitions. There were many questions raised regarding whether these two large acquisitions Corus and JLR are worthwhile and whether the prices were right in terms of being at the top of the market, virtually. My view on that is that if you want to buy a house and that house is of a particular value, then it may not be there if you wait
Fiat is facing a new distraction. While Sergio Marchionne has worldwide plans with zombie Chrysler, Fiat is facing an insurrection at home. Well, close to home. The German dealer council of Fiat has unanimously decided to sue Fiat Germany.
Two actions by Fiat raised the dealers’ ire: (Read More…)
Recent Comments