Volt rated at 93 MPGe ... and 37 mpg ... and 60 mpg

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

No you aren't. I think you're confusing a tax credit with a tax rebate. If you buy a Volt, all that happens is you get $7500 knocked off your taxes. It doesn't mean you get a check in the mail for $7500 or that $7500 is knocked off the MSRP.

Taxation is theft by definition, simply by knowing you can not refuse to pay your taxes without being coerced into doing so.

Tax credits are simply incentives stating I will not take $7500 of your money if you buy this car.

[Number 3]

Ok, tax credits or rebates or illegal taxation aside, I didn't see anyone on here bitching about the $2,500 Toyota Priussss got in tax incentives. Your U.S. tax dollars incentivized a foriegn national companies product. I didn't see one peep on the $1.5 Billion (with a B) DOE loan Nissan got for the Leaf, again, paying for a foreign national company's R&D.

So please make sure that you separate your dislike of the use of government funds from the technological masterpiece the Volt is.

Look there are two ways to "motivate" the populis to do what is right. A) reward the behaviour you want or B) penalize the behaviour you don't want.

If you talk about raising gas taxes such that gas is $5 or $6 per gallon whch would make the Volt an immediate financial winner, you will hear all about how this disadvantages the less well off. So you won't ever get to plan B.

Now if you wait until the price of gas naturally gets that high to make it economically viable for any automaker to put EVs or EREVs into production, it's too late.

This is the governemnt supporting technology development.

As I understand it, in Japan for example, the government pays for all technology development. The companies only have to pay it back if the technology goes into production. So the OEM really has no downside risk. So you may not like it, but this at least gives GM a shot at making the car economically viable for them and for the customer.

So the question is do you think this technology needs to be developed? What should the first step be? and does the government have any role that process? Especially when at $3 or less per gallon full size trucks and SUVs remain very popular.

It's a chicken and egg question. Will batteries get cheap enough if no one develops and produces them and if there is no viable economic need for the batteries then why would anyone bother to produce them.

[mickss]

People get a tax break for buying a fuel efficient vehicles and they also get taxed for buying a gas guzzler. If any of these taxes in anyway help us to be less dependent on foreign oil then I`m good with it, let the oil producing Arab counties (OPEC) eat sand and wash it down with the unsold surplus oil.

[King Sun]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

I
And again, since when has the first generation of any technology ever been cheap? When flat screen LCD TVs first hit the market, I said the same thing you're saying right now, there's no point in paying a ton of money for that when the TVs we have right now work fine. A couple years later and I have a flat screen LCD TV sitting right here in this room.

this goes back to my o.g post and what some people in the thread don't understand. Technology gets cheaper with production and revisions and your examples with the flat screens are dead on. the first hdtv was still big ass tube tv's but the picture quality was superb at the time and over time the tv's got smaller and you don't have to spend thousands of dollars to even have the top of the line flat screen now in days. Hell they are making flat screens now with the depth of an folder now but the point is this kind of tech needs to be out of the road for the long term r&d to make the tech better. The volt wasn't meant to be the most fuel efficient car its meant to use alternate energy in the most efficient way and maybe if the car sells decently the tech will get cheaper and better and everyone would be happy. But seriously some of you guys just need to step away from your political parties views and look at the bigger picture. I know some of you guys don't want to give up your v8's maybe this could keep them in the market a little bit longer. think about it.

[mickss]

This is what we as nation can look forward to.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/op...6friedman.html

I stated in a earlier post about our transition from the horse and buggy to the automobile and the misconception and reluctance of those to give up their horse and buggy for the new technology. If we don`t commit ourselves to alternative energy sources we will be left behind riding our horses while the Chinese pass us in their electric flash cars.

We as country will be trying to sell horses to the world while the Chinese are selling those electric flash cars.

