Consumer Reports questions GMs Volt
- Thread starter Drew99GT
- Start date
- Status
Seems kind of basic that having an electric car that carries around a gas engine as back up is not real efficient - and vice versa. Why can't they make this operate a true hybrid like prius, only using the gas engine less? In other words, you would tell car's GPS computer how far you are going and maybe the route and it would decide on the optimum mix of gas and electricity to use so that you come home with very little electricity left and use only the minimum amount of gas.
They should rig the heater (do they?) to preheat off shore power when plugged in, so one doesn't have to use the inefficient cold batteries for that.
It is clever to heat the seat and not the air, as that may help efficiently create the impression of heat. Maybe they could add electric vests like motorcyclists run.
It is clever to heat the seat and not the air, as that may help efficiently create the impression of heat. Maybe they could add electric vests like motorcyclists run.
Electric vehicles are a joke, if you think about it. It’s the illusion that you’re not using gas. Think about it-You need a power plant to make the electric energy, so that means, coal, natural gas, nuclear as the primary source. So in most cases, unless it’s solar or wind or geothermal, as an example (But then to built and make those plants you probably had to rely on a plant that use the dirty fuel), you’re still polluting.
Originally Posted By: css9450
Hmmm, Consumer reports.... a GM car.... a bad review.... where's the surprise there?
+1 Seriously, CR has always had a massive... enthusiasm..... for non-domestic brands.
Hmmm, Consumer reports.... a GM car.... a bad review.... where's the surprise there?
+1 Seriously, CR has always had a massive... enthusiasm..... for non-domestic brands.
As usual Consumer Report makes their mind up about something before they actually review it and then write their review to fit that mindset.
$5,000 markup from a Chevy dealer? Are they trying to look stupid?
$5,000 markup from a Chevy dealer? Are they trying to look stupid?
It is astounding how stupid and ignorant Consumer Report really is - "Gee, my electric vehicle has a lot less range in winter when I use the heat, why is that?” So if these guys have no clue, imagine average American consumer.
It just shows how the propaganda that electric vehicles are our saviors is nothing more than PROPAGANDA being shoved down our throats, just like E10. Electric cars make sense for a very small percentage of the population and cannot work with our current infrastructure.
Stop the taxpayer founded incentives and we’ll soon find out how “viable” electric car really is.
It just shows how the propaganda that electric vehicles are our saviors is nothing more than PROPAGANDA being shoved down our throats, just like E10. Electric cars make sense for a very small percentage of the population and cannot work with our current infrastructure.
Stop the taxpayer founded incentives and we’ll soon find out how “viable” electric car really is.
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: css9450
Hmmm, Consumer reports.... a GM car.... a bad review.... where's the surprise there?
+1 Seriously, CR has always had a massive... enthusiasm..... for non-domestic brands.
Agreed, but their point is well taken: The Volt is a novelty car for greenies who can afford it. The point of electric cars and high fuel mileage cars efficiency and economics. The Volt is the antithesis of both. Dealers already charging a $5,000 market adjustment?
I'll get a chuckle if I ever see one stuck on the side of the road though.
Originally Posted By: css9450
Hmmm, Consumer reports.... a GM car.... a bad review.... where's the surprise there?
+1 Seriously, CR has always had a massive... enthusiasm..... for non-domestic brands.
Agreed, but their point is well taken: The Volt is a novelty car for greenies who can afford it. The point of electric cars and high fuel mileage cars efficiency and economics. The Volt is the antithesis of both. Dealers already charging a $5,000 market adjustment?
I'll get a chuckle if I ever see one stuck on the side of the road though.
Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
As usual Consumer Report makes their mind up about something before they actually review it and then write their review to fit that mindset.
They drove it for 2,500 miles. Considering it gets about 35 miles per charge, how much more "reviewing" do they need to do?
Did you expect them to come out and say "GM's new Volt is the answer to the US's energy crisis?", knowing full well that anyone else who's reviewed the Volt has come to the same conclusion that it's a novelty car?
Meanwhile oil prices could at any moment skyrocket to unprecedented levels and we're hung out to dry because we're subsidizing energy sources that amount to a drop in the bucket when we could be procuring the available domestic fossil based fuels.
As usual Consumer Report makes their mind up about something before they actually review it and then write their review to fit that mindset.
They drove it for 2,500 miles. Considering it gets about 35 miles per charge, how much more "reviewing" do they need to do?
Did you expect them to come out and say "GM's new Volt is the answer to the US's energy crisis?", knowing full well that anyone else who's reviewed the Volt has come to the same conclusion that it's a novelty car?
Meanwhile oil prices could at any moment skyrocket to unprecedented levels and we're hung out to dry because we're subsidizing energy sources that amount to a drop in the bucket when we could be procuring the available domestic fossil based fuels.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Did you expect them to come out and say "GM's new Volt is the answer to the US's energy crisis?", knowing full well that anyone else who's reviewed the Volt has come to the same conclusion that it's a novelty car?
