This morning General Motors held a press conference at its Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly plant to announce that the Chevy Volt was in production, on sale, and will start shipping today. The Volt goes on sale in seven initial markets, with a national rollout in early 2011. Export sales will begin late next year.
While there were a number of journalists in attendance (including, significantly, a noticeable number from Japanese news outlets) and though there was some news to be made, this particular dog and pony show was more of a pep rally than anything else. Hundreds of assembly line workers from the plant attended the event and the speakers frequently praised them. When GM North America president Mark Reuss walked in before the event started, he made a point of congratulating each member of the GM management team that was in attendance. Ron King, UAW president, was busy so Gary Bernath stood in. He went out of his way to praise the locals at all the GM facilities involved in the Volt project, and he thanked Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and other elected officials.
GM CEO Dan Akerson drove Volt VIN 00001 up onto the stage, got out and flashed a V sign with both hands, saying that it was V for Volt as well as for “victory.” Akerson referred to the difficult times that GM has faced since the Volt concept was introduced in 2007, and he praised the resilience of GM’s salaried and union employees. There was a whiff of somewhat premature triumphalism in the air, “American engineering is back”, Akerson said. Calling the Volt a “game changer” Akerson announced that Volt #00001 will be going into GM’s Heritage Center along with other “game changers in GM history.” He said that GM will be expanding their vehicle electrification program, and that GM’s ultimate grail will be hydrogen fuel cells to power the electric motors.
Akerson said that the most important ingredient in the Volt “is talent” and that with the help of tax breaks and other government subsidies GM will be hiring another 1,000 engineers and development personnel, in Michigan, to work on batteries, motors and power control.
When Gov. Granholm spoke, she was clearly emotional and I wasn’t the only person to notice that she was a bit teary eyed. A Democrat who is term limited and will leave office next month, this was one of Granholm’s last public appearances in office. The governor of course praised the UAW and the federal government. She invited businesses to come to Michigan, which she described as “the center of the electrification of the car,” citing the 17 battery companies and component suppliers already located in the state. Whether those facilities will ever employ 65,000 people as the governor predicted remains to be seen.
The mutual admiration society vibe continued as UAW executive Gary Bernath spoke. He praised Granholm’s “fabulous job”, alluded to the concessions that Local 22 made to bring Volt assembly to Detroit-Hamtramck, and insisted that “UAW workers can compete with anyone in the world”.
Tom Stephens, GM Vice Chairman, followed Bernath. Interestingly, though lately GM has been emphasizing its brands rather than the corporate umbrella, Stephens was the first speaker to actually use the word “Chevrolet”. He also used a phrase that I suspect will feature prominently in Volt advertising “range anxiety”. Speaking of advertising and marketing, prominently featured on the video screens was a logo that read VOLTAGE, with Volt and Age in different colors and a lightning bolt motif in the V and A. The Volt is being promoted with its own social networking site, www.chevroletvoltage.com. I think we can safely predict that sometime in the next year or so we’ll be hearing ads telling us that we’re now in the age of the Chevy Volt.
Mark Reuss congratulated the Volt management and development team and said that the Volt demonstrates just what GM can achieve, that the company, the state of Michigan and the country are once again technological leaders. Reuss noted GM’s commitment to Michigan and mentioned that the company has recently invested over $700 million in eight Michigan facilities. He said that the company was devoted to “true technical excellence” and that with the Volt they have “created the new soul of this company and of Chevrolet as a brand.” Comparing the Volt to a “moonshot”, Reuss made the comparison even more obvious when he quoted Neil Armstrong, “the Eagle has landed.”
Volt VIN 0002 will be the first Volt available for retail sale but you won’t be able to buy it at a Chevy dealer. Simultaneously with the launch event, Volt #2 was going up for public auction on www.bidonthevolt.com. Reuss announced that 100% of the sale price will be donated to the Detroit Public Schools Foundation. While he was speaking, some of the GM execs already put in bids. At the time of this writing, the bidding on the $41K car has already reached $80,000. GM and the DPS are also organizing a number of student activities involving the Volt as a means of encouraging more students to study science and enter the 54th annual Science & Engineering Fair of Metropolitan Detroit. When that science fair was first organized in the 1950s the domestic automakers took an active role, sponsoring scholarships. That was when GM also ran the Fisher Craftsmen Guild to cultivate and identify students with a talent for design. Reuss said that by working with the DPS GM hopes to nurture the next generation of engineers.
