GM’s styling department was originally called “Art and Colour,” an indication of the importance The General has always placed on color. And since the Volt hype campaign is leaving no gimmick unturned, GM is offering fans an opportunity to name the greenish-silver color that debuted with the first production-look Volt. The prize? An early test-drive of a pre-production (of course) Volt. Since we’re sure to be barred from test-fleet Volts, why not submit a color name for a chance at what could be TTAC’s first road test of the automotive Hail Mary? Our choices: Silver Lining or Bailout Green. Yours?
Find News by Subject:
Category: News Blog
A National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) study on Antilock Braking Systems (ABS) reveals that they’re not all that. In fact, the technology increases fatalities in certain circumstances. (Not that Frank Williams didn’t warn you back in 2006.) “ABS has close to a zero net effect on fatal crash involvements. Fatal run-off-road crashes of passenger cars increased by a statistically significant 9 percent (90% confidence bounds: 3% to 15% increase), offset by a significant 13-percent reduction in fatal collisions with pedestrians (confidence bounds: 5% to 20%) and a significant 12-percent reduction in collisions with other vehicles on wet roads (confidence bounds: 3% to 20%).,” “The Long-Term Effect of ABS in Passenger Cars and LTVs” reports [download pdf here]. “ABS is quite effective in nonfatal crashes, reducing the overall crash- involvement rate by 6 percent in passenger cars (confidence bounds: 4% to 8%) and by 8 percent in LTVs (confidence bounds: 3% to 11%).” That doesn’t sound . . . confidence inspiring. In fact, that nine percent increase looks even worse close up. A LOT worse.
Chillicothe, Ohio residents will retain the right to vote out speed cameras on November 3, thanks to a Ohio Supreme Court ruling yesterday. Fearing the public would shut down his signature program, Chillicothe Mayor Joseph Sulzer had asked the high court for an emergency injunction blocking the citizen-led initiative. Sulzer argued that this step was needed because the proposed initiative was unconstitutional and the city was denied a fair chance to argue against it before the Ross County Board of Elections (view Sulzer’s court filing). The supreme court justices unanimously rejected his complaint.
Yesterday, China’s auto production officially exceeded the 10m mark. You’ve seen nothing yet, opined Dongfeng Motor Co. vice president Ren Yong at the sidelines of the Tokyo Motor Show (which had been mostly shunned by foreign makers.) Peak oil theorists, take a Valium before reading further.+
Read More >
The Chinese car maker Great Wall Motor, a Hong Kong-listed Chinese car company, is suing Fiat in China for industrial espionage. According to the Financial Times, this in “an apparent response to an Italian court ruling that Great Wall copied a Fiat car model.”
Last year, Fiat sued Great Wall both in Italy and in China for copying the Fiat Panda, which Great Wall sells as the Peri.
Read More >
The deal to sell Volvo to Geely may be falling apart after 10 months of heavy petting. Everybody from Bloomberg to the DetN has lapped up the leak that it’s all about intellectual property that may be misappropriated in the Middle Kingdom. The true crime: A massive insult to the intelligence of the dear reader is being perpetrated. If there are concerns about stealing trade secrets, why did they come up now and not earlier, while Ford and Geely were progressing from first to second base in a cloud of steam? Did they fall asleep in the drive-in? Whatta we gonna tell your mama? Whatta we gonna tell your pa? “We say it’s about trade secrets.” “Great idea. Works all the time.”
The Financial Times found a more likely cause for the sudden interuptus:
Read More >
Everett writes in:
I know that each motor, transmission, and car combination has optimums areas of performance for mileage. All the Jetta drivers that swear by idling in 5th gear are a testament to that. With some of the newer V-8 motors, however, finding the sweet spot is a little more problematic. Take for example a GMC Yukon XL, paired with a 5.3L V-8. Because GM designed the motor to shut down four cylinders whenever it could to increase fuel economy, the motor does just that when coasting, during braking, and for short stretches where the motor can maintain the desired speed (provided the driver holds a steady pedal). Is it possible that because the motor would produce more horsepower under the V-4 mode at a higher rpm/road speed, that there is a sweet spot of efficiency at a HIGHER than expected speed? Having a power curve for the V-4 mode of the motor would be a good starting point to know if there is a point where the V-4 mode is revved higher and produces enough power to better maintain highway speeds, but saves gas because four cylinders are shut down. Any ideas if that exists for the actively managed motors out there and what speed that would be?
Aldo: Hi Mr. Posawatz. I will be buying a Volt and wanted to know if an extension cord could be used to increase the reach for recharging, or if we are going to be limited to the length of the cord that comes with the car. Thanks!
