Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    9:13 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: Car Talk > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Is the Volt dead? Back to Topics
Shockjock1961

Champion Author
Illinois

Posts:23,350
Points:2,681,465
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jul 6, 2013 3:49:40 PM

As the Volt sales number drops below both the Tesla Model S and the Nissan Leaf while continuing to loose even money for GM, is it proving itself to be a dead end product?
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 28, 2014 1:19:05 PM

"Oh, did someone "hate" on your whiteboard? Or did someone suggest that there's some inconsistency in your zeal for prosecuting certain crimes against GasBuddy and ignoring others?"

No zeal involved in politely asking somebody to follow the forum guidelines that they might not have known about. The zeal in prosecution (persecution?), OTOH, came from somebody trying to 'fight somebody else's fight' (not sure why it was necessary, but I guess haters gonna hate).

Too much drama...
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 1:11:54 PM

Weaslespit,

Oh, did someone "hate" on your whiteboard? Or did someone suggest that there's some inconsistency in your zeal for prosecuting certain crimes against GasBuddy and ignoring others?
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,350
Points:2,681,465
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:55:08 PM

And GM Zealots and shills are going to spin... ;)
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:44:25 PM

"Only in the Bizarro world of the GM FanBoi, where facts are "hate," is history "basless conjecture.""

Haters gonna hate. Just look at my whiteboard ;) All because I politely asked a newbie poster to not bump old/inactive topics...

SMH
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:39:41 PM

Weaslespit: "More baseless conjecture. Par for the course!"

Only in the Bizarro world of the GM FanBoi, where facts are "hate," is history "basless conjecture."
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:20:29 PM

"As did all of detfan's... but you didn't seem to mind his rosy assertions, which universally favored GM, all that much. Strange, that."

More baseless conjecture. Par for the course!
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:16:57 PM

SoylentGrain: "Your constant claims of profit and loss come directly out of your keister."

Weaslespit: "As do most of charlie's assertions."

As did all of detfan's... but you didn't seem to mind his rosy assertions, which universally favored GM, all that much. Strange, that.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:14:46 PM

SoylentGrain: "What it actually costs GM to produce a car is information GM would highly guard."

It would surprise me to learn that GM lost money on the Corvette. It wouldn't surprise me much, mind you. I mean, look at the history of GM.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 11:28:03 AM

"That award goes detfan's "GM, The Leader in Alternative Propulsion Solutions" which started out as complete nonsense and died when detfan gave up his defense of the indefensible."

A lesson you appear to have yet to learn...

"Your constant claims of profit and loss come directly out of your keister."

As do most of charlie's assertions. All we can do is show him his error - we can't make him accept the reality of them.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,095
Points:19,920
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:49:13 AM

.

[Edited by: SoylentGrain at 8/27/2014 10:50:43 AM EST]
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,095
Points:19,920
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:43:25 AM

"The Corvette is a low-volume, high-margin product that is developed and produced appropriately."

What it actually costs GM to produce a car is information GM would highly guard. Your constant claims of profit and loss come directly out of your keister. With the exception of a few internal employees, very few people know how GM or any other car company, for that matter, accounts for cost of production.

The real answer is you don't know. It's a pointless exercise to speculate or guess.

Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,350
Points:2,681,465
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:42:50 AM

"This thread has to take the award for containing the most absolute nonsense posted in a single "discussion""

The comparison of the Corvette to a Volt being one of the biggest offenders...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,350
Points:2,681,465
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:41:22 AM

"The Corvette is a low-volume, high-margin product that is developed and produced appropriately"

Wow, anybody who compares the Corvette to a the Volt as a measure of success has no conception of the meaning of an apples to oranges comparison...
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:11:52 AM

rkt_wgn: "Your are totally wrong on prices, and mileage. I will try one last time..."

Do you promise?

"... to explain to you what I paid for one of the cars."

Between charity from the taxpayers and desperation givebacks from GM, you didn't pay MSRP. You didn't pay anywhere near MSRP. But, so what? That's the MSRP that GM ended up bringing the car to market for. That's not even what it costs, "We lose money on every one - Akerson."

Even with unheard of levels of taxpayer charity, these things hardly move off lots. GM couldn't engineer the Volt to match their "50/50/600, nicely under $30K" brag. Even missing the price by $11K, they still couldn't hit the engineering marks they set for themselves.