The schedule for the event said that Volt #2 would be driven on stage carrying a “special guest”. Though some of the reporters joked that it might be Kid Rock, nobody was surprised when one Robert Lutz stepped out of the passenger side. Lutz joked about his upcoming book, supposedly titled, The Car Guys vs The Bean Counters, and described the Volt as an attempt to leapfrog “a famous environmentally sensitive car company” that at the time could do no wrong. He said that General Motors is still the depository of more intellectual property and engineering skill than “any other car company in the world” even though “reporters would swoon over the other company”. Lutz closed by saying that the Volt was the most exciting vehicle program he’s ever been involved with. After the press conference, when a Japanese reporter asked him what his favorite cars were, he said that was a hard question, that he was currently driving a ZR-1 Corvette, had a couple of Pontiac Solstices that he enjoyed, but that he’d be buying a Chevy Volt because “without a doubt it’s the highlight of my career”.
Dog and pony show and mutual admiration notwithstanding, the event was newsworthy even if the speeches were predictable. CNBC’s Phil Lebeau did a live remote interview from the event with Lutz. To his credit, Lebeau pressed Lutz on when, or whether, the Volt will turn a profit. Later I heard him ask another executive if the Volt was being sold “at cost”.
So despite all the glad handing and rah rah, as well as the Volt’s undisputed engineering success, there are still serious questions about the Volt program. Still, since there were plenty of people, including on this web site, that believed that a production Volt would never see the light of day, it’s hard not to wish the Volt team congratulations on a notable milestone.
…nobody was surprised when one Robert Lutz stepped out of the passenger side
And the car promptly flipped over.
Well, I don’t know if it was Volt 00001 or 00002 or some other number, but I saw a Chevrolet Volt on the road this morning in northern Virginia. It even had regular issue Virginia tags (on a new car in VA this usually means the purchaser transferred the tag from whatever car was traded in as tags here belong to people and not to cars).
Perhaps a pre-production loaner for DOT, EPA, or your friendly influential DC politician? (What is the federal politician density in N. VA? I suspect it must be the highest in the nation short of under the cupola in the house of Congress.)
I was one of those people who did not think the Volt would be produced. I realized long ago that I was wrong.
But I still don’t think it should be produced, for a variety of reasons.
– GM needs to sell profitable products, not science projects, particularly as a bailout recipient.
– It is not economical for commuters, since they tend to not drive enough miles to justify the EV premium on this car.
– It is not economical for long-distance drivers, since its highway fuel economy is eclipsed by several vehicles, thus making the EV premium harder to justify.
– The Prius is cleaner and more economical.
– The Cruze will kill it in the showroom.
– It shouldn’t need a government subsidy.
To me the Volt seems like more of a ‘high-earth-orbit shot’ than a ‘moon shot’. It is reported to drive very well, and I think it’s a nice-looking car.
Good luck Chevy Volt, and congratulations on your birth.
– GM needs to sell profitable products, not science projects, particularly as a bailout recipient.
GM needs to fix its image away from big trucks and SUV’s to modern cars and the Volt is an absolute genius way to do so.
– It is not economical for commuters, since they tend to not drive enough miles to justify the EV premium on this car.
Even the Prius isn’t “economical” if you compare it to a subcompact its a stupid argument. Why do people buy highend XLE Camry’s and not base CE’s? Because they want more and better which the Volt is. It’s faster, quieter, handles better, with a WAY SUPERIOR tech/nav package then the Prius while getting better lower CO2 foot prints if you drive less then 87.4 miles (the exact point using USA average power sources of 49% coal, 9% hydro, 19% nuclear , 9% Natural gas + renewables) that 99% of all commuters drives less then each day.
– It is not economical for long-distance drivers, since its highway fuel economy is eclipsed by several vehicles, thus making the EV premium harder to justify.
Yet most driving is short and its EV mode is staggeringly efficient hell its a mere 5% less efficient then the much smaller pure EV leaf, which is incredible.
– The Prius is cleaner and more economical.
It’s not true for 99% of drivers.
– The Cruze will kill it in the showroom.
Completely different customer bases. People who bought Priuses the top traded in cars after other Toyota vehicles, were Lexus, Mercedes, Honda, BMW, Acura. Rich people bought them and don’t give a hoot about price tags. Hell Lexus keeps making small luxury hybrids because the average Prius buyer makes MORE money then ES, RX, IS buyers which annoys Toyota to all ends. GM’s big failure is losing the prosperous American market to foreign car brands and the Volt is a freaking stealth missile that will get those buyers in DROVES. Californians love the Volt and they are one of primary markets which GM has lost over the past 30 years.
– It shouldn’t need a government subsidy.
Tell that to the Prius, Insight, Altima, VW TDI’s, Ford Hybrid’s, etc which all got equal huge rebates (especially Toyota which received the largest amount total for a purely imported vehicle.)
