Chevy volt is 10,000$ over priced.

[Bill in Utah]

Originally Posted By: ARB1977
I could care less about electric cars. 40K will buy you a nice VW TDI. That gets good miles and you dont have to worry about batteries.


No, but you do have to worry about VERY COMPLICATED emission controls that are NOT proven. And I'm not going to have the time or handle idiot VW dealers trying to figure out how to repair those emission systems.

Once the new EPA "stuff" came into play, diesels became an non player for me. You want to talk complex? Welcome to 2010 and small diesels... SAD..

 

[StevieC]

Bill,

Don't forget that people are still a bit concerned about GM's financial state and also people don't understand the technology or will be likely afraid of it because it's so new. That all adds more people to the group that won't be buying.

I think this is going to be a huge flop for G.M. and if I wasn't confident in that I wouldn't post it here for fear of the GM culturists on here pointing the finger later on.

GM needs to go away!

Steve

 

[meep]

1. hydrogen is too costly to produce from electrolysis-- starts as electricity.... so you're back to coal.

2. more crude is required to produce a gallon of diesel than a gallon of unleaded. diesel may present higher mpg but it doesn't do any good for global efficiency. Sad-- I'd always wanted a diesel...

3. cost per k/w to miles is only a fraction of fuel cost per mile.

4. GM did a GREAT job with the EV-1, and there was a cult following of those cars that would have eagerly purchased them at end-of-life, if GM had allowed it.

5. ALL THAT CASH WE SPEND ON FUEL GOES TO WHERE??? Hint: it does NOT stay in america...

6. electric grid loses nearly 90% of generated power in transmission, per numbers a decade back. I haven't see the power line technology change-- assume it's roughly the same now-- THAT would need to improve. If we can alter the way we produce electricity, so that we could lower transmission loss, the we could handle the increased electric consumption w/o increasing production waste.

7. GM should be applauded for their approach to do something different. 40 mile range is very usable. if you need more, that genset is efficient, your resultant mpg is very good. I recall filling up my vehicle every 2-3 days when I lived in DC. Having a car like the volt would have been a tremendous operating savings for me. As our technology has become mature and we are returning focus towards "form" (form vs. function), I hope they can add some design pizazz ("form") to attract buyers. Man, if that thing looked like an audi instead of an eggplant from the rear...

 

[jsharp]

Here's a recent article about the Volt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/opinion/30neidermeyer.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

So the future of General Motors (and the $50 billion taxpayer investment in it) now depends on a vehicle that costs $41,000 but offers the performance and interior space of a $15,000 economy car. The company is moving forward on a second generation of Volts aimed at eliminating the initial model’s considerable shortcomings. (In truth, the first-generation Volt was as good as written off inside G.M., which decided to cut its 2011 production volume to a mere 10,000 units rather than the initial plan for 60,000.)

Quantifying just how much taxpayer money will have been wasted on the hastily developed Volt is no easy feat. Start with the $50 billion bailout (without which none of this would have been necessary), add $240 million in Energy Department grants doled out to G.M. last summer, $150 million in federal money to the Volt’s Korean battery supplier, up to $1.5 billion in tax breaks for purchasers and other consumer incentives, and some significant portion of the $14 billion loan G.M. got in 2008 for “retooling” its plants, and you’ve got some idea of how much taxpayer cash is built into every Volt.

I can't find much in it to disagree with...

 

[StevieC]

Finally some light at the end of the this dark tunnel. Thanks jsharp!

 

[mechanicx]

This thread is short on facts and long on GM bashing. A person could make good arguments to bash other automakers but that wouldn't be OK. It's not GM's fault that electric vehicles are expensive and not very viable or that they are being developed in the first place.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
This thread is short on facts and long on GM bashing. A person could make good arguments to bash other automakers but that wouldn't be OK. It's not GM's fault that electric vehicles are expensive and not very viable or that they are being developed in the first place.
So that makes it ok to go ahead and spend my money as a taxpayer on something that isn't going to sell and bring profits back to the company?