The bottom line here is that El Lutzbo threw a hissy fit over Tesla, when he should have been watching and learning from Toyota and he bullied the rest of GM into producing an over-priced, underwhelming, taxpayer-supported loser that provides GM no profit and no strategic advantage.

It is entirely possible that some people, who manage to use the Volt electrically almost all the time, can "save money," which is just lovely for them but these savings are fuelled by taxpayer support and not due to GM's excellence in automaking, so there's little reason to praise GM for this turkey.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:02:08 AM

SoylentGrain: "Yeah, and the Chevrolet doesn't sell many Corvette units, as well. Is that another unsuccessful GM product line?"

The Corvette is a low-volume, high-margin product that is developed and produced appropriately.

SoylentGrain: "This thread has to take the award for containing the most absolute nonsense posted in a single "discussion"."

Not even close. That award goes detfan's "GM, The Leader in Alternative Propulsion Solutions" which started out as complete nonsense and died when detfan gave up his defense of the indefensible.

My favorite response in that thread was contributed by probedude: "GM, The Leader in Self-Congratulatory PR Statements."

Runner up for most absolute nonsense would be another thread started by detfan, "Why are some Import supporters so hateful?" That thread was notable for detfan whining about posters, such as myself, posting unpleasant facts and ignoring the invective he was spewing elsewhere. Sadly, that thread didn't come to my notice until it had died, or I would have been happy to contribute.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,095
Points:19,920
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 9:49:36 AM

"That's the point. Even with these huge "incentives" these cars sell in miniscule numbers...

Definitely not the definition of a successful line... "

Yeah, and the Chevrolet doesn't sell many Corvette units, as well. Is that another unsuccessful GM product line? This thread has to take the award for containing the most absolute nonsense posted in a single "discussion".

Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,350
Points:2,681,465
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 9:12:18 AM

Yes we know RW, the you got a huge handout from the taxpayer, and the dealer came you a steep discount selling you a car that they sell at a loss at even a bigger loss...

That's the point. Even with these huge "incentives" these cars sell in miniscule numbers...

Definitely not the definition of a successful line...

[Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 8/27/2014 9:12:55 AM EST]
Profile Pic
rkt wgn
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:18,245
Points:3,200,255
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 8:52:06 AM

Once again Charles,
Your are totally wrong on prices, and mileage. I will try one last time to explain to you what I paid for one of the cars.
You haven't bought a new car In years evidently as you have no idea what the actual drive away price is.

You are also entirely wrong about the Volt also, but I won't get into that!

Have a nice day, Charles! :)

[Edited by: rkt wgn at 8/27/2014 9:00:07 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 8:50:07 AM

"You betcha! Your tax dollars at work!"

It has been my pleasure to see the emergence of the EV segment after all of these years. I support my tax dollars going towards this endeavor, regardless of the make of the vehicle that it went to support.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 8:22:31 AM

"At least Ford didn't embarass themselves with technologically moribund product like BAS."

That remains to be seen, no? Perhaps they'll hit a home run, or...

"And...? GM can't stand any improvement there (Cruze)?"

I think I said this earlier;

'Any car can be better...'

"Toyota builds an excellent fullsize truck. They underestimated the xehophobia of the fullsize truck segment."

The same thought process can be applied to the economy car segment, but in reverse...

"On the other hand, nobody understands the Ridgeline at all, anyway."

I was just sayin'.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 7:36:23 AM

rkt_wgn: "Charles. Ignorant on the facts again you just can't stand hearing the truth, so you make up your own non fact stories:)"

What fact are you challenging? Are you saying that, for $70K, the ELR won't save you hundreds of dollars on gas, like I said it would?

At an 96mpg over, let's say, 12K miles, your Volt requires $437.5 of premium gas per year. Then, there's some electricity. I hear $20 per month is typical, for a grand total of $677.5 in fuel costs. Over 12K miles per year at my piddly, taxpayer-friendly 50mpg, I use $795 in gas. Your savings are an amazing $120/year for the extra $11K that the Volt currently costs. Luckily, you have the taxpayer to help you out and the net price of the Volt drops to about $27.5K, making the difference $3.5K or so (unless GM is incenting them to get them moving... a not unusual situation). They payback is a mere 29 years (if we ignore the opportunity cost of the mone you could have invested).

