Filed under: EV/Plug-in, Hybrid, Chevrolet
Why you gotta be hatin' on the Chevy Volt? Oh, it's all the hype...
Before we get into how much C-Net's Wayne Cunningham thinks the Chevy Volt will not have the E-Flex propulsion system at all but will instead be powered by hype, let's state that he does think there is a lot of value in moving away from purely gasoline-powered cars and does think GM has done good work in this field in the past. OK, now onto the hype.
With Volt sand sculptures, independent Volt-friendly forums and misplaced excitement about people outside GM driving the Volt (false, that), Cunningham is critical of how realistic a production Volt will ever be. He is of course correct that there is some ka-razy hype surrounding the Chevy Volt. If you follow cars (especially advanced technology cars), how could you not notice all this? But, as we've demonstrated time and again here on AutoblogGreen, GM is not sitting idly by and coasting on January's Volt announcement. We haven't seen drivable models appearing in our test garages yet, but if you're going to bet on a concept that will actually make it to production, you could do a lot worse than the Volt. If hype is needed to get the car out of the auto show ether and into our driveways, I'll happily suffer through it.
Cunninham also doesn't like the Volt's looks. We'll see what he has to say about the revised E-Flex concept coming to Frankfurt next month.
Gallery: Chevy Volt Concept
[Source: C-Net]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
steven 3:28PM (8/13/2007)
Where did I read it, or maybe I dreamt it... that the Volt concept was never inteneded to actually come out as a real production vehicle, but to be the underlying technology in a future products like the Saturn Vue and Aura? I admit, the GM method here is akin to "putting your mouth where your money is", but hey, what if they are able to pull it off? Heaven forbid those Prius owners might no longer have God's Own Most Holiest of Grails (try to say that rolling your Scottish R's like Tim the Enchanter). Until that time comes, we'll just put up with them being holier than the rest of us. If you don't like it, bad-mouth it. It's the American way.
Reply
kert 4:43PM (8/13/2007)
here's my source of puzzlement. why dont they have a running prototype yet ?
They have gone out of their way to claim that the battery is the only holdup. OK, fine. So the rest of the drivetrain should be ready to go ( and it really should be, AC-driven electrics are really nothing new, anno 2007 )
So, why did they not plop in another set of batteries ( maybe with a capacitor bank ), with equivalent voltage and power output, for demo purposes ? Say, just enough lead-acid in series to up the voltage and enough strings in parallel to have adequate power. That may result in reduced capacity and somewhat different weights, but its certainly possible, if you pick the correct cells.
Reply
ug 5:03PM (8/13/2007)
This is why the Volt is hyped. It's now or never for the car. Even if you aren't in it for the environmental benefits, at current rate of oil depletion, we simply don't have the luxury of 20 years to switch over to electrics. Probably much sooner than 20 years from now if we aren't all driving electric cars, we'll have been forced to abandon them for bikes and public transit.
Reply
miike127 8:22PM (8/13/2007)
Yes, they keep showing the "concept" car. But, at this stage there should be a Real Car mockup, test mule, what ever you want to call it. So, where is it???
Reply
TX CHL Instructor 8:38PM (8/13/2007)
GM owes more than it can ever pay back out of profits. It is going to have to shrink substantially to stay in business. Don't hold your breath waiting for the Volt.
Reply
gianfagna 11:12PM (8/13/2007)
what about a god-damn ELECTRIC VOLT?
Lutz really is a corrupt DINOSAUR
Reply
Schmeltz 9:03AM (8/14/2007)
What is wrong with you people??? Geezzzz, GM is trying to develop this car, is making every effort to do it right, is being as forthright as possible, trying to keep the car at a cost many people can afford, AND work out a deal with the UAW, AND trying to make consistent profits, AND keep their quality up, AND keep their others models current....and then we have people such as the above that come on websites like this and drop their useless bashes, such as:
"Lutz really is a corrupt DINOSAUR"
What do they have to do to convince you that they are trying their hardest to bring the Volt to reality? What good does a lead-acid battery mock-up do other than make the concept vehicle go 50 yards? Then you guys would bitch about GM wasting their time on that. Sure the Volt is getting a lot of coverage, as it should in my book. It is a paradigm shift vehicle. It seems no matter what GM does, they just can't win with you people. Do us all a favor and crawl back in to the hole you slithered out of in the first place.
Reply
Derek Versteegen 9:22AM (8/14/2007)
Look, if GM was "really" interested in doing it right, then they wouldn't have orphaned the EV1 years ago. Why start over with the Volt - they could just pull the plans from the EV1, save a ton of R&D and just invest in battery technology. If NASA can use a 30 year old design for a space vehicle, surely a ton of R&D can be saved by resurrecting the EV1.