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
This thread is short on facts and long on GM bashing. A person could make good arguments to bash other automakers but that wouldn't be OK. It's not GM's fault that electric vehicles are expensive and not very viable or that they are being developed in the first place.
So that makes it ok to go ahead and spend my money as a taxpayer on something that isn't going to sell and bring profits back to the company?

But if you are going to take it down that OT route, then blame the responsibile party. Any automaker gets tax money to develop these electric vehicles. They don't even have to be American.

 

[StevieC]

That's fine but it's the emphasis that GM is putting on the volt like it's going to be this big profit producing revolutionary, "Lets put all our eggs into 1 basket" approach that is the problem.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: ARB1977
I could care less about electric cars. 40K will buy you a nice VW TDI. That gets good miles and you dont have to worry about batteries.


Well, there's no free lunch out there. As Bill has already suggested, the Achilles heel of the new diesels is the super complex Rube Goldberg exhaust-emissions systems that they have to lug around in order to stay clean enough to pass muster here in the 'States (and other emissions-sensitive locations).

When one of these new TDI or Blutech exhausts fails out of wty, you're not going to be getting by with the $99.99 special at Midas. Repairs are going to be every bit as costly and complex, if not more so, as a battery swap will be in a hybrid.

Pick your poison.

Oh yeah, as for the Volt, it will be miles ahead of a diesel on this front. Optimized to run just for battery charging, the emissions on the Volt's gas engine will be kindergarten math compared to what's necessary on a modern diesel. This weighs in favor of the Volt's ultimate price, whatever it is.

 

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: meep


6. electric grid loses nearly 90% of generated power in transmission, per numbers a decade back. I haven't see the power line technology change-- assume it's roughly the same now-- THAT would need to improve. If we can alter the way we produce electricity, so that we could lower transmission loss, the we could handle the increased electric consumption w/o increasing production waste.




You have that backwards. The power transmission system in the US delivered over 90% of the power that entered it a decade back. Losses were a bit over 7%. Losses are under 7% now.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: jsharp
Here's a recent article about the Volt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/opinion/30neidermeyer.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

So the future of General Motors (and the $50 billion taxpayer investment in it) now depends on a vehicle that costs $41,000 but offers the performance and interior space of a $15,000 economy car. The company is moving forward on a second generation of Volts aimed at eliminating the initial model’s considerable shortcomings. (In truth, the first-generation Volt was as good as written off inside G.M., which decided to cut its 2011 production volume to a mere 10,000 units rather than the initial plan for 60,000.)

Quantifying just how much taxpayer money will have been wasted on the hastily developed Volt is no easy feat. Start with the $50 billion bailout (without which none of this would have been necessary), add $240 million in Energy Department grants doled out to G.M. last summer, $150 million in federal money to the Volt’s Korean battery supplier, up to $1.5 billion in tax breaks for purchasers and other consumer incentives, and some significant portion of the $14 billion loan G.M. got in 2008 for “retooling” its plants, and you’ve got some idea of how much taxpayer cash is built into every Volt.

I can't find much in it to disagree with...


I can, that snippet seems like a textbook hatchet job.

The Volt is not a hastily conceived project, it's been talked about for years.

It didn't cost $50B to develop the Volt - (that number, if accurate) was to bail out the whole company. And they had a lot of cash on hand last I looked. It's ludicrous to portray the Volt as a life or death project for the company - unless you have an agenda or axe to grind. The bailout sucked, but it's not gonna be undone. No use crying over spilled milk.

10,000 volts at 41K apiece is $.41B revenue if I did my arithmetic correct. Hardly chump change.

Where did the $1.5B in tax breaks and incentives come from? Thin air? (10,000 units)($7500) does not equal $1.5B. If it's like most tax incentives, people that have money will be disqualified from participation. And there will be local taxes charged on the purchase price that will go back into the public trough.

So long as my wife is not in transit between our houses, the 40 mile range is sufficient such that all of the driving she does would be electric only.

An engineeer friend of mine told me that the gas engine/generator/electric motor setup could be more efficient than a gas engine driving the wheels. That type of arrangement worked well enough for the diesel electric WWII fleet submarines. It's not a new concept.