Hmmm... this is such an awesome deal, I think you should buy 2 more.
Profile Pic
04Ram1500
Champion Author Boston

Posts:7,917
Points:2,204,085
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:45:28 AM

Yes
Profile Pic
rkt wgn
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:18,245
Points:3,200,255
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:41:54 AM

The prius can't outclass the volt. It is too ugly :)
Besides it can't get the yearly mileage by far .?
Profile Pic
rkt wgn
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:18,245
Points:3,200,255
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:38:20 AM

Charles. Ignorant on the facts again you just can't stand hearing the truth, so you make up your own non fact stories:)
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:22:24 AM

rkt_wgn: "Also the volt is not dead,"

You betcha! Your tax dollars at work!

rkt_wgn: "This car we have owned for a year, and has averaged 96+ lifetime MPG."

What a story! Except, I'm not impressed. At 96mpg, you're filling up justa bout monthly, anyway. Which, for $24K and no raiding the taxpayer's pockets, is not far from what we do with a Prius. We'd fill it up every other month, except we take long out-of-town trips, regularly, to see some of our children. On those trips, the Volt would be outclassed by a Prius.

rkt_wgn: "GM makes 2 of the very best high mileage cars. Volt and ELR."

Yes! For $70K, you, too, can save hundreds on gas!
Profile Pic
rkt wgn
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:18,245
Points:3,200,255
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 9:35:34 PM

Also the volt is not dead, but very much alive and well!! Best high gas mileage cars on the road!!! :) :)

[Edited by: rkt wgn at 8/26/2014 9:36:21 PM EST]
Profile Pic
rkt wgn
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:18,245
Points:3,200,255
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 9:31:04 PM

My wife had to buy 4 gal of gas on Sat, and it had been so long since she bought gas, she almost had to get out the
Owners manual to figure out how to open the gas tank lid. There is a button inside the car to push to open the lid. This car we have owned for a year, and has averaged 96+ lifetime MPG.
It would be better if she would shop a little closer to home. About 80 miles round trip.
GM makes 2 of the very best high mileage cars. Volt and ELR.
Profile Pic
WilhamClouse
Champion Author Calgary

Posts:2,117
Points:463,420
Joined:Jun 2013
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 4:52:39 PM

I saw one the other day!
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 4:19:58 PM

Weaslespit: "Which [Ford hybrid sales] still pale in comparison with regards to Toyota's volume, which again pales in comparison to the number of ICE vehicles sold."

At least Ford didn't embarass themselves with technologically moribund product like BAS.

Weaslespit: "The Cruze brought GM back from the dead in the segment which is Toyota and Honda's bread-and butter."

And...? GM can't stand any improvement there? And no comforting words about the Malibu? The emergency el cheapo refresh isn't helping. Perhaps a shot of real money might have made a difference?

Weaslespit: "Too bad Honda and Toyota's attempt to get into the D3's bread-and-butter segment (trucks) have failed so miserably."

Toyota builds an excellent fullsize truck. They underestimated the xehophobia of the fullsize truck segment. Strangely, GM and Ford abandonedthe field i the face of the Tacoma in the midsize truck segment.

On the other hand, nobody understands the Ridgeline at all, anyway.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 4:01:17 PM

"It's a risk Ford seems to be managing."

Which 'no' other OEM in the world has decided to do outside of expensive sports cars...

We won't know how well they are managing that risk until 5 years down the road.

"They found a way to avoid BK in '09, when Chrysler and GM went under."

Yes, Ford had turned themselves around faster than GM and light-years before Chrysler. They only had to mortgage all of their assets to avoid BK...

"They have a cost-effective hybrid system; they're the only US-based manufacturer to even try to counter Toyota and they have two Energi products."

Which still pale in comparison with regards to Toyota's volume, which again pales in comparison to the number of ICE vehicles sold.

"The Cruze sells OK but it's in no danger of dethroning the Corolla or Civic"

The Cruze brought GM back from the dead in the segment which is Toyota and Honda's bread-and butter. Too bad Honda and Toyota's attempt to get into the D3's bread-and-butter segment (trucks) have failed so miserably.

Silly fanboy.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 4:00:28 PM

Weaslespit: "Which is not what this car is intended for... Just like a minivan is not intended to set speed records and take hairpin turns and a pick-up truck is not meant for comfort."