Sorry, but from my perspective, the Volt is all smoke and mirrors - "hey look at us, we're trying, I promise we are". GM has done wonders in South America where e85 is the predominant fuel and thats where they actually did something right since it has afforded them a good transition here. I'd rather spend my time and money converting my 1979 Porsche 924 than support any GM electric or hybrid electric project. Honestly, I'm not sure why this site gives it so much attention (but I understand why it needs to be news, cuz without it the clean energy movement is that much more quiet).
Reply
Really! 9:49AM (8/14/2007)
One thing I have noticed about leftists and greenies (redundant?), is that they have no sense of reality whatsoever.
It takes something called "time" to produce a car.
Are any of you employees in the auto industry such that you are boldly proclaiming how far you think that GM should be in this process?
I'm pretty sure almost all such commenters were Humanities or Gender Studies majors in college.
Non-scientific leftists are the worst kind. Everything for them is about their feelings.
The Volt will be what it is when it is. In the meantime, turn off your computers and go empty your composting toilet into your "organic" garden. Take a bath while you're at it.
Bluster, noise and government regulation usually cannot hasten the advancement of science in any meaningful way.
---------------------------------------
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3028847519933351566
Reply
Lithous 9:53AM (8/14/2007)
"If NASA can use a 30 year old design for a space vehicle, surely a ton of R&D can be saved by resurrecting the EV1."
LMAO. RIGHT THIS SECOND the space shuttle is up in space with tile damage. The THING THAT MADE THE LAST SHUTTLE EXPLODE. So, maybe, just maybe, having to band aid on old design is not the way to go.
Is there something wrong with most of you? Seriously.
So why doesn't/didn't Toyota just bring back the RAV-4 electric? Oh, right. Because Toyota can't afford any mistakes, their profit levels are so low. I mean, at least Toyota has an excuse. But wait, Honda had an EV in the 1990's. They claim to be the greenest in America (therefore they care more than GM) and they didn't just bring their EV back.
It is just that easy guys. What is wrong with EVERYONE in the car industry who had an electric? Hell, there were electric cars back in the early 1900's. Let's just bring those back as is too.
Reply
Schmeltz 9:58AM (8/14/2007)
Derek:
Thanks for your comment, but I wonder why would you want them to resurrect the EV-1? I know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but c'mon? As great of a technology platform as the EV-1 was, it was just not ready for prime-time. It paved the way for many modern vehicle technologies such as regenerative braking as an example, but its range was to short, it only sat 2, and didn't look particularly stunning by most people's definition. The Volt, as a range extender EV, removes the range dilemna from the equation. This is why it garners so much attention, not just here, but in other media outlets as well.
If you want to convert your 79 Porsche, hey, knock yourself out. As for the Volt, we got to exercise some patience. I know we are the "NOW" generation, but good things take time. I would rather wait longer for something that works, rather than have something just pieced together now. Wouldn't you?
Reply
Dave 11:58AM (8/14/2007)
The Volt should be a series hybrid.
The base model should have a ~5 mile range.
Larger (AND HEAVIER AND FAR MORE EXPENSIVE) battery packs should be optional.
Reply
Derek 1:15PM (8/14/2007)
@Schmeltz
I agree with your statements about the EV1. I only bring it into light because technology could have been much farther along had it not been abandoned. I acknowledge the Volt for its range extending capabilities (by design) but I wonder why GM didn't start with what it already had and worked with it. For instance, couldn't GM been able to come to market faster with the reintroduction of the EV1 while showcasing ways to make it a hybrid? Why is it always the gas to electric mind set and not the electric complimented with gas - maybe its the reality of the industry, I don't know. Maybe bring the EV back into light would be the corporate equivalent of OJ admitting he did it.
The EV1 was something close to 3,000 lbs with 1,175 being the batteries (26). Some of the research I've done recently with some of the batteries available today are much better - for weight and power - particularly Valence batteries.
I am a person of great patience and I would rather wait for something done right too. But I just see the signs of what GM has done in the past, R&D for the SSR and HHR at the sacrifice of the well adorn Camero. At least they aren't waisting time with Hydrogen. People in the industry understand that cars that show well do not necessarily sell well. I believe GM learned that with the examples I cited earlier. So how long is one going to wait for the Volt when Honda and Toyota have solid Hybrids on the market now that have a head start on PHEV technology with after market conversion kits readily available? It just seems they are spending too much time in the media and not in the garage.
But again, I understand this, as it is good overall. But while they are talking, others are hard at work.
Thanks for having a conversation Schmeltz and not a bitch fest.
:-)
@Lithous and @Really,
I can tell your reply was based on nothing but emotion. There was nothing wrong with the EV1 - it had no band-aids to worry about. So trying to flip my statement like you did is grossly inaccurate as you compared apples to oranges. And your sarcasm shows just how one sided you are.