Wouldn’t the stagnation of not doing the Volt, or anything remotely new or break-even, be something like eating one’s seed corn?
The fact is that completion of the Volt was a political/PR move, not a business decision. Remember, it is one of the cars “Americans want to buy”, according to the President.
TTAC is that nobody wants EVs, except governments: https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/11/vw%E2%80%99s-klingler-nobody-wants-evs-except-governments/
@TimCrothers: I agree that the Prius isn’t ‘economical’, which is why I bought a different economy car rather than deal with a 12-year payback on the price difference. At $33k after the subsidy, the Volt is worse yet.
Moreover, it isn’t even a SULEV or PZEV: http://gmauthority.com/blog/2010/11/shenanigans-part-2-carb-rates-chevrolet-volt-as-more-polluting-than-toyota-prius/
I’ll believe people will buy the Volt in droves when they’re selling well in 2014. But too bad for GM, since they’ll lose money on every one.
Subsidies = lipstick on a pig.
@Robert.Walter: The Volt is technologically fascinating, but the reason nobody else is even trying to do the same thing is that it’s not profitable, and fraught with risk as a new flagship product. I believe in risk-taking, but not insanity. GM would have done well to provide good quality, profitable, efficient cars for a fraction of the development cost of the Volt, like the Cruze.
+1 to gslippy, very well said. In my opinion, the Volt is a brilliant technical achievement, but the basics are not too great: too heavy (+740 pounds than a Prius!), too expensive, 4 cramped seats, very basic “range extender” engine which cannot provide sufficient performance and fuel economy on extended trips. Did anybody notice or mention that the so very hated Prius starts at $22.8K before incentives and without any tax breaks, has 5 seats, a flat floor and a real trunk?
But I agree that it is a start that puts GM and the U.S. on the map and will serve as a springboard for hopefully better products. The Prius took 10 years and 3 generations to become what it is today.
Lutz said “…General Motors is still the depository of more intellectual property and engineering skill than any other car company in the world”.
How about competent accounting skill to bring the technical prowess to fruition?
Kudos to the folks at Hamtramck assembly,hourly and salary. As a GM retiree I’m proud of you people.
Not only that, I sleep better these days.
Not sure who that is in the top picture in this story, but if you’re at GM, and you’re at a major press event, striking a Nixon pose – not a great idea.
That’s Dan Akerson. Actually my notes from the event do say “Nixon”. It’s been almost 40 years, I doubt many remember the Trickster.
I too thought he was embracing his Inner Nixon … just didn’t have time earlier to make the comment.
Would have been oh so cool if they had done a little Village People Y-M-C-A kind of dance move, but spelling V-O-L-T…
I’m no fan of either Nixon or GM. But Nixon said, “If you take no risks, you will suffer no defeats. But if you take no risks, you win no victories.”
GM is certainly taking a risk with the Volt.
A Nixon pose, indeed. I can practically hear him.
Would YOU buy a new car from this man? :) For the benefit of the few who don’t understand the reference…
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2331/2273802356_13a4ac298d.jpg
Did anybody thank the taxpayers?
Ssssarright… they already have been:
http://www.davehitt.com/blog2/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/bigthree.jpg
Is that a Ford product you’re bashing in your link about taxpayers?
BTW, one-fourth of my salary from my Dearborn employer is paid in taxes.
Bob Lutz has a serious inferiority complex. It propagates to GM’s marketing, too, which completely turns me off their brands.
Maximum Bob is a fantastic character. I think it’s sad he’s gone from GM. At least he was interesting, and pushed the envelope.
Lutz is with Lotus now. If he has an inferiority complex, I want some of that.
And throw a little of his under-achiever, under-performer, shortcomings my way too…
This is the end of America. Someones at my door!! No.. no.. I won’t go , I wonnnnnnn’t……..
Oh , I see. No, I didn’t order that pizza.
OMG!!! A GM well-wisher on TTAC
Is it snowing in Hell?
The Volt is a technological success. So was the Concorde, as in the aircraft. The Concorde never made a dime and was grounded when the British and French decided that it was too costly to keep up an aging plane. I hope the Volt fares better. GM does deserve a good bit of credit here. If this is reliable, it should sell in smallish but reasonable numbers. Early adopters and attention whores will love this thing.
For a program that cost 30M running 30 years (both approximate), the amortization of 1M/yr doesnt seem out of line.
I looked to Wiki to see if the economics were discussed:
“BA discovered that their target customers thought that Concorde was more expensive than it actually was. They progressively raised prices and service quality to match these perceptions.[28] It is reported that BA then ran Concorde at a profit, unlike their French counterpart.[111][112][113] BA’s profits were reported to be up to £50 million in the most profitable years, with a total revenue of £1.75 billion, before costs of £1 billion.[111]
… several UK and French tour operators operated charter flights to European destinations on a regular basis;[117][118] the charter business was viewed as lucrative by British Airways and Air France.[119]“
Very well said. My sentiments exactly.