What's the point of a range-extender that doesn't meaningfully extend the range? The Volt may be half-assed in many ways but it's a reasonably good idea and, if the situation demanded it, you could drive it all day long with a fairly reasonable number of fairly fast refuelling stops. The two-gallon tank in the i3 is moronic. A 10 gallon tank, even an 8 or a 6, would make the car far more practical and hardly make a difference in available interior space or weight. People compelled to drive this thing 200 miles are going to be sorely tempted to do some very stupid things with gas gans.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 3:51:46 PM

Weaslespit: "Lol, nice crystal ball ya got yourself there... Apparently you didn't read (or have forgotten) all of the reasons why all aluminum trucks have not yet been brought to market. Lots of risk, there."

It's a risk Ford seems to be managing. But they seem to be a company that takes risks. They found a way to avoid BK in '09, when Chrysler and GM went under. They have a cost-effective hybrid system; they're the only US-based manufacturer to even try to counter Toyota and they have two Energi products.

Aluminum-specific risk aside, GM's new trucks were met with pretty complete indifference and they don't appear to have gotten any sales increase out of them whatever (at least none that wasn't spurred by incentives). Ordinarily, the "new" truck would get a bump. The $1.2 billion absolutely could have been put to better use.

The Malibu languishes, too. The Cruze sells OK but it's in no danger of dethroning the Corolla or Civic (whichever is in the lead at the moment) and GM has no counter to the Prius.

There are plenty of ways GM could have spent $1.2 billion and either gotten some market share or some strategic advantage for their money but they blew it on a moonshot that was doomed to fail.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 3:43:47 PM

"the i3 REx is a car only CARB could love. To ferry the car across a couple of Western states would require stopping every 70 miles - or less - which is ridiculous."

Which is not what this car is intended for... Just like a minivan is not intended to set speed records and take hairpin turns and a pick-up truck is not meant for comfort.

It is an urban vehicle, bottom-line.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 3:38:20 PM

"And, the fact of the matter is, GM was caught napping and Ford has stolen a march on them in the pickup space. Aluminum is going to generate a lot of interest and it's a halo for Ford. That $1.2 bllion wasted on the Volt could have been better invested in their trucks."

Lol, nice crystal ball ya got yourself there... Apparently you didn't read (or have forgotten) all of the reasons why all aluminum trucks have not yet been brought to market. Lots of risk, there.
Profile Pic
GrumpyCat
Champion Author Alabama

Posts:5,075
Points:1,182,260
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 2:53:00 PM

Charlie_H: "Pathetic is the word. Combined with the ridiculously small REx fuel tank (about two gallons, as I recall), the i3 REx is a car only CARB could love. To ferry the car across a couple of Western states would require stopping every 70 miles - or less - which is ridiculous. You couldn't even put up with this on the East coast, where some turnpike plazas are 30 miles apart. Driving this thing across just IN and OH would be torture."

"CARB" is right. Is believed BMW thought they could sneak the i3 REx in under the wire as an EV and qualify for white stickers if the gasoline REx range was less than the battery EV range. In an unusual display of sanity CARB said, "No" and lumps the i3 REx in with other hybrids. The non-REx i3 gets white stickers.

The European i3 REx is said to have a bit larger gas tank.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 1:09:12 PM

Charlie_H: "I need not apologize for PHV sales... it's a low volume car"

Which was developed at a low-volume investment price tag.

Weaslespit: "So is the Volt."

Which wouldn't be a problem, except it was developed at a high-volume investment price tag. Even that wouldn't be a problem, if there was a strategic advantage to it. There isn't. GM couldn't grab and hold a commanding lead in the market and their shortcomings in product development mean that they won't won't be able to keep a leadership vehicle in this space in the near future, either. They need an Atkinon engine and some other improvements, which could have been addressed by the $1.2 billion they wasted on this project.

Weaslespit: "Gotta love a double-standard."

You are at liberty to love any double-standard you can find. But that isn't one. GM must put their money where the profits are. As must Toyota. For GM it's in the Silverado and the Sierra. For Toyota, it's in midsize-to-compact cars. They would also be wise to continue developing HSD to maintain their strategic lead in fuel economy.

And, the fact of the matter is, GM was caught napping and Ford has stolen a march on them in the pickup space. Aluminum is going to generate a lot of interest and it's a halo for Ford. That $1.2 bllion wasted on the Volt could have been better invested in their trucks.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 11:05:46 AM

"I need not apologize for PHV sales... it's a low volume car"

So is the Volt.

