GM lowers expectations for Volt fuel savings

[xcel]

"We've been very cautious in terms of the volume, just because of the innovation and the technology associated with that vehicle."

Justin Hyde - Detroit Free Press - July 10, 2008

Volt mockup in the wind tunnel.

Volt’s will sell with high fuel price if GM does not charge an outrageous price for them. The AAM states FE rules cost jobs. And so does low FE capable automobiles -- Ed.

WASHINGTON -- General Motors Corp. has told federal regulators they should not count on any fuel economy gains from the upcoming Chevrolet Volt or plug-in hybrids when setting new efficiency standards, saying such vehicles would be built in low numbers through 2015.

The comments counter the enthusiasm GM and others have been building for the Volt as a revolutionary model with technology to reduce oil consumption and leapfrog Toyota Motor Corp.'s lead in hybrids. GM has set a goal for the Volt to travel 40 miles on batteries charged from a home outlet, with an engine powering electric motors providing an additional range of a few hundred miles.

GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz told the Free Press last month that the automaker planned to build 10,000 Chevrolet Volts in 2011, the vehicle's first full year of production, and 60,000 the following year.

He added that the goal was highly dependent on battery and electrical suppliers, and that GM was still targeting a sales price of less than $40,000… [Read More]

[GreenVTEC]

Might as well just badge the things as a Caddy and promote them at the country club and Trump properties.

Or even better - A TV commercial that doesn't mention one fact about the fuel savings. Just sell it as the ultimate turn on car: Because instant torque and quiet EV mode is the ultimate in Luxury and sex appeal. And BTW. You have to live in specific zip codes in southern california to own one.

[pdk]

"Lowered expectations" is right.

[BailOut]

Every time I hear GM gripe about battery technology or supplies I just want to scream. They had their hands on a great battery technology and they sold it off to Chevron, who of course promptly killed it.

I guess it's kind of like selling your life preserver to someone that wants to shred it into a thousand little pieces the day before the ship you're on sinks, then crying that no one makes a good life preserver while the ship goes down.

[c0da]

I read somewhere that they were only going to sell 10,000 the first year and slowly increase that the next year. If that's true they just keep digging their grave deeper...

Oh, here's where I read it.

GM is maintaining the position that those vehicles will be built in such low numbers through 2015, that they won't make a significant enough impact on the fleet. As it stands, Chevy plans to be build 10,000 Volts in 2011 (the first year of production), and 60,000 the following year... and meeting those numbers is highly dependent on outside suppliers for battery and technology delivery (let's hope they don't mimic the problems Toyota is having with the Prius battery supply).

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/10/g...-going-to-hel/

[abcdpeterson]

Are they kidding? Only 40 miles for a car costing almost $40,000!!!
They will never sell this thing.

Edited 7/12/08 15:45

I had posted a rant about the car only going 40 miles. Things are not as bad I had first thought, so I pulled that part of my post.

It was pointed out that the car has an gas power generator. I think the generator is perfect, I would still like to see longer than 40 miles for battery only, around 100 would be closer to my idea of a electric power short trip car, with gas generator for extended trips.

$40k is still a long way out of my reach. But hopefully that will change as the car goes into more mass production and market pressure pulls the price down.

[sailordave]

Remember the retro Ford Thunderbird? Know what killed it? It wasn't quality or lack of demand. It was built on the same platform as the Lincoln LS which was based on a Jaguar sedan. The Thunderbird was a beautiful cruiser in the true tradition of the original T-bird. Soon as dealerships got their hands on one they instantly marked up the price. Prospective buyers got tired of this and walked off and onto another brand to buy something other than Ford. GM is going to shoot themselves in the foot,...AGAIN!! if they make a similiar mistake with the Volt. They're seeing the high demand for true hybrids and the rising sale value of those same hybrids and are possibly looking to replace money they lost in truck sales with the Volt or similar models. Big mistake. Might as well slap a caddy badge on it and call it an Allante, another failed Caddy. Remember the mistakes GM made in the 70s? The overheating engine of the Vega? It's Mustang fighter replacement, the Monza? Or the ever popular Vette,...Chevette that is. My mom's Datsun B210 was a better car than that Chevette. I love GM but not enough to have blind loyalty.

[southerncannuck]

I think they will sell out the entire production run. 40 miles on battery is good for most commuters. I wish them well.

[dsharp]

First of all the headline "GM lowers expectations for Volt fuel savings" is sensationalistic and misleading. It implies that GM is lowering the expectations for fuel savings on the individual cars. If you click through to the article, you'll see that's not the case. Individual Volt cars will still be just as efficient as previous expectations, but GM is trying to downplay their expected effect on overall fleet fuel consumption.

Also, to the gentleman who was flabbergasted that the Volt only has a 40-mile AER (all electric range), you seem to be unaware that the Volt has an on-board internal combustion engine that kicks in after 40 miles to provide extended range.

[Aaron]

No average consumer will buy a $40K car. How many driver do you see driving a Corvette that costs a similar price? Not many.

If GM thinks a $40K Volt is going to save the company and is the answer to all their problems they are dead wrong. If GM prices the Volt to $30K or less, it will be a winner.