AutoblogGreen

I love the Tesla, but they didn't even really build the car, not production build anyway. I appreciate that they put it together, and I think the reason GM is building the Volt is because of the Tesla's success.

The Volt will change the world, in my opinion.

Reply

I think that the public wants an affordable EV very badly and wants one now given oil / gas prices are increasing daily. GM seems to be the closest to Mass Pro at this time, so if there is even the slightest hint that the program may be pushed out, canceled or the pice raised out of the affordable range there is a lot of dissappointment from the public that follows the intro of EV's.

Reply

The Tesla will likely loose much of it's appeal when one burns up. Hundreds of pounds of conventional lithium-ion batteries are just too dangerous for a production vehicle. The Volt will use newer, safer batteries -- A123 et. al.

Reply

Sam, the paradox is really very simple. The guy who buys a Ferrari is buying into the history, the performance, the appearance etc. and is an "enthusiast". Cars are an emotional thing to him and he can overlook mechanical issues because, for him, they are often opportunities to work on the car. A friend of mine in PA buys kit cars from people who started them and lost interest - he finishes them and sells them at a substantial profit.

The "consumer" who buys your run-of-the-mill sedan is buying transportation. He has as much emotional attachment to it as his refrigerator. He buys a soul-less Toyota, lives in the socialist republic of Kalifornia and drinks latte while Kim-san works on his car.

Reply

Wow, Whopper...that was harsh.

Actually as a "consumer" I value my experience just as much as the "enthusiast". Do I really want a $125,000 exotic to drive from point A to point B in overly congested, poorly maintained roads, amongst other drivers whose idea of performance driving means tailgating and lane changing continually? No, I'd rather spend $15,000 to drive an appliance and use my other $110,000 to enjoy life at point A or B (which may/may not include latte's)! I don't have to wait for "Kim-san" to work on my car, my Toyota appliance doesn't go into the shop; definitely not as much as the neighbors Corvette. It spends more hours in the shop than it drives in a performance mode beyond my Toyota's capability (speed limits and other traffic laws normally guarantee this).

Reply

This is mostly about expectations.

A typical Tesla owner likely treats the car as a toy. Show it off at track day; take it out to run some errands on a sunny afternoon. You'll rarely - if ever - see a Tesla slogging its owner to work in rainy stop-and-go traffic.

A presumably typical Volt owner might likely own no other vehicle. The car will need to work rain or shine; summer or winter. It will take kids to school and families to the beach. The cup holder will be used for morning coffee; stale french fries will hide under the seats. If they build it, someday you'll be behind a Volt, also stuck in rush hour traffic.

These are two totally different ownership experiences - and with them come two totally different set of expectations from their manufacturers. Small company quirks won't spoil the Tesla experience. Anything less than a first-class, large company effort will likely kill the Volt before a potential owner ever gets to see one.

Reply

Hey jimmy, go over to youtube and type in "car fire".

15,600 hits, so there's plenty of fire potential in gasoline powered cars too. I'll bet the Tesla is considerably less likely to catch fire than the car you're driving right now.

Reply

Electricity: Fuel of the Future
Source: Stanford Daily
[May 08, 2008]

SYNOPSIS: Not only does electricity meet the needs of the transportation sector, it triumphs over both biofuels and gasoline in all relevant metrics.

http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=18193&url=http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/5/8/positiveSustainabilityElectricityFuelOfTheFuture

Reply

The kind of people that can afford a supercar (e.g. a Tesla) typically own several conventional vehicles as well. They don't depend on their shiny new toy as a daily driver. If they turn out to be reliable and practical, they might well decide to make it just that, but they can afford to take the risk that it won't be.

By contrast, Joe Average does depend on his wheels, they're not just a plaything. So, he's willing to trade performance and snob appeal for reliability. In the case of the GM Volt, a lot of people remember the EV-1 project and won't believe the hype until the Volt actually hits showrooms.

Reply

While you may be right that Tesla owners are more forgiving to their maker than Volt folk will be towards GM, I think that stems purely from a "little engine that could" scenario.

For years, GM has been the placard for inefficent, shadily built, and earth-killing machines. Their love affair with SUV's made them blind to the fact that IF GIVEN THE CHOICE the American auto-buyer would consider a well-designed frugal go-getter.

Tesla's stance has always seemed to be a product of frustration within this industry. Frustration with the fact that WE DO posess the technological ingenuity to remove oil and gasoline from our transportation equation. Frustration with the fact that WE CAN build a near-zero emissions vehicle and be environmentally responsible while looking good doing it.

Tesla, in effect, dons the visage of a philanthropic pioneer. GM on the other hand... will continue being seen as the lazy, greedy, old-world company hell bent on profits and margins instead of the betterment of mankind... who only just now sees fit to jump onto the eco-conscious bandwagon.