"The Volt is not an inherently more attractive car..."

More opinion being paraded under the guise of fact.

"and the PHV is hampered by that "lack of supply" think that GM FanBoiz were lamenting back in '11 (when Volts were starting to stack up on dealer lots)."

Still amazes me that despite the sales data, you continue to believe this nonsense. You are a true Toyota Believer.

"Not hardly. In typical GM fashion, they built the concept without a concern for what the car would actually do."

As does any OEM with regards to concept cars. There is a reason it is called 'concept' car.

"Bzzt. I understand it well. Low CD allows for higher A, which enables good headroom and similar features."

Bzzt - it all has to do with drag and then what is aesthetically appealing... Note how you glossed over cars with a Cd of 0.15. That makes the Prius Cd quite unimpressive, if that is what you are going to hang your hat on.

"Yes, GM is supposed to do that."

Gotta love a double-standard.

SMH

Haters gonna hate
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 10:18:09 AM

Weaslspit: "... you're still singing the same song whenever PIP sales tank ..."

I need not apologize for PHV sales... it's a low volume car and Toyota isn't shipping many here. It's almost certainly more profitable to sell them in Japan, where people are much more interested in fuel economy.

However, you need to put sales in perspective, hence the reminder. The Volt is not an inherently more attractive car, its sales are powered by massive government aid and the PHV is hampered by that "lack of supply" think that GM FanBoiz were lamenting back in '11 (when Volts were starting to stack up on dealer lots).

Weaslespit: "Unfortunately you seem to fail to grasp the magnitude of how insignificant a .03 difference in Cd really is, especially with differences in the frontal area from vehicle to vehicle."

Bzzt. I understand it well. Low CD allows for higher A, which enables good headroom and similar features. Review my remarks on brick vs teardrop. Nobody considers a brick to have "good" aerodynamics, not matter how small its frontal area is.

Weaslespit: "... which is why the concept Volt shown at the NAIAS saw such dramatic changes - they had to lower the Cd."

Not hardly. In typical GM fashion, they built the concept without a concern for what the car would actually do. The concept had a crappy CD, and high drag in spite of its overall low frontal area. They were fairly well into the project before they realized why the EV-1 had a CD of .19...

Charlie_H: “If you proposed a rushing an expensive project at Toyota to make an aluminum Tundra, you'd be regarded as crazy.”

Weaslespit: "Yet GM is supposed to do just that, lest they “strike-out looking”? What an interesting double-standard you have yourself there…"

Yes, GM is supposed to do that. Toyota has about 10K units of Tundras per month. GM has about 50K and is cross-shopped with FCA and Ford. Companies allocate development money based on the impact on the bottom line. GM can not accept a threat in the truck market because GM would collapse without truck sales. The situation is similar at Ford (although they're cushioned by a better market position) and FCA. If Tundra sales went to zero, it would not have the same impact on TM, so it's a lower priority than the 40K/month in Camrys or 30K/month in Corollas, where Toyota makes its money.

Development money is limited, companies need to make smart choices about how they invest. GM put $1.2 billion into the Volt program and it was a big mistake. When they did that, I pointed this out and said that GM would be better off:

- Investing in programs to lighten their vehicles (they're still heavy by class).
- Invest in an Atkinson engine, which would be enabling tech for all hybrid/PHEV efforts. Without that, the Volt is doomed to unimpressive CS mode fuel economy and saddled with the laughable premium fuel requirement.
- Extend VCM to additional vehicles (they did do this but not as fast as I would have recommended - and the engines have problems).
- Improve aerodynamics across the entire range (they have made some progress but the Volt, for example, trails the PHV by a significant margin).
- Waiting on a PHEV would not affect their strategic position, as the market was not ready. Most of the ability to build a PHEV is actually the ability to build a car, particularly a hybrid car, and it had better be a very good hybrid car or it will be a very bad PHEV.
Profile Pic
Sugarshaneo7
Veteran Author Michigan

Posts:325
Points:56,140
Joined:Nov 2011
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 3:20:00 PM

is it?
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 1:28:18 PM

"They've had hardly any stock since April. And 15 state availability."

Two-and-a-half years later, and you're still singing the same song whenever PIP sales tank after a singular, anecdotal data point (some would call those 'outliers')...

