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

You miss the whole point once again. It is not a matter of need.
Marketing has nothing to do with need. It has to do with capitalizing on
wants (in the context of this discussion). People already had the desire -
the fad was under way - for SUV's. You seem bent on creating a big bad
wolf that forced the unwilling masses by means of deceptive marketing, to
do something they didn't want to do. That is bull.

 

Actually, nothing said. The iPod is a great example of a trend already in
place for mobility, slim design, iTunes, anything from Apple, and a few
other things. The marketing effort was focused on, and had the desired
effect on that part of the population that was interested in this stuff.

 

Didn't the Europa produce around 78HP with a 10 second plus 0-60 time? I
would certainly call that under powered.

I guess I could believe this sort of complaint on the surface. This is the
kind of thing that tweaks some people and causes them to buy a different
car, and doesn't bother other people at all. As much as my wife loved our
Park Ave, she was thrilled with how much easier the Malibu, and then later,
the Sonata were to park in the city. We have never beat the mileage of the
Park Ave by much (a bit in the city), and we certainly lost out on comfort,
though the Sonata wouldn't need much more than those double ply seats to
match the comfort of the Park Ave. But - she still likes that it is easier
to park the car she drives now.

Well hell Mike - that's because you bought a Ford. You shoulda bought a
Silverado!

 

Come on Scott - context, man, context. And the price tag on the Z3?

 

Ah - you landed squarely on my hot button when it comes to the Grand Am GT.
The car flat out begged for a standard transmission. It would have been
completely fun to drive if it had one. Not to mention that the 3.4L would
have been somewhat more impressive with one. Sporty is indeed a definition
within one's mind though. I'll allow that some would never consider the
Grand Am a sporty car, but many others do. I'm not calling it a sports
car, just calling it sporty. Many of us rather enjoy the American version
of sporty - a bit of raw muscle, comfort, and a feel that is completely
different from the starkest of cars. There are many true sports cars and
cars out there that others would consider more sporty than the Grand Am,
which are more nimble, smaller, etc. but I wouldn't want to drive one on a
daily basis.

 

In a SERIES HYBRID (cruise ship, diesel-electric train, etc.), the ICE
spins a generator that directly powers one or more electric motor(s).
There need not be a battery storage system between the generator and
motors, and in high-power systems no battery would suffice.

In a PARALLEL HYBRID (Prius, et al) the ICE is designed for economy at
the expense of torque, so acceleration would be unacceptable if the
battery powered motor (max torque at zero rpm) did not provide
supplementary twist to the wheels.

In the VOLT the battery can be charged from the grid, from regeneration,
or from the ICE-powered generator. However, all torque comes from the
motors.

In my view, the VOLT is more akin to the all-electric EV with an added
gerbil-in-a-wheel for special circumstances.

My home and office are six miles apart, so it's conceivable that with
normal city driving the ICE in mine will never turn on. I don't think
that having the potential to recharge its own battery makes the VOLT a
hybrid. If I disconnect the ignition from that ICE, what is it?

Ike

 

Fiero anyone - end up being not

The Fierro was a success but was discontinued because it cut into the
sales of the more lucrative Corvette.

 

Sporty FWD car, is an oxymoron.

 

That was the one; it was the Renault 16 engine with a different cam. Even
the tranny was from the R16, with the differential cage flipped to give four
forward gears instead of four reverse gears! (Later models used a Ford "big
valve" engine with about 1/3 more hp.) I sure didn't consider it
underpowered - it was the only car I've ever driven that didn't feel
sluggish when I was tired, and it didn't require downshifting to pass on
highways. I could count on one hand the number of times I floored the
accelerator, and those were all when testing repair attempts on the original
POS Solex carburetor. I once took my foot off the clutch in a gas station,
unaware it was in gear. The wheels spun until the car matched the engine
speed... the engine speed hardly blipped at all. Twice I came down on the
throttle a bit too hard in second gear in curves and found myself facing the
wrong way. Amazing what a 3/4 ton car will do!

I had a Silverado about 7 years ago, just before the company switched the
fleet from Chevy to Ford. It was comparable in performance (except it was a
gasser instead of a TD) and reliability. The fuel pump died around 35K
miles, but I was in town. The gearbox was definitely smoother. The big
downside: the ground clearance under the differential was less than the
Ford's, enough that I scraped the skid plate pretty regularly on the rocks.
I even got high centered on it once.

 

To say that all of the energy used comes from gasoline is misleading.
If you were to disable regeneration, you would use more gasoline.

The wasted braking energy in a typical car is captured energy in hybrid
regeneration. My Honda Civic Hybrid automatic has over 100,000 miles on
the original brakes, and I live in mountainous country.

 

No it's not.

This is true, but you're just recapturing energy that was already put
into the system by the gasoline engine.

nate

 

That energy is discarded by any vehicle that doesn't have regeneration.
Regeneration is consuming energy that needs to be dispersed to slow the
car, lost as heat in conventional brakes. Regeneration is just as much a
source of energy as recycling cans is a source of aluminum for new cans.

 

PG&E in California requires a TOU plan for EVs:
"The E-9 rate is mandatory for those customers that are currently on a
residential electric rate and who plan on refueling an EV on their
premises."

If you have an off-peak panel already, why would you need the extra
feedback? Why a unique plug for the car?

PG&E will install a Time Clock for you.

 

It's not an energy source at all. It's recovered energy. Energy that
came from gasoline. Remove the gasoline engine. Car is parked in the
garage and the batteries are flat. Let's see regeneration move the car.

It can't? well then it's not an energy source.

 

My co-op's rules presently permits the connection of furnaces and water
heaters only.

The off-peak panel is powered through a second meter. The breakers for my
water heater, heat pump and underfloor heating boiler are located in that
panel. Power to the water heater is controlled by their RC high-current
relay controller. A second RC low-current relay controller picks a small,
"postage stamp" relay located in a separate box. The low voltage control
wires from the heat pump and boiler connect to that relay.

Instead of a timer, my co-op can shut down any of these devices by sending a
command over the power line. Typically they shut down my heat pump and
boiler for 4 hours from 5 p.m. to 9 pm. and on Saturday morning when they
are experiencing their peak demand.

Without a unique plug/jack combination I could plug any 110V device into
that outlet and operate it at half their normal rate. Without a control
wire coming from the car, they would be unable to disconnect it when they
needed to.

I've opened a dialog with my co-op in this regard. Their engineer is going
to contact GM so see if they have incorporated a control line as have the
manufacturers of electric furnaces and boilers, and to find out if
conventional and unique power cords are available. It would be best to have
one of each.

From what I've observed there is no standard for off-peak control. I'm
familiar with four power companies serving my region, two co-ops and two
investor-owned utilities. Each uses a unique scheme. Some schemes are
mixed. In my last home a timer was used for the water heater and an RC
controller was used for the furnace control wire. Another co-op uses a
single RC controller to pick high current relays passing power to the
furnace, boiler and water heater. It's a mess out there.

 

It's true that regeneration helps, but note the "RE" -- that system
simply recovers kinetic energy produced by... gasoline. From any
viewpoint, 100% of propulsion comes from gasoline. Of course, you can
get philosophical and trace gasoline back through solar energy and
eventually to the big bang, reported to be from using regular gas in a
high compression engine...

 

It's expensive. But you get what you pay for, and the American car
companies have abandoned that market. GM's idea of a sports car is the
Corvette, which goes very fast in a straight line.