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

[Stew]

The volt is a start, BUT with cars like the new Hynundai Elantra, Fiesta, and 2012 Focus, and even Chevy's own Cruze which will get you 40 MPG for half the money or less.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by GTAHVIT

haven't we already had this bebate.... We can't answer your question...

obvioulsy the Prius is a hit... Hybrids are a hit. the green movement is going strong.... Hell you can get a hybrid tahoe...

So there are indicators, but the volt and the leaf require a completely different mind set... we don't know if they will be successful. and the politicians have to look like they care so they offer incentives to buy cars like the leaf and volt becasue it currently aligns with their political position....

other than that I don't know why they have to incentivise a car that should be in demand....

you've made it pretty clear that you think these cars a gonna flop. Time will tell.

Unfortunately the bold is the answer to the question, but, and I know I'm nitpicking here, it's Congress that sets tax laws.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Unfortunately the bold is the answer to the question, but, and I know I'm nitpicking here, it's Congress that sets tax laws.

yep, poor use of the word "feds" I'll change it.

[el ess A]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-0...es-expire.html

The Prius hybrid has spearheaded sales growth for Toyota Motor Corp. in Japan for more than a year, helped by government subsidies. The model will likely bear the brunt of plunging demand as the support ends.

“A collapse in sales is unavoidable,” said Hiromi Inoue, the new-car sales chief for Tokyo Toyopet Motor Sales Co. “The daily pace of orders for the Prius is already dropping. We are bracing ourselves for the coming crisis.”

The number of customers signing up to buy a Prius at Tokyo Toyopet’s 66 showrooms has dropped to about eight a day from 20 in June, Inoue said. Industrywide, car sales in Japan are expected to plunge 23 percent in the six months beginning in October from a year earlier, according to the Japan Automobile Dealers Association.

Apparently the Japenese aren't quite convinced the Prius can fly out the door without government help, either.

I think PART of the reason of wariness of the consumer to drop big bucks on this technology is that GM, or government, or the tree huggers who want you to buy one is NOT doing a very good job on educating the consumer about electric or electric hybrids. A lot of people don't understand it.

Have all the EV cars you want, just don't MAKE me buy one if I want personal transportation. As long as they make a gas-burning, non-electric driven Camaro, I'll be just fine.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by el ess X

Have all the EV cars you want, just don't MAKE me buy one if I want personal transportation. As long as they make a gas-burning, non-electric driven Camaro, I'll be just fine.

Then don't! I don't understand why some of you are constantly trying to talk down the car if you're not even interested in it. If you don't like the car then don't buy it, simple as that. Nobody's holding a gun to your held and trying to get you to buy the car.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by 1bad65

Well yes, that's an obvious observation.

I still am waiting for someone to answer my question: if people really want these cars, why does the Gov't have to pay people to buy them?

They have to do it because gas prices are too low to make the cars worth while. So they can either raise the price of gas, or effectively lower the price of efficient cars. Or ignore the consumption issue all together.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by el ess X

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-0...es-expire.html



Apparently the Japenese aren't quite convinced the Prius can fly out the door without government help, either.

I think PART of the reason of wariness of the consumer to drop big bucks on this technology is that GM, or government, or the tree huggers who want you to buy one is NOT doing a very good job on educating the consumer about electric or electric hybrids. A lot of people don't understand it.

Have all the EV cars you want, just don't MAKE me buy one if I want personal transportation. As long as they make a gas-burning, non-electric driven Camaro, I'll be just fine.

The fact is that there is no real reason to buy an EV (or EREV or Hybrid or whatever it is) at this time; it's simply to early for it be economically viable. However, the market is there for a relatively larger group of niche owners to gradually bring the price of the cars down, thus getting the car more affordable as time goes on. Plus, I'm sure there will be oil shocks sometime in the near future to help the cause of EVs even more.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

They have to do it because gas prices are too low to make the cars worth while. So they can either raise the price of gas, or effectively lower the price of efficient cars. Or ignore the consumption issue all together.

You're sort of missing the point of 1bad65 and others are saying. They're essentially saying there is no economical reason for them to offer incentives on anything, considering the whole point is to influence buyers to chose a certain product because they think you should buy the subsidized product over its alternatives.

[1bad65]

Originally Posted by a_Username

You're sort of missing the point of 1bad65 and others are saying. They're essentially saying there is no economical reason for them to offer incentives on anything, considering the whole point is to influence buyers to chose a certain product because they think you should buy the subsidized product over its alternatives.