"Sure I do"

You'd like to think so, of that I have no doubt. Unfortunately you seem to fail to grasp the magnitude of how insignificant a .03 difference in Cd really is, especially with differences in the frontal area from vehicle to vehicle. You hang your hat on one variable out of a dozen that influence fuel efficiency. In addition, cars with Cd of .15 have been designed historically, but along with Cd comes aesthetics - it has to look somewhat decent as well which is why the concept Volt shown at the NAIAS saw such dramatic changes - they had to lower the Cd.

"I'd say 2014 is certainly less "Ancient History" than your figures..."

Yeah, the previous 2 years (the only two years of the PIP's history) is 'ancient'... <rolls eyes>

"which deliberately ignored it. For some strange reason. Going for the win?"

And your data deliberately ignores what was posted regarding 2012, 2013 and June/July 2014... Hello pot ;)

"GM FanBoiz should be grateful that Toyota isn't interested in the win... They're interested in money.”

Which is why this was posted, so I'm not sure why you felt the need to refute it, outside of you fanboy status with Toyota;

“charlie - GM completely mismarketed the car and cheaped out on the engineering."

Weasle - I think you meant to reference the PIP? <rimshot>”

“What's clear is that you don't understand the difference between "cheap" and "inexpensive." Or "cheap" and "appropriately budgeted."”

Spoken like a true fanboy.

“What all-aluminum Tundra is that? Toyota sells 10K units/month or thereabouts. They have higher priorities than the truck market.”

Again, spoken like a true fanboy. Lots of money in the truck segment, but apparently Toyota isn’t interested in ‘that’ money. Eh? They put quite the effort into the Tundra and it is a nice truck, FYI...

“If you proposed a rushing an expensive project at Toyota to make an aluminum Tundra, you'd be regarded as crazy.”

Yet GM is supposed to do just that, lest they “strike-out looking”? What an interesting double-standard you have yourself there…
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 10:16:29 AM

"You have just proven that it is. Those that say it is not don't understand what the numbers posted above means..."

Sure I do. CD vs CDA. A low CD give you the luxury of more A for similar overall drag. But we don't refer to "aerodynamic" in terms of CDA because a small brick has the same CDA as a larger teardrop but you'd hardly call the brick "aerodynamic."

"Going for the win again, eh?"

I'd say 2014 is certainly less "Ancient History" than your figures, which deliberately ignored it. For some strange reason. Going for the win?

"*Newsflash* - they haven't looked good since May."

They've had hardly any stock since April. And 15 state availability. GM FanBoiz should be grateful that Toyota isn't interested in the win... They're interested in money.

[Edited by: Charlie_H at 8/22/2014 10:16:58 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 9:37:34 AM

"No, it's not. It's .28. The leader in this class is as .25. The Camry hybrid is at .28. The Hyundai Sonata hybrid is at .25."

You have just proven that it is. Those that say it is not don't understand what the numbers posted above means...

"Oh, so now you're the guy who's into ancient history?"

Ancient history? Um, ok...

"Where's 2014? Let's review 2014:

Prius PHV - 10,671
Volt - 10,635

Oh, ouch."

Going for the win again, eh? Jan-May was 'ancient history', let's look at the last 2 months of 2014;

Volt - 3,797
PIP - 2,942

Oh, Ouch. ;) Since you like to go for the 'win'...

"Prius PHV sales are probably not going to look very good in August"

*Newsflash* - they haven't looked good since May.

[Edited by: Weaslespit at 8/22/2014 9:38:17 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 4:55:51 PM

Oops - overlooked something important...

The Prius PHV has 1/3 the range (at best) and it sells nearly as well as the Volt with just 1/3 the tax credit and only 15-state availability.

I think, if we could do sales comparisons on a state-by-state basis, we'd discover something rather upsetting to the GM Fanboiz.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 4:48:03 PM

Weaslespit: "All OEM's are looking for weight savings - the Volt is already very aerodynamic."

No, it's not. It's .28. The leader in this class is as .25. The Camry hybrid is at .28. The Hyundai Sonata hybrid is at .25.

Did you already know this and are perfectly satisfied with "also ran" status as being equivalent to "very aerodynamic?" Or do you just not bother to look things up?

Charlie_H: "The Prius PHV has 1/3 the range (at best) and it sells nearly as well as the Volt with just 1/3 the tax credit."

Weaslespit: "It sold half as many as the Volt in 2012 and 2013..."