Of course an eco-car from such a company would fall under increased scrutiny. What does GM know being a company who, for the last thirty years, got %30 overall less mileage than Honda, a racing company?

Reply

I actually expect a lot of Tesla owners use their car as a daily driver for a couple reasons:

1) It's the most unique out of their vehicle collection.
2) Giving the finger to OPEC.

Reply

Dan, I agree with your explanation. However I think the idea that US consumers have not been "given the choice" of frugal cars is just wrong. We have had fuel efficient cars available for many years, due to low gas prices most buyers choose larger vehicles. Honda for example, has had 10 years of ever increasing record sales and profits, and the Ridgeline is only 3 years old. They have always offered frugal cars and made a ton of money doing it. GM became a truck company due to a short sighted pursuit of higher profits WITHOUT investing in cars for the future. Hopefully they have learned from their mistakes. It just takes a long time to turn around a big ship. If E-Flex is successful they will be in better shape going forward if not, there will be a lot of people feeling the pain.

Reply

Dan:
The 430HP corvette gets 16/26mpg. The 240HP S2000 gets 18/25mpg. What can Honda teach GM about mpg again? And GM has won the GT1 (highest production-based) class at Le Mans 4 out of the last 5 years. Which of them is a racing company?

I don't really judge the two companies by different standards. I don't hope for either to fail. But just as I know GM has a tough road ahead of them, I know Tesla does too. I don't expect this transmission debacle to be the last problem we hear of with the Tesla Roadster.

And despite the high price, I don't see how they can make money overall (not just an operating profit but an actual one) on the Roadster. They have to go to the Whitestar for that, and Whitestar is in deep trouble because battery technology isn't there yet. The Tesla Roadster is a clone of literally the least practical car on the road (Lotus Elise) with a money-is-no-object battery pack and yet it still has only a moderate range. There's currently no way to get to affordability with EVs, and that hurts Tesla a lot. It not only reduces their revenue, but it makes it tougher to amortize the overhead of their store(s) and repair centers throughout the country.

I'm glad companies are investing in EV development, but Tesla is the example that shows that EVs are not really here yet for most people. Because of this, I think companies should be concentrating on neighborhood EVs (glorified golf carts). There are a lot of people who shuttle around their neighborhood to places, and the savings in running costs mean people are eager to purchase these. And they're easy to charge without rewiring your garage.

Reply

Something important to remember with GM. They have a history with EV's and its not a good one (EV1). So alot of people are waiting for them to use the Volt and do something terrible / damaging to the EV cause. They are being held to a higher level and they should be. Personally I think the execs there have seen the light and the Volt is for real (not a political excercise), which is different than when the EV1 was around. Just my $0.02

Reply

I find that "Kim-san" comment a tad racist and also misinformed. Kim is a Korean surname where as the title "san" is Japanese.

Reply

"There's currently no way to get to affordability with EVs"

In the short term, I agree, but in the long term, I disagree completely. You could have said the same thing about big screen TVs when they were at $10,000, or with VCRs when they cost $1500, or with cell phones when they were $500. Or with computers when they were $1,000,000.

The way to make affordable EVs is exactly the same process that made all those other products affordable. Sell a small number of first generation product at outrageous prices to those who will buy it regardless of the cost. That's where Tesla is now.

Then, make each successive generation of the product a little less expensive by refining the design, improving the production process, and increasing the production volume. It will take at least three generations, maybe five or more, but over time the product will become more and more affordable until it becomes mainstream. Yes, profits might be slim to none in the first stages, but the important thing is to keep going. That's why GM killed the EV1, the path to profit was too long for them, especially when they had huge short term profits available with big SUVs.

Certainly NEVs can continue their path in parallel. My only problem with them is that they condition people to expect that electric cars can never be more than that. That's why Tesla is important; they showed how false that myth is.

Reply

Good comments today, I suppose most of the points are covered. Again hope to see both of these vehicles on the road very soon.

Reply

Doug, cool your sinsabilities. If I was talking about a BMW I'd say Hans was working on it, a Fiat it would, of course, be Tony. Kim may be commonly a Korean surname, but I worked with a guy from Japan whose name was Kim Sukada. Not sure what "Kim" may have been a nickname of some kind.

Rob, you made my point. An enthusiast makes the sacrifice and drives the exotic because he enjoys the drive. A collector covers it with a tarp and waits for the market to pump up the price before he sells. Your $15K sedan is transportation from A to B. Do you "enjoy" the driving experience or is it just a means to get from A to B? Do you wash and wax your car (enthusiast) or take it through a drive-thru car wash (consumer)?

Reply

BlackbirdHighway, Go to your favorite video search engine and look for "lithium battery fire".. you'll see lots of reasons why a vehicle should use a safe battery. As for my current vehicles, biodiesel isn't very flammable at all, and ethanol is less flammable than gasoline at normal temps.

Reply