Correct

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Then don't! I don't understand why some of you are constantly trying to talk down the car if you're not even interested in it. If you don't like the car then don't buy it, simple as that. Nobody's holding a gun to your held and trying to get you to buy the car.

That sounds all fine and good, but I'm still being forced to pay for other people to buy them.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by 1bad65

That sounds all fine and good, but I'm still being forced to pay for other people to buy them.

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.

[el ess A]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Then don't! I don't understand why some of you are constantly trying to talk down the car if you're not even interested in it. If you don't like the car then don't buy it, simple as that. Nobody's holding a gun to your held and trying to get you to buy the car.

So your answer is "if you don't like it, shut up"...sounds like a majority political party's rhetoric. I don't think it will be uber successful because it's not economically smart to do so at the moment. The "defense" of an economically disadvantaged vehicle seems rather backwards to me.

I simply don't want GM to get damaged on technology that IMO isn't ready to be economically feasible to stand by itself without crutches. What if the Volt DOES flop? I don't see any contingency plans for that. GM's had success with the Camaro and Equinox, but with the Volt, I'm not seeing people talking about them positively outside of this thread. I'm simply not. The thing I've heard most often from people is "$41K for that?"...what signal does that send?

Truthfully, when you buy gas, or milk, or anything like that, does COST ever figure into it? At all? All other things being equal, to most consumers, PRICE IS KING! You can't get people to buy something they don't really want. You only see subsidies when people aren't demanding a product. If people were falling all over themselves to get the Volt/Leaf/et al, then subsidies would NOT be part of the equation.

And it's true that nobody's making me buy the car...YET. But if you get an opinion, so do I. You may disagree with it, but it's still my opinion.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by el ess X

So your answer is "if you don't like it, shut up"...sounds like a majority political party's rhetoric. I don't think it will be uber successful because it's not economically smart to do so at the moment. The "defense" of an economically disadvantaged vehicle seems rather backwards to me.

I simply don't want GM to get damaged on technology that IMO isn't ready to be economically feasible to stand by itself without crutches. What if the Volt DOES flop? I don't see any contingency plans for that. GM's had success with the Camaro and Equinox, but with the Volt, I'm not seeing people talking about them positively outside of this thread. I'm simply not. The thing I've heard most often from people is "$41K for that?"...what signal does that send?

Truthfully, when you buy gas, or milk, or anything like that, does COST ever figure into it? At all? All other things being equal, to most consumers, PRICE IS KING! You can't get people to buy something they don't really want. You only see subsidies when people aren't demanding a product. If people were falling all over themselves to get the Volt/Leaf/et al, then subsidies would NOT be part of the equation.

And it's true that nobody's making me buy the car...YET. But if you get an opinion, so do I. You may disagree with it, but it's still my opinion.

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.

[1bad65]

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.

So do you think it's fair that some Americans receive Gov't help purchasing a car while others do not simply based on the choice of car being purchased?

[bigearl]

Originally Posted by a_Username

The fact is that there is no real reason to buy an EV (or EREV or Hybrid or whatever it is) at this time; it's simply to early for it be economically viable. However, the market is there for a relatively larger group of niche owners to gradually bring the price of the cars down, thus getting the car more affordable as time goes on. Plus, I'm sure there will be oil shocks sometime in the near future to help the cause of EVs even more.

My understanding of some of the bigger reasons the Gov't stepped in to offer a rebate are as follows:

Some "experts" have put electric vehicle use vs technology/battery/etc development in terms of a tipping point calculation. They believe the technology will come when there is evidence of strong enough demand. The Gov't believes it's in the best interest to get this invention kickstarted so they are assisting in getting to that tipping point faster. This is not an Obama thing, it's part of a larger package signed by Bush to foster tech growth. It's got a sunset provision as does every bill that offers a taxcut made in the last 12 years.

GM told the Gov't, as did others, that they are close to making cars like this a reality but they need help because it's just too much R&D to be profitable, so the Gov't looked at that as a factor and said we won't front you money up front for R&D which is an unfair trade advantage (this is when this started-not during the bailout, if you want to debate me don't go there because this predates the bailout), but we'll put out money on the back end to help people buy your tech which will help defray your costs in developing Volt 1.0.

The technology in the Prius and other hybrids, and the technology in pure ev's, is really not what GM is putting together. GM is putting together a pretty revolutionary project to attempt to address the shortcomings of American infrastructure for electric. Basically GM said, "we want to build an EV, but that won't work in America so build me the closest thing to an EV you can that will work here". I look at it as America paying $7500 each for someone having to develop a work-around for the post ww2 city planning (or lack thereof) that occured.