Even though Consumer Reports is the perennial BITOG whipping boy, their conclusion about the car, as you correctly point out, isn't much different from that of any other mainstream review. It's a novelty car and the entry fee will most likely never get paid back. They correctly point out, also, that it won't be the average family who buys the Volt, trying to save money on gas. It'll typically be the enthusiast who enjoys or wants to support electric vehicle technology...much as the hybrid market was 10 years ago. Hybrid technology has advanced itself and has integrated itself into mainstream vehicles. As electric vehicle technology matures, it too will become more commonplace in the market. Until then, the Volt will be a niche vehicle.
Did you expect them to come out and say "GM's new Volt is the answer to the US's energy crisis?", knowing full well that anyone else who's reviewed the Volt has come to the same conclusion that it's a novelty car?
Even though Consumer Reports is the perennial BITOG whipping boy, their conclusion about the car, as you correctly point out, isn't much different from that of any other mainstream review. It's a novelty car and the entry fee will most likely never get paid back. They correctly point out, also, that it won't be the average family who buys the Volt, trying to save money on gas. It'll typically be the enthusiast who enjoys or wants to support electric vehicle technology...much as the hybrid market was 10 years ago. Hybrid technology has advanced itself and has integrated itself into mainstream vehicles. As electric vehicle technology matures, it too will become more commonplace in the market. Until then, the Volt will be a niche vehicle.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Agreed, but their point is well taken: The Volt is a novelty car for greenies who can afford it.
Definately! Its sort of like the EV-1; its not going to be a mainstream car. I don't think they're marketing it as one.
Agreed, but their point is well taken: The Volt is a novelty car for greenies who can afford it.
Definately! Its sort of like the EV-1; its not going to be a mainstream car. I don't think they're marketing it as one.
I don't get the impression they are panning it because it's a GM, they are panning it because it's not a cost effective solution.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
They drove it for 2,500 miles. Considering it gets about 35 miles per charge, how much more "reviewing" do they need to do?
Did you expect them to come out and say "GM's new Volt is the answer to the US's energy crisis?", knowing full well that anyone else who's reviewed the Volt has come to the same conclusion that it's a novelty car?
Meanwhile oil prices could at any moment skyrocket to unprecedented levels and we're hung out to dry because we're subsidizing energy sources that amount to a drop in the bucket when we could be procuring the available domestic fossil based fuels.
So is the Prius & Leaf then, granted I am a fan of Volt purely because it is a big risk being the first.
However judging it based on other cars that operate in a completely different way is asinine.
The Prius can not be charged, you are at the mercy of petrol.
The Leaf cannot go any further than 100 miles(if your are lucky) before needed to be charged. You are at the mercy of your local road system because terrain will affect it a lot.
The Volt can be charged, you drive 25-40 miles but forgot you need to run somewhere else. No worries your will burn a small amount of petrol but you won't be stranded.
Now if you never drive more than that except the occasional long trip you can be extremely effective in curbing your petrol usage.
They are different cars for different purposes and all novelties really. The Prius is ugly and cramped and only uses fossil fuels. The Leaf can be green but at the expense of convenience. The Volt can be used like a Leaf until the long distance run is needed. If anything it strives to be the answer to people who would buy a Leaf but keep another car around for long distance.
Buy a Volt and only need one car to do both you are going to make a compromise no matter what.
They drove it for 2,500 miles. Considering it gets about 35 miles per charge, how much more "reviewing" do they need to do?
Did you expect them to come out and say "GM's new Volt is the answer to the US's energy crisis?", knowing full well that anyone else who's reviewed the Volt has come to the same conclusion that it's a novelty car?
Meanwhile oil prices could at any moment skyrocket to unprecedented levels and we're hung out to dry because we're subsidizing energy sources that amount to a drop in the bucket when we could be procuring the available domestic fossil based fuels.
So is the Prius & Leaf then, granted I am a fan of Volt purely because it is a big risk being the first.
However judging it based on other cars that operate in a completely different way is asinine.
The Prius can not be charged, you are at the mercy of petrol.
The Leaf cannot go any further than 100 miles(if your are lucky) before needed to be charged. You are at the mercy of your local road system because terrain will affect it a lot.
The Volt can be charged, you drive 25-40 miles but forgot you need to run somewhere else. No worries your will burn a small amount of petrol but you won't be stranded.
Now if you never drive more than that except the occasional long trip you can be extremely effective in curbing your petrol usage.
They are different cars for different purposes and all novelties really. The Prius is ugly and cramped and only uses fossil fuels. The Leaf can be green but at the expense of convenience. The Volt can be used like a Leaf until the long distance run is needed. If anything it strives to be the answer to people who would buy a Leaf but keep another car around for long distance.
Buy a Volt and only need one car to do both you are going to make a compromise no matter what.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Did you expect them to come out and say "GM's new Volt is the answer to the US's energy crisis?", knowing full well that anyone else who's reviewed the Volt has come to the same conclusion that it's a novelty car?
