Motortrend article: 100 MPG+ Chevy Volt, GM's "Moon Shot"

I've driven a couple dozen of them, since my employers are cheapskates
and get me econoboxes to rent when I am on travel.

Again, do a comparison. Drive an MR2 and then a Corvette. Neither one
of them is a Lotus by any means, but the whole difference in design
philosophy becomes very evident. Of course, the MR2 is gone now, but
the philosophy isn't.

Even if you compare mid-sized cars you'll find GM is still obsessed with
having huge amounts of centering force as a substitute for actual steering
control. The Corolla doesn't have big centering springs to hide the dead
band because it has much less of a dead band to begin with.

Now, as I said, it's getting better and the CTS is actually a radical
departure from GM tradition in terms of suspension and steering feel.
I'm hoping that starts to trickle down to the rest of the line.

No, not at all. Toyota and Honda are in many ways following the same path
that GM got themselves in trouble with. It's interesting, though, that
Toyota and Honda started out with one product line and split them into two,
whereas GM started out as multiple companies merging together into one.
--scott

 

I want a car without stupid shiney trim on the side windows because it
causes glare when I north or south during the early morning or late
afternoon, but if I buy a car, I'm forced to buy that stupid trim. I
also want a car that never needs washing and that stays cool when it's
parked in the sun with the windows rolled up, but I'm forced to buy
cars without those features.

 

Speaking of the Toyota Venza, I looked at one at the Philadelphia auto show
the other day. If the driver is long legged and has the seat back, the seat
is around three inches from the rear seat. Even a child could not sit
behind the driver. LOL

 

This is a joke, right? A Grand Ma, sporty?

I'd rather have a car as small as possible that doesn't feel like a
penalty box. Think VW Scirocco or Porsche 914, or for a higher end
and more current example, Lotus Elise.

Nope, nor do I care. I can't remember the last time I drove a GM car
that didn't piss me off in some regard.

(thinks)

OK, I do recall. It was when I borrowed a Malibu while my Impala was
in the shop. The 'bu was actually fairly decent, although bland as
vanilla pudding.

nate

 

Nope, nor do I care. I can't remember the last time I drove a GM car
that didn't piss me off in some regard.

(thinks)

OK, I do recall. It was when I borrowed a Malibu while my Impala was
in the shop. The 'bu was actually fairly decent, although bland as
vanilla pudding.

nate

 

**This is a joke, right? A Grand Ma, sporty?

The Grand Am GT's are very sporty. Especially with the Ram Air hood. My
sister has an '03, and the thing is rather quick too for a 3400.

**Nope, nor do I care. I can't remember the last time I drove a GM car
**that didn't piss me off in some regard.
**(thinks)
**OK, I do recall. It was when I borrowed a Malibu while my Impala was
**in the shop. The 'bu was actually fairly decent, although bland as
**vanilla pudding.

And I think the same about Porsches'. It's called opinions. You like
Porsche and Volkswagen's. Personally, I wouldn't own either if you paid me
too. Not because they are not reliable, but because they are ugly.
Different people have different opinions, views, and experiences.
Unfortunately the Impala you drive happens to be a complete lemon. Most GM
vehicles are not.

 

It could be fast (in a straight line) as a Corvette and it still
wouldn't be sporty. A FWD midsize family car can't be made "sporty"
by the addition of ugly plastic cladding and red backlighting for the
gauges. A manual transmission option, decent sport seats, and a real
handling suspension would be a good place to start.

The fact that GM *thinks* that the Grand Am is sporty is also why
people who want sporty cars don't think of GM as an option.

It's not really a *lemon* per se, it's just an awful car. A complete
ergonomic disaster, and loud as hell and slow to boot. It could get
90 mpg and I'd still want to trade it in.

nate

 

What's your point? People buy what they want, and no one forces them to buy
anything. Unless you are saying you would purchase something just because
the advertisement told you to, in which case, I would advise you to start
using your brain, and to think for yourself.[/QUOTE]

.....says the guy who, no doubt, has been convinced to buy something
thanks to clever marketing.

 

iPod.

'Nuff said.

 

9-16 year old's aren't usually purchasing new vehicles.

 

....says the guy who, no doubt, has been convinced to buy something
thanks to clever marketing.[/QUOTE]

I'm definaltey not going to drop $50,000 just because the ad looked good.

 

Are you not the guy that said your "Shamwow" works great?

....says the guy who, no doubt, has been convinced to buy something
thanks to clever marketing.[/QUOTE]

 

But, but, but do you not own a Toyota?

 

Apparently neither does our friend Elmo, he buys used cars

 

Interior dimensions are about the same as the highly successful Camry.

And make no mistake - the Volt is *NOT* a "hybrid". The definition of
the term was established by the founder of the genre - the Prius - in
which the wheels can be driven by either an internal combustion engine
or an electric motor.

The Volt is a pure electric car, in which the engine-generator is an
onboard battery charger that supplements charging via the grid.

 

It is a hybrid, albeit a different type. The Prius (and all other
hybrids currently on the market) are "parallel hybrids" e.g. the engine
and motor operate in parallel. The Volt is a "series hybrid" more akin
to a diesel/electric locomotive than any automobile currently on the
market. It may also be a "plug in hybrid," e.g. one that can run on
electricity to the point of partial discharge and then be recharged from
the grid rather than from its onboard ICE, depending on which rumors one
listens to.

Really, the Volt is an intriguing concept, but one has to wonder if a)
battery technology really is good enough to make the "plug in"
capability, if it is in fact so equipped when it comes to market, truly
useful for more than a handful of ultra-short-trip commuters, and b) if
it will suffer the fate of so many GM cars that appear promising on the
show stand and somehow become homogenized, focus-grouped, and value
engineered to the point of bland mediocrity by the time they hit the
showroom (and to make matters worse - Fiero anyone - end up being not
quite ready for prime time, and thus are discontinued due to poor
reputation/sales just when they are finally starting to fulfill their
initial promise)

nate

 

I think it will in many areas where electricity is cheap, because even
if you're doing half your commute on the engine and half the commute on
stored power, the savings can be considerable. However, there are places
in this country where power is fourteen or fifteen cents per kilowatt hour
and in these places, plug-in operation will be a net loss.

One of the interesting things about the hybrids, though, is the possibility
of adding a 60 Hz inverter and getting AC power out of the battery stack,
for less money than running a field generator.

My feeling is that this won't happen to the Volt because GM is pushing it
through so fast that they won't have time to wreck it. Part of the problem
with GM is that they try to make all their products everything to everyone,
which makes them less desirable for anyone. I think they're trying to get
the Volt out as quickly as possible, and the Volt is the vision of only a
few people which makes it much less likely to be mangled this way. But I
predict than unless something dramatic changes in GM management, they will
wreck the design within five or six years by adding junk to it.
--scott

 

I dare say that you are not "forced" to buy any car. When you buy a car,
it's because you choose to buy a car. Besides, if you throw enough money at
it, both of your concerns could be addressed.

 

The Chevy Blazer has been around for forty years. A bit long lived for a
fad, don't ya think? And it certainly wasn't the first.

 

The fiero was ready... it was exactly as the bean counters forced it to
be. Once it proved to be a sales success then the engineers were allowed
to do it properly instead of on the cheap. By then the name was ruined.