[Chevy Volt Vehicle Line Director] Tony Posawatz: The EVSE or charge cord will be about 25 feet and designed to all relevant codes. We do not recommend extension cords but rather that when you have your home inspection, you reposition your outlet/charging station approproiately [sic].
From a recent Fastlane livechat on the Chevrolet Volt, ironically titled “Making Electric Vehicles Attractive to Consumers.” Which would you prefer?
Commenter the duke is being promoted. He’s now the king of CC Clue, for nailing Monday’s most difficult ’51 Packard. We bow down before you.
For today’s clue though, we don’t need no uppity royalty, because this is not a brand fit for kings; this is a job for a lower class: woodworkers and carpenters. Please step up and identify the make of this well-aged grain of wood. And if you’re really good, you’ll count the rings and tell us how old it is.
GM’s Onstar EV Lab recently invited Autobloggreen in for a preview of some of the Volt’s unique Onstar options. The upshot is that the GM-exclusive system will reach new levels of invasiveness, monitoring battery charge and temperature levels, as well as providing charging information. But beyond these Volt-related systems, ABG also reveals that Onstar monitored current users as guinea pigs for developing Volt roll-out plans:
GM pulled real data from thousands of OnStar-equipped vehicles over the last week, and calculated what would have happened had they all been Volts. These vehicles were a representative sample, which in this case means the random drivers were selected from areas where GM expects initial interest in the Volt will be high. GM has previously said that it has its eye on “early adopter” cities like San Francisco and Washington, D.C. to sell the Volt at first, so the sample might have included drivers from these areas.
This is a new development in the discussion of whether Onstar crosses privacy lines in the pursuit of safety, and oh yeah, profits. Onstar would argue that complete access to your vehicle helps prevent things like carjackings (a mission it has now officially accomplished once). The downside is that GM is apparently allowed to spy on your vehicle use patterns at will. Oh, and apparently the computer voice recognition leaves something to be desired, for the rurally accented. Is the system worth the downsides?
The Mainstream Media has a thing about safety-related stories. It started with the “if it bleeds it leads” paradigm, and has become a predictable hobbyhorse thanks to the fact that you’d have to be the worst kind of sociopath to even consider arguing against more safety. If the MSM likes anything more than trench-warfare debates, it’s coming together afterward over a hot cup of won’t someone think of the children? But facts are facts, and as the WSJ reports, driving a car has literally never been safer. There were 1.19 deaths for every 100 million vehicle miles traveled in the second quarter of 2009, the lowest number since the NHTSA began keeping statistics in the 1970s. And the IIHS’s recent gee-whiz test results don’t even tell the whole story, although they do indicate that the lobbying group may be losing some relevance. Beyond passive safety features like improved steel, engineering and airbags, active safety features like stability and traction control are preventing a great number of deaths. As are roadway improvements like rumble strips and median dividers, not to mention increased DUI and seatbelt enforcement. In short, great strides have been made. Which means it’s time to think about changing the conversation about safety. As the video above proves, we’ll never completely wring the danger out of the practice of piloting tons of metal around at speed, but the latest statistics show that it might be a good time to consider prioritizing lower vehicle weights over a safety-at-all-costs approach. After all, even the most fanatical safety advocates are now focusing on distracted driving and motorcycle deaths.
Actually, that’s not the equivocal message we might have expected from a University of Michigan study on electric vehicle (EV) viability [via Green Car Congress]. Instead, the money quote reads:
The data provide strong evidence that a combination of economic and social incentives may be most effective in successfully introducing these vehicles.
The study’s baseline shows that, given no increase in fuel costs, 42 percent of those surveyed would consider buying an EV. But with every doubling of a hypothetical price premium, the probability of purchase fell by about 16 percent. At a $10k premium, only 14 percent said they would consider purchasing an EV. Which is enough to conclude that the “social incentives” of EV ownership are enough to create a certain level of demand for even uncompetitively-priced vehicles. And that seems to indicate that breathless green marketing is here to stay. In fact, if the image after the jump is anything to go on, this eco-toehold in the minds of some consumers will likely be exploited with ever-more breathtaking shamelessness.
Chinese automaker Geely has been pursuing Volvo for 10 months now, and it’s beginning to look like the chase was in vain. Bloomberg reports that disagreements over Volvo’s intellectual property are about to scuttle the deal, the same reasons GM gave for rejecting Beijing Automotive’s bid for Opel in July. The problem, it seems, hinges on product integration. Volvo’s vehicles are all based on Ford platforms, so giving Geely access to current and in-development Volvo models means trusting them with the special sauce. And Ford is even less likely to do that, after a former Ford employee was arrested last week for attempting to pass some 4,000 secret documents to SAIC and Beijing Auto.
A far more popular choice than our “don’t these cars look vaguely similar?” collection.
Recent Comments