If you don't burn any gas, who cares if it has to be premium?

 

[Bill in Utah]

Originally Posted By: Win

If you don't burn any gas, who cares if it has to be premium?


First of all 40 miles is pie in the sky. VERY FEW people will be able to get that. It WILL be less. Go to GM's web site and they tell you that.

So unless you go a LOT less than 40 miles (you prob should be spending a LOT less than $41k -$7,500 for a commuter car that makes sense) you will be using fuel.

I'd bet that ALL of the Volts will use fuel at one time or another. If it did not need the gas engine why buy it? Go get a golf cart or one of the other electric only vehicles. The market place is full of them due to demand.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: Anies
Overpriced. Like I said, government wants Cafe improvements, better emissions/fuel economy these cars need to be cheap as all heck.
Well, you can get a base Prius for roughly 1-2 grand more than a stripped, base man-tran Camry. So no problem there.

Originally Posted By: Anies
1 - People aren't sold on the idea of hybrids. More tech, more problems.
I dunno -- most of the time, Toyota dealers can't keep any of their hybrids in stock on the lots. So, in fact, lot's of people ARE sold on the concept. As well they should be. And while there is "more tech" in some places with the hybrids, there's less in others compensating for the complexity. None of the HSD cars have either a traditional starter or alternator, eliminating commonly seen maintenance headaches. Their transmissions have about two dozen, give or take, moving parts in them, compared to the hundreds in a conventional auto or CVT. And despite all the Chicken Little squawking from ten years ago, the traction batteries are, in the vast majority of cases, lasting the life of the car.

More problems? The EVIDENCE does NOT support this claim.

Originally Posted By: Anies
2 - People don't want to pay 30-40+k for a hybrid when they could buy a luxury sedan for that price or keep their existing car which is almost paid off, or not having issues.
Those people can have a base Prius for barely over $20, if they want (hardly more than what they'd pay for a base Camry...).

Originally Posted By: Anies
3 - If its anything like the BMW hybrid, BMW has to send out engineers to your house to make sure your house is fit enough to charge the BMW(Mini cooper). This has been on-going with the test phase of the little hybrid. Possible to expect the same from GM so they aren't held liable.
Skip the plug-in part, as all the Toyota/Lex hybrids have, and this a total, complete NON-ISSUE.

Originally Posted By: Anies
4 - Maintenance out of warranty. How expensive is this gonna be out of warranty.
What -- you're looking forward to a cheap rebuild of your thousand-part many-speed automatic trans when it fails out of wty? My TCH's trans has about as many moving parts as I have fingers and toes. If we're fretting about complexity, I'll take a Toyota/Lex hybrid transmission ANY DAY over a conventional multi-speed auto.



Originally Posted By: Anies
Don't get me wrong, I am all for hybrids, but things like this pop into my head and cost is a big concern. Cost of parts, cost of batteries, weekly/monthly cost in electric etc.

Well, you've got me confused as to exactly where you're coming from. You sound conflicted. I respectfully recommend you look at the nearly-10-year history of these cars, versus the still-on-going propaganda howl. If you do, you'll see that for a profile like you describe, a Prius would save you money. Period.

Originally Posted By: Anies
This would be a perfect car for me as my commute is really only 4-5 miles each way. The price tag, heck even the Prius price tag is a bit much. These cars need to be mainstreamed to be lucrative.
Buy a base Prius a week before Christmas in Texas pickup country. You might even bargain your way South of $20k. Yes, you can easily drive one North of $30k, but you can do that to a Camry easily, and a Corolla if you work at it.

Originally Posted By: Anies
They should find ways to make it happen. ...
They are. Go shopping and you'll see.

 

[StevieC]

EK Very informative... Thanks!

 

[Bill in Utah]

The Toyota dealership in downtown SLC has "only" 69 Prius sitting on the lot! Row and Rows of them

This dealership has only 45 Prius (out of 245 total vehicles)

This small dealership has 28

Only 20 here

And 19 here

They have never sold well here. The Camry Hybrid you seen MANY more over the Prius. And the newest one I may see one a week.