Even though Consumer Reports is the perennial BITOG whipping boy, their conclusion about the car, as you correctly point out, isn't much different from that of any other mainstream review.
If they gave it a positive review, I'm sure some people would claim that it's because they're part of a vast Communist conspiracy designed to undermine oil companies.
As for the markup, Edmunds reported a dealer asking for $20K
http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/07/chevrolet-dealer-want-a-volt-thatll-be-an-extra-20k.html
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Did you expect them to come out and say "GM's new Volt is the answer to the US's energy crisis?", knowing full well that anyone else who's reviewed the Volt has come to the same conclusion that it's a novelty car?
Even though Consumer Reports is the perennial BITOG whipping boy, their conclusion about the car, as you correctly point out, isn't much different from that of any other mainstream review.
If they gave it a positive review, I'm sure some people would claim that it's because they're part of a vast Communist conspiracy designed to undermine oil companies.
As for the markup, Edmunds reported a dealer asking for $20K
http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/07/chevrolet-dealer-want-a-volt-thatll-be-an-extra-20k.html
Kestas
Staff member
If you've followed the development of the Volt over the years and its expectations, you'll find that this is a great idea once the breakthrough in battery technology occurs. It hasn't yet happened. We've been waiting for about 15 years for this technology to develop. We're still waiting.
It looks like GM mapped a fishbone diagram for the Volt program where GM seriously thought this breakthrough would occur toward the end of Volt's development. The problem is you can't mandate innovation.
It looks like GM mapped a fishbone diagram for the Volt program where GM seriously thought this breakthrough would occur toward the end of Volt's development. The problem is you can't mandate innovation.
Originally Posted By: powayroger
Electric vehicles are a joke, if you think about it. It’s the illusion that you’re not using gas. Think about it-You need a power plant to make the electric energy, so that means, coal, natural gas, nuclear as the primary source. So in most cases, unless it’s solar or wind or geothermal, as an example (But then to built and make those plants you probably had to rely on a plant that use the dirty fuel), you’re still polluting.
Electric plants would love it if we could even out our demand. There are places where they pump water uphill into dams overnight then release it through turbines the next day for peak power load. Then they won't need their expensive, usually natural gas fired, peaker plants.
Stuff like peak power metering (and discounts/ carrots & sticks) would let one usefully and cheaply charge their Volt at 3 am. But of course a delay timer on a clothes dryer can do the same thing for 1/1000 the price.
Electric vehicles are a joke, if you think about it. It’s the illusion that you’re not using gas. Think about it-You need a power plant to make the electric energy, so that means, coal, natural gas, nuclear as the primary source. So in most cases, unless it’s solar or wind or geothermal, as an example (But then to built and make those plants you probably had to rely on a plant that use the dirty fuel), you’re still polluting.
Electric plants would love it if we could even out our demand. There are places where they pump water uphill into dams overnight then release it through turbines the next day for peak power load. Then they won't need their expensive, usually natural gas fired, peaker plants.
Stuff like peak power metering (and discounts/ carrots & sticks) would let one usefully and cheaply charge their Volt at 3 am. But of course a delay timer on a clothes dryer can do the same thing for 1/1000 the price.
Did CR question the Honda FCX Clarity?
No matter what, you are still burning natural gas.
But the FCX Clarity runs on hydrogen. It's only the most abundant element in the universe...
But here on Earth hydrogen is found combined with an oxygen molecule or a carbon molecule. The hydrogen for the FCX Clarity is made from natural gas. Wouldn't it be quicker, cheaper, and easier to just make an engine specifically to run on clean 130 octane natural gas?
But the FCX Clarity only produces water for emissions
So where does the carbon go when they crack it from the hydrogen molecule in the natural gas? My guess, it mixes with oxygen and makes CO2
OH NOES!!!!
So, the way I look at the Leaf, Volt, and Clarity is not as "final solutions" They are pretty freakin' terrible for that. No. I see them as the first step in what may be a long journey.
No matter what, you are still burning natural gas.
But the FCX Clarity runs on hydrogen. It's only the most abundant element in the universe...
But here on Earth hydrogen is found combined with an oxygen molecule or a carbon molecule. The hydrogen for the FCX Clarity is made from natural gas. Wouldn't it be quicker, cheaper, and easier to just make an engine specifically to run on clean 130 octane natural gas?
But the FCX Clarity only produces water for emissions
So where does the carbon go when they crack it from the hydrogen molecule in the natural gas? My guess, it mixes with oxygen and makes CO2
So, the way I look at the Leaf, Volt, and Clarity is not as "final solutions" They are pretty freakin' terrible for that. No. I see them as the first step in what may be a long journey.
I can see an anti-GM and domestic and pro-Japanese slant in that CR article. Of course the Volt doesn't make sense for all drivers or really make economic sense at the current time, but that's not anything new and doesn't need to be the whole focus.
- Status
Similar threads