Oh, so now you're the guy who's into ancient history? Where's 2014? Let's review 2014:

Prius PHV - 10,671
Volt - 10,635

Oh, ouch. Shall we consider wordwide sales? Of course not. GM's giving up on the Volt in Europe, anyway, on account of low sales.

Now, I do have good news for you... Prius PHV sales are probably not going to look very good in August, so GM has a chance to retake the lead. Cars.com lists only 324 for sale, as opposed to the Volt's 9000+. Toyota would have to have them to sell them. Restricted supply probably cost Toyota some PHV sales last month... they ended the month with about 550 cars on Cars.com. The Volt was at 8600 or so.

Why doesn't Toyota ship more cars here? They understand the market better than GM does... there's not a great appetite for expensive PHVEVs at this point (gas is $3.33 today) and they're better off selling what they build in Japan (where gas is much more expensive and people care deeply about energy conservation), getting better prices.

But all that is really neither here nor there... The Prius PHV has 1/3 the range (at best) and it sells nearly as well as the Volt with just 1/3 the tax credit. More range, at least not all by itself, is not going to stimulate more sales.

In fact, it's really too bad that the Volt is married to the maximum tax credit (and what a coincidence that is, how is it Congress set the max at exactly the capacity of the Original Volt? I wonder... OK, no, I don't). If they weren't, they could reduce the size of the battery pack to lighten the vehicle and decrease the cost substantially, while increasing useful room and, in all probability, the CS mode fuel economy. That would decrease the MSRP and make the car more appealing in several ways. But that would happen at the expense of some of the tax credit, which would have an effect on the net price.

In fact, GM could use all this valuable data they're collecting (GM fans have often pointed to 'data' as strategic) plus data collected from their lovely, tax-supported Battery Test Facility (GM Fans have often remarked on how important that facility is... never mind that battery manufacturers do plenty of testing and Tesla and all the rest seem to get along OK without one) to dig deeper into a smaller battery and get *more* range at lower cost except... there goes the tax credit again.

Dang. Who knew the tax code could be so cruel?
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 3:54:14 PM

"The Prius PHV has 1/3 the range (at best) and it sells nearly as well as the Volt with just 1/3 the tax credit."

It sold half as many as the Volt in 2012 and 2013...

"The one reason to avoid reducing the range is to keep the battery at the credit maximum and avoid reducing the tax credit, which is a huge par of selling this car."

The range won't decrease.

"Of course, if GM improves the car in a useful way (lighter, more aerodynamic)"

All OEM's are looking for weight savings - the Volt is already very aerodynamic.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 3:44:57 PM

Weaslespit: "I would like to see an increase in range,"

The Prius PHV has 1/3 the range (at best) and it sells nearly as well as the Volt with just 1/3 the tax credit. More range is not going to help sell the Volt.

The one reason to avoid reducing the range is to keep the battery at the credit maximum and avoid reducing the tax credit, which is a huge par of selling this car. If it drops from, say, $7500 to $6850, that would be a bad PR hit.

Of course, if GM improves the car in a useful way (lighter, more aerodynamic), and keeps the battery at 16-17kwh, then more range will likely result, anyway.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 3:04:53 PM

Those are all things everybody would like to see...

I would like to see an increase in range, an in crease in mpg when out of EV-only mode and a decrease in the msrp.

Given the size of batteries, I won't be disappointed if the 5th seat remains unattainable as long as the EV range is increased significantly.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 2:51:03 PM

I tell you what... it might remain a sales sluggard but I promise I won't call it an engineering or marketing mistake if Volt 2 features:

- MSRP decrease to $31K or less (with tax credit, that would be $23,500)
- 5th seat.
- More than 11 cu ft of cargo room with seats up.
- CS mode fuel economy at 45mpg+.
- EV range can't decrease by more than 10% It's currently 38... 34 and up is OK.
- Nothing really stupid gets done to it to erase the benefit of those improvements (like the 5th seat is rear-facing and you have to go in through the hatch to sit there and you'd better by under 4' to fit).
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,293
Points:515,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 1:30:01 PM

"Hey, if you don't like the tenor of the commentary, get GM to build a better car."

Any car can be better... I certainly hope that Volt 2.0 is better. If it is not I will certainly be disappointed.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,429
Points:44,915
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Aug 20, 2014 4:59:50 PM

Hey, if you don't like the tenor of the commentary, get GM to build a better car.
Post a reply Back to Topics