Deals are there to be gotten if you take your time. Some of the above dealers think that their inventory is special and sticker is the rule. (HINT: its the one above that says "Please Call" for the sticker price)

I laugh when they tell me that.

But each and every vehicle above is WAY less than $41k and is proven. Plus I think they have more room in them...

If I was in the market forgetting everything else, I know what I'd get...

But PLENTY of Hybrids in stock here!

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
The Toyota dealership in downtown SLC has "only" 69 Prius sitting on the lot! Row and Rows of them

This dealership has only 45 Prius (out of 245 total vehicles)

This small dealership has 28

Only 20 here

And 19 here

They have never sold well here. The Camry Hybrid you seen MANY more over the Prius. And the newest one I may see one a week.

Deals are there to be gotten if you take your time. Some of the above dealers think that their inventory is special and sticker is the rule. (HINT: its the one above that says "Please Call" for the sticker price)

All the better to get a deal when gas prices aren't on an upswing. As of right now, Southeast Toyota is showing 25 cars at the Pensacola dealer (high for that store; last time I checked a couple months ago it was single digits), and 524 Prii across SET "jurisdiction". By contrast the numbers for the Camry are 64 and 5625 respectively.

If I were seriously in the market for a Prius, I'd be thrilled right now. You can bet your next paycheck, however, that with the next strong uptick in gas prices, the Prii will vaporize from the lots. Silly (or reasonable) as it may be, that pattern has been repeating itself for years now. Probably does for Corollas and Yari too; I just have not tracked it.


Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
But each and every vehicle above is WAY less than $41k and is proven. Plus I think they have more room in them...

If I was in the market forgetting everything else, I know what I'd get...

But PLENTY of Hybrids in stock here!

I can't imagine how'd you get a Prius North of $40k, short of ordering installation of a solid gold aftermarket crack-cocaine dispenser in the dash.

 

[jsharp]

Originally Posted By: Win

I can, that snippet seems like a textbook hatchet job.

The Volt is not a hastily conceived project, it's been talked about for years.

It didn't cost $50B to develop the Volt - (that number, if accurate) was to bail out the whole company. And they had a lot of cash on hand last I looked. It's ludicrous to portray the Volt as a life or death project for the company - unless you have an agenda or axe to grind. The bailout sucked, but it's not gonna be undone. No use crying over spilled milk.

10,000 volts at 41K apiece is $.41B revenue if I did my arithmetic correct. Hardly chump change.

Where did the $1.5B in tax breaks and incentives come from? Thin air? (10,000 units)($7500) does not equal $1.5B. If it's like most tax incentives, people that have money will be disqualified from participation. And there will be local taxes charged on the purchase price that will go back into the public trough.

So long as my wife is not in transit between our houses, the 40 mile range is sufficient such that all of the driving she does would be electric only.

An engineeer friend of mine told me that the gas engine/generator/electric motor setup could be more efficient than a gas engine driving the wheels. That type of arrangement worked well enough for the diesel electric WWII fleet submarines. It's not a new concept.

If you don't burn any gas, who cares if it has to be premium?


It's not difficult to argue against points the article didn't make. There's even a name for that. A strawman. It never claimed that it cost $50 Billion to develop the Volt or that $1.5 Billion would be spent on incentives.

Locomotives and submarines have used 'hybrid drives' for decades and for good reasons. Efficiency isn't it.

The Volt may or may not be a life or death project for GM. But the results of many such marginally profitable or non profitable projects are cumulative. We've already seen the outcome of that. Bankruptcy. It would be nice to not see it again.

 

[greenjp]

The Volt is a luxury car. Luxury in this case being exclusiveness & techno wizbangery. Some people value those things.

No one does a cost/benefit analysis on leather seats, V8 upgrades from V6s, sunroofs, nav systems, etc. It's funny how when it becomes an "eco" thing you all of the sudden have to justify the expense.

jeff

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk

I can't imagine how'd you get a Prius North of $40k, short of ordering installation of a solid gold aftermarket crack-cocaine dispenser in the dash.