Edit; I`m also including this link to a thread I posted concerning a plan for electric vehicles.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=118241

[King Sun]

Originally Posted by mickss

This is what we as nation can look forward to.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/op...6friedman.html

I stated in a earlier post about our transition from the horse and buggy to the automobile and the misconception and reluctance of those to give up their horse and buggy for the new technology. If we don`t commit ourselves to alternative energy sources we will be left behind riding our horses while the Chinese pass us in their electric flash cars.

We as country will be trying to sell horses to the world while the Chinese are selling those electric flash cars.

Edit; I`m also including this link to a thread I posted concerning a plan for electric vehicles.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=118241

It sill boggles me to this day especially in a state like fl why we still don't have high speed rails. Like I said some people don't want electric cars for a more educated opinion reason ( raising cost of electicity) but theres a lot more people that think they won't be able to have their muscle cars anymore if the tech gets more popular or sides with their political influence but we should all agree we need more than one source of energy. Hell they even have hydrogen cars now.

[spurscar]

I love the Volt and Prius and such. I hope they gut the demand for oil.

Then gas prices will drop for my SS.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Ok, tax credits or rebates or illegal taxation aside, I didn't see anyone on here bitching about the $2,500 Toyota Priussss got in tax incentives. Your U.S. tax dollars incentivized a foriegn national companies product. I didn't see one peep on the $1.5 Billion (with a B) DOE loan Nissan got for the Leaf, again, paying for a foreign national company's R&D.

So please make sure that you separate your dislike of the use of government funds from the technological masterpiece the Volt is.

Well, no one has mentioned the Prius because this thread is about the Volt. Plus, I'm very consistent when it comes to economics; the government should stay out of the way of everything that is related to economics.

Look there are two ways to "motivate" the populis to do what is right. A) reward the behaviour you want or B) penalize the behaviour you don't want.

If you talk about raising gas taxes such that gas is $5 or $6 per gallon whch would make the Volt an immediate financial winner, you will hear all about how this disadvantages the less well off. So you won't ever get to plan B.

Now if you wait until the price of gas naturally gets that high to make it economically viable for any automaker to put EVs or EREVs into production, it's too late.

This is the governemnt supporting technology development.

The problem here is the populace is many times more efficient at choosing what the next economic step is to be than the government ever could dream to be. The fact is that there is no legitimate reason for us to want EVs, especially no reason for to be penalizing for choosing a vehicle we want. I'm sorry but why would it be "too late?" Was the automobile, TV, radio, electric bulb, all "too late?"

As I understand it, in Japan for example, the government pays for all technology development. The companies only have to pay it back if the technology goes into production. So the OEM really has no downside risk. So you may not like it, but this at least gives GM a shot at making the car economically viable for them and for the customer.

As I understand it, Japan's public debt is nearly 200% of their GDP? You're definitely implying here that we should follow in the footsteps of Japan. You have a skewed definition of "economically viable." If it was economically viable to begin with, the government would not be in the equation at all. Risk is just as necessary as profits in the capitalist system, considering if there was no risk then there would be no caution when investing and displace valuable resources. Plus, how do you think the Central Bank of Japan funds these incentives? For every government expenditure there must be a tax to fund it, i.e. they recklessly use private wealth.

So the question is do you think this technology needs to be developed? What should the first step be? and does the government have any role that process? Especially when at $3 or less per gallon full size trucks and SUVs remain very popular.

Not yet, leave that to the entrepreneur when the time comes, absolutely not, to answer your questions, respectively.

It's a chicken and egg question. Will batteries get cheap enough if no one develops and produces them and if there is no viable economic need for the batteries then why would anyone bother to produce them.

The broad view of government intervention in this scenario is simply that, too broad. Why stop at batteries? Don't you want to get a head start on nuclear-powered cars? I mean, because trade and economic development is a fixed-pie of which one can only benefit at the expense of another? Where have I heard this before... oh yeah, mercantilism.

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

All these arguments make me want a VOLT..or a Cadillac version that much more.... Thanx GM

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

If you haven't heard people talking positively about the Volt outside of this thread then you simply haven't been paying attention.