Before even being able to get into how an older EV could be resurrected, you immediately put me in the category of the other people that you and "Really" are bitching about. You'd rather make no points and insult people with sarcasm and stereotypes. Have your fun as you will. Take care.
Reply
Lithous 3:47PM (8/14/2007)
I think I'm going to PUKE. I love the guys who want to rip GM a new one, which *you* did, and then turn around and act like anyone else who rips in to someone is a bad guy.
"hey look at us, we're trying, I promise we are".
What do you call that statement? Being nice? Many people probably are missing family time over at GM over the Volt and you gotta bring in the "smoke and mirrors" and the "I promise we are" CRAP.
Grow a pair. If you are going to jerk to an entitiy made of people expect to something back. "Do as I say not as I do" is your motto apparently. No I don't work for GM or any car company but I'm tired of the undermining of the American autos who have many people working harder than they are getting credit.
Mirror image, baby. Live with it. You can't take but you can give it.
Reply
Lithous 3:50PM (8/14/2007)
"If you are going to jerk to an entitiy made of people expect to something back."
Should be:
If you are going to be ajerk to an entitiy made of people expect to get some back.
You are like one of those phony professional wrestlers that hit the guy with chair when the ref isn't looking and then you cry to the ref if anything remotely similar comes back your way.
Reply
Derek 6:15PM (8/14/2007)
@Lithous
You're obviously only reading what you want to read in my post. Again, you've contributed nothing to the conversation but more insults. May you rest in peace.
Reply
Lithous 7:20PM (8/14/2007)
OK, you are not very bright and/or not very truthful or understanding...
1. "There was nothing wrong with the EV1 - it had no band-aids to worry about."
Yes there were things wrong or it would have been successful. But what I really meant was to take a car from even 10 years ago nearly untouched and make it work today would be band aiding it as oppossed to a total redesign which happens often for most car models after a very short amount of time now-a-days.
2. "So trying to flip my statement like you did is grossly inaccurate as you compared apples to oranges."
I didn't state it *HAD* band aids. So I did not flip anything around, you did. I stated to make an old car work would be band aiding it. I didn't not state a "band aided car", I stated, "having to band aid", which you would have to to make it work now.
3. I added nothing to the conversation? Hmmm. I didn't call you dumb and move on. No, I told you you were because your analogy of the space shuttle was very ill timed. Extremely. Hopefully this old design doesn't send those coming home on it to RIP like you so nicely willed such things on me.
4. "And your sarcasm shows just how one sided you are."
And your comment about, "I promise" was so different?
5. "Why start over with the Volt - they could just pull the plans from the EV1, save a ton of R&D and just invest in battery technology."
Again, I stated prior, you know, when I stated nothing of use according to you, that: why doesn't Toyota just bring back the RAV4 electric or Honda's EV2 or whatever they called that thing? That is legit but you are in fact reading what you want. As you stated that is what I was doing. Another, do as I say not as I do, thing from you.
6. "Again, you've contributed nothing to the conversation but more insults. May you rest in peace."
Have you fooled anyone? Into believing a word you are writing about me (other than I was not necessarily nice, I'll give you that one).
I debunked your "space shuttle is proof theory" by showing the problem with the space shuttle.
Then I debunked your "if GM was "really" interested in doing it right" theory ("then they wouldn't have orphaned the EV1 years ago") by asking why hasn't all the others done it right with their old vehicles kept them or brought them back.
Oh, wait, I know. It is because you could buy a RAV4 and not an EV1 that is the difference. Wait, what is this, a factory EV1 drivetrain on eBay right now: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260148314716
Yea, I know you never stated the last thing but why not throw out some of the other crap that people on here are thinking about.
But thanks, I'll rest in peace. So kind of you to have me in your thoughts.
Reply
james duffy 8:31AM (8/19/2007)
There is an old saying, that if you go to bed with the devil you'll likely wake up in hell. So the auto companies are sleeping with the gasoline companies and do you think for one second the auto companies would ruffle the feathers of the gas companies??? If electric cars ruled, our whole economy would have to change. It seems conversion kits and their ease of installation is the answer.
Reply
Chris Reeves 10:47PM (8/23/2007)
Of the "right wing" people who knock the EV1, how many of you actually drove one. Are your statements that it wasn't ready based on first hand knowledge or the spoon fed spin of GM? I'm a "right wing" EV1 driver. I had the car for six years and the only reason I don't have it now is the GM wouldn't sell it to me.
Reply
web hosting 8:14AM (4/19/2008)
Titan of the Year for best Open Source project, PC-Welt Editorial Staff Award 2005
Best Internet Tool, PC-Welt Readers Choice Award 2005
Innovation of the Year in the software category, by PC Professionell 2004/2005
Reply