This thing has Pontiac Aztec written all over it. How long before the first recall?
Congrats to our competitors down the road for bringing this to production, despite the idiotic naysayers. If George Will disparages you, just count your blessings.
<<<He said that GM will be expanding their vehicle electrification program, and that GM’s ultimate grail will be hydrogen fuel cells to power the electric motors.
that sounds like a vote of no confidence in batteries
Battery-powered EV’s are proven to be efficient:
Coal-burned -> Electricity generated -> battery charged -> battery expended -> electric motor turns -> car moves.
Leaf and Volt prove that this works at a 90+ MPG equivalent. Bottom line is that battery EV’s easily double the efficiency of ICE autos.
Fuel-cells are less efficient than EV’s
Coal-burned -> Electricity generated -> hydrogen generated -> hydrogen transported -> hydrogen expended -> electricity generated -> (charge battery?) -> electric motor turns -> car moves.
This set up is inherently less efficient than batteries, but probably still more efficient than ICE’s.
There is precisely one reason fuel-cells are still being pursued despite cost disadvantage: range.
Pump hydrogen into a fuel-cell car and the car can go and go just like an ICE car.
Batteries have relatively pathetic ranges. Even if battery energy density miraculously doubled and the ranges concomitantly doubled, it would create another problem: charge times would stretch to 16 + hours. Practically, this means “more than overnight” which becomes a deal-breaker.
Nothing wrong with batteries. Much is right with batteries. But Fuel-cells are the Holy Grail for a full-range electric vehicle.
You know what’s a great way to transport lots of hydrogen in an easily-managed form at STP?
Hydrocarbons.
It would make more sense IMO to tax/tariff the shit out of imported oil, but have zero taxes on fuels generated from atmospheric CO2, water and power. Then a gasoline fuel cell can convert into electric power more efficiently than combusting it, and with zero NOx.
There is more power in the thorium in an average ton of coal than burning the coal itself. We need a massive build of thorium reactors, and reprocessing facilities to more efficently extract power and reduce waste volumes.
Techie:
The 99/93 mpg EPA figure is a phoney number. It is based on the amount of KWH equivalent contained in a gallon of gasoline. When you account for conversion efficiency, transmission loss and charging inefficiencies the number of equivalent gallons of gasoline required to charge the leaf or volt is 3-4 gallons. The actual mpg equivalent is 25-33. This is still a meaningless number. There is no real mpg equivalent for an EV.
Wind and solar power are the key to hydrogen production. These sources are useless in powering the grid but since the “fuel” is free they have great utility in producing hydrogen which normally takes more energy to produce then it returns in use.
By the way I like the way the Volt has turned out. I don’t think it should be paid for with other peoples money, particular since only the rich early adopters will buy them. These are people who don’t need a subsidy.
@ Angela
I’d like to see some figures on that. I agree that there is transmission loss and loss of energy during charging and discharging the battery, but if we’re going to take those figures into account, then you would have to compare Apples to Apples. i.e., energy per gallon of gasoline + energy it takes to refine petroleum + energy it takes to transport gasoline.
Techie:
There are large upstream energy consumption in the mining and transport of coal and the processing of uranium. These energy costs are at least as high as petroleum refining and transport. Using a total energy imput to output ratio in processing and transport is even more favorable for the ice.
Shouldn’t this article be under the “Volt Birth Watch” series?
If you’re going to take a swipe at the UAW, at least get the name right – BOB King.
Speaking of Bob, he was out in his jet twice in Nov. I always hope the old fella doen’t loose it into my building while doing his low passes.
Congratulations to the GM team that made the Volt a reality. No matter what you want to say about the impracticality of the design or the value to the consumer, the fact that this car is shipping to customers is a helluva achievement.
I’ve worked on projects like this (although nothing so spectacular) where there’s no real sleep for 2 years, and the phrases “shut the project down”, “don’t let the price creep up”, and “I don’t care if it works or not, ship it” haunt what little sleep you get. Those nighmares seem ot have been avoided in the Volt, from what we know.
The people who made this happen have my utmost respect, and I believe that a successful project like this does something important. It shows that GM can still do significant engineering, product development, and – it can get things done.
Good Stuff.
After all the nitpicking and analyzing, the bottom line is this:
New car buyers settle on the cars they buy for many reasons. A LOT of us buy a car because we just love the thing. That said, I think a lot of people will love this car.