And again, since when has the first generation of any technology ever been cheap? When flat screen LCD TVs first hit the market, I said the same thing you're saying right now, there's no point in paying a ton of money for that when the TVs we have right now work fine. A couple years later and I have a flat screen LCD TV sitting right here in this room.

Apparently again you haven't been paying attention. Just yesterday an article went out about GM searching for ways to up production of the Volt due to the fact that 240,000 people have expressed interest in the car. Granted not all 240,000 people are going to buy the car (obviously), but there IS demand for a car of this type.

Does it make economic sense for you? No. It doesn't even make sense for me to get a Volt. But just because it doesn't make sense for us doesn't mean that applies for everyone.

Flat screens were not expensive to make when they first came out. They were, however, in very high demand. Electronics are a bad example because the price has more to do with who has the technology and how much they can get for it than how much it costs to make. Something like an engine, or a battery does not follow the same path. With all the technology, modern production techniques, etc., why does a car cost more every year? Because there are significant quantities of raw materials, machine time, labor etc. that will NEVER go away that ultimately determine the price.

Look, I am not bashing the Volt in any way, I think it is by far the best of all the alternative fuel vehicles out there. The leaf is a gimmick, and the prius is nowhere near as capable. Plus I hope it does well for GM's sake. However, people keep talking about the batteries getting lighter, cheaper, etc., it will never happen. I sure hope I am wrong about that, but physics are a bitch and I just don't see it from what I know. I will be happy to eat my words if I am wrong, because I think it would spell a brighter future for all of us, but I think an electric car that costs anywhere near what today's cars do (while exhibiting similar performance) will never happen no matter how many they make.

[chain777]

Here's an interesting bit about the European version of the Volt to confuse the debate about the gas engine providing direct power:

"The 2011 Chevrolet Volt made major media waves when it was first revealed that its engine could power the drive wheels independently under certain circumstances. According to a report from HeadlineAuto in the UK, though, General Motors' European division is actually considering adding a switch for the Opel Ampera (the Volt's more attractive European cousin) that would allow the driver to control how the drivetrain operates."


http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/08/r...-to-gas-power/

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by chain777

Here's an interesting bit about the European version of the Volt to confuse the debate about the gas engine providing direct power:

"The 2011 Chevrolet Volt made major media waves when it was first revealed that its engine could power the drive wheels independently under certain circumstances. According to a report from HeadlineAuto in the UK, though, General Motors' European division is actually considering adding a switch for the Opel Ampera (the Volt's more attractive European cousin) that would allow the driver to control how the drivetrain operates."


http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/08/r...-to-gas-power/

GM has described the powertrain unit to have "continuously variable" capabilities. However they've found the most efficient operating parameters and have programed the Volt as such. If Europe wan't to provide a switch... It doesn't change the way the car will operate...it'll just use a less efficient operating pattern.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by rayhawk

However, people keep talking about the batteries getting lighter, cheaper, etc., it will never happen. I sure hope I am wrong about that, but physics are a bitch and I just don't see it from what I know. I will be happy to eat my words if I am wrong, because I think it would spell a brighter future for all of us, but I think an electric car that costs anywhere near what today's cars do (while exhibiting similar performance) will never happen no matter how many they make.

Batteries today have become a fraction of the size of their ancestors while still holding multiple times the charge. Try and find a picture of the EV-1s battery pack side-by-side with the Volts....the difference is astounding.

Still, these batteries are in incredibly high demand, and production output is limited -- which is one of the primary reasons they can't sell many more than 10,000 units the first year. As more are produced, and the technology becomes commonplace (more manufacturers use them), price will go down. Early in Volt development, the price of the battery was quoted at nearly $1,000 per KwH. Now it's something like $850.

I agree with you that they'll never be Cruze-inexpensive...but I firmly believe they will decrease in cost to something a little easier to swallow.

[Russell James]

Here is a pic of GM's first EV, this one was even pre- EV 1. I'd say battery technology has come a long way.