Chevy Volt Burns in Garage While Charging

Discussion in 'Chevrolet Volt' started by Ptero, Apr 16, 2011.

?

What do you think burned the garage down?

  1. primarily a Chevy Volt flaw

    5 vote(s)
    17.2%
  2. primarily a recharger flaw

    4 vote(s)
    13.8%
  3. the garage wiring was bad - something else would have started the fire

    20 vote(s)
    69.0%
  1. Chuck

    Chuck just the messenger

    Petro has a point on intellectual property - China demands knowing your trade secrets if you want to do business with them - wish I had a link handy. :(
     
  2. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Chuck- sure it certainly is hardball capitalism/nationalism.
    "If you want access to 1.2 billion consumers-you have to give us your secrets"
    And all the corps do it since they are all short term oriented and all CORPS have ZERO interest in the USA national interest.
    Corps don't care about The USA-just look at how the leaders of financial corps act- first order of business -buy off our leaders-
     
  3. herm

    herm Well-Known Member

    if you dont want to share, take your ball and go home. No more coolie exploitation.
     
  4. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Right- no free access to cheap labor and 1.2 billion consumers.
     
  5. Ptero

    Ptero Hydrogen Nut, Battery Skeptic

    Well, I see that today GM is about to recall EVERY Chevy Volt. Can't say I'm surprised.

    As I've explained before, Secretary of Energy Chu canceled support for the automotive fuel cell program. A big part of this over the years had been the electric drive platform. But without fuel cells, the electric drive platform reverted to batteries, a very poor replacement for fuel cells because they possessed only one-seventh the range and are an environmental nightmare on a large scale.

    Here is the platform GM was working on in 2002. They had planned to skip hybrids and EVs completely.

    [​IMG]

    When the intellectual cripples took over, waving "Who Killed the Electric Car?" as their bible, they trashed the potential of American industry and forced a 100-yr-old technology onto this magnificent spaceage platform. Now this still-birthed, billion (taxpayer) dollar atrocity is going to China.
     
  6. herm

    herm Well-Known Member

    The problem with the skateboards is that the upper passenger modules still need crash, rollover and side impact protections.. and since it cant take advantage of the rigidity of the skate some of the weight has to be duplicated..
     
  7. Ptero

    Ptero Hydrogen Nut, Battery Skeptic

    I was gonna park my Smart Car on it.
     
  8. Ptero

    Ptero Hydrogen Nut, Battery Skeptic

    Looks like things will get interesting again next week.
    GM CEO agrees to testify at Volt hearing in D.C.
    http://www.detroitnews.com/article/.../1361/GM-CEO-asked-to-testify-at-Volt-hearing

    Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said in a letter sent to House members Monday that its subcommittee overseeing bailouts will hold a hearing Jan. 25.

    The hearing is titled "Volt Vehicle Fire: What did NHTSA know and when did they know it?"

    Strickland said last week the White House was informed in September of the June fire, but officials didn't ask the agency to keep the information secret. NHTSA didn't publicly disclose the fire until Nov. 12, when Bloomberg News first reported it occurred.

    After an initial investigation concluded that damage to the Volt battery was the cause of the June fire that occurred three weeks after the government crash test, NHTSA briefed Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, according to letters Strickland sent to three House Republicans.

    NHTSA opened a formal defect investigation Nov. 25, after a second Volt battery pack caught fire seven days after another government test.

    GM, which received a $49.5 billion government bailout, is still 26 percent owned by the Treasury Department.

    Republicans have asked GM and the Obama administration to answer detailed questions about why they didn't disclose the fire in a crash-tested Volt for several months, and whether politics was behind any decision to delay the disclosure.

    A spokesman for Issa, Ali Ahmad, said Friday the committee would demand that NHTSA turn over records.

    "NHTSA has stalled on responding to the committee's inquiry for six weeks and inexplicably refused to provide any documents. The committee expects full compliance with its request and will consider compulsory methods if NHTSA does not immediately change its position," Ahmad said.
     
  9. PaleMelanesian

    PaleMelanesian Beat the System Staff Member

    http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Pr...ent+on+Conclusion+of+Chevy+Volt+Investigation

     
  10. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    So
    No real world "battery" fires caused by crashes!
    Potential for Unreal world fires should be reduced by the modification
    The "not a real world problem" Probably didn't cost many sales
    The $40,000 price is what costs sales-not great gasoline mpg doesn't help either- but the price is the problem.
    Charlie
     
  11. herm

    herm Well-Known Member

    Imagine how much worse sales would be without the $7500 tax credit that brings it down to $32,500.

    The MPG is pretty good, 37mpg combined for a nearly 4000lb car.. and not taking into account the 40 miles of electric driving you get everyday at an equivalent of $1 a gallon gasoline.

    Visualize a Ford Explorer with 40 miles of electric range, at a $10k hybrid premium... I bet it would sell.
     
  12. EdwinTheMagnificent

    EdwinTheMagnificent Legend In His Mind

    The world needs more people that care................ and have $40,000.
    I care, but I'm a few dollars short.
     
  13. FXSTi

    FXSTi Well-Known Member

  14. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Sure 37 mpg combined is great for a 4000 lb car,
    but it only has the interior room comfort of 3000 lb cars

    The PROBLEM is always the same-THE PRIUS IS SOOO GOOD-AND SO CHEAP
    Charlie
    PS-Low gasoline price doesn't help either-let's hope we don't get higher prices via an Iranian adventure-a 3rd pointless war would sink our economy for another 10 years(probably would get us off foreign energy-on to wind Nukes-maybe-conservation)
     
  15. herm

    herm Well-Known Member

  16. jcp123

    jcp123 Caliente!

    Look, I like the Volt. It has a few imperfections - an ICE that's too big for strict genset duties but not really big enough to propel a nearly 4000lb car if it's asked to - but otherwise, it's a good (not great) proof of concept if you look at it as a BEV with a range extender. Its other major flaw is that awful MSRP. I say shed a few pounds and use the ICE purely to drive a genset in the next generation. Hopefully by then, we will see a price significantly less than it is, and perhaps more advenced batteries. A Volt-II capable of over ~120miles on batteries (easier with less weight to propel) and with a small ICE for genset duties, selling for $10k less than the current Volt would make an impact. Conversely, upsize and atkinsonize the engine if you want it do drive the wheels as a hybrid.
     
  17. herm

    herm Well-Known Member

    In my opinion.. GM should use the 1.8L engine out of the Cruze, atkinsonize it with a 13:1 expansion ratio and solve the PZEV issue without having to use an additional air pump, thats primitive 70s emission control tech.

    They may have to lower the 100 mph spec down to a more reasonable 85mph... 100mph requires 50kW of electricity, 85mph only requires 34kW or 46hp

    MSRP is what it is, lots of compacts sell in that price range...
     
  18. Ptero

    Ptero Hydrogen Nut, Battery Skeptic

    [​IMG]

    Looks like 603 people bought Volts in January 2012. That's 20 per day and almost as fast as Ford built B-24s (650 per month or one every 60 minutes) in 1943.
    http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120201/AUTO01/202010410/1148/AUTO01/Volt-sales-fall-January

    One poster commented that GM should hold a fire sale on the $42,000 Volt. But wasn't that the problem?
    Another pointed out that when observers had noted that the Volt averaged a cost of $250,000 per car for GM to build, the administration said the number would fall with increased sales volume.

    The Consolidated B-24 cost $297,627 in the year it was built.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_B-24_Liberator

    Chevy Volt Costing Taxpayers Up to $250K Per Vehicle
    Analyst: 'This might be the most government-supported car since the Trabant'
    By TOM GANTERT Dec. 21, 2011
    http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16192

    Oh, one more comparison.
    "The B-24 was notorious among American aircrews for its tendency to catch fire."
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2012
  19. herm

    herm Well-Known Member

    Ptero, I need to balance out your anti-American leanings with some WW-II history, you probably are a secret Prius owner! (joking!)

    The B-24 was a great plane, but built light and with less armor compared to a B-17. Another great plane was Martin's B-26.. I used to know lots of those pilots with many local stories.

    "Once a day in Tampa Bay"

    http://rwebs.net/dispatch/output.asp?ArticleID=14

    "As production of an improved B-26B began in April 1942, two unrelated events seemed to threaten the Marauder's future. The first was the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo by 16 North American B-25 Mitchells, launched from the deck of the USS Hornet. North American used this notoriety to seek more contracts for its B-25. The second happening was a furor over the Marauder's high accident rate in training, especially at McDill Field in Tampa, Florida. To the cadets assigned to fly the B-26, the Marauder was becoming known as the "Flying Prostitute" and "Widow Maker." A Senate investigating committee arrived in Tampa to be greeted by the sight of two crashed B-26s still burning. "One a day in Tampa Bay" was a horrifying possibility.

    However, the Army quickly determined that the Marauder's accident rate was due to inadequate multi-engine training of cadets, aggravated by the B-26's very high wing loading and high takeoff and landing speeds. The plane could not be flown by the "seat of the pants" but required careful attention to minimum airspeeds, especially with one engine out. The Cessna AT-9 and other twin-engine advanced trainers were part of the answer, and Martin designed a number of modifications to improve the Marauder's slow speed performance."
     
  20. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Hey
    you are right Herm.
    The B26 was one of the coolest looking of our WW2 planes.
    It LOOKED FAST!!
    The B17,24,25 looked sorta industrial
    The B26 looked FAST!!
    Kinda like the F104- looked fast-and was tricky to land because of landing speeds and not a lot of wing(which is why it was fast!)
    Yeah cool plane

    Ptero- hey low blow!!
    The Volt isn't supposed to be a money maker- it is a test vehicle-maybe its sons will morph into your fuel cell vehicle someday.
    Charlie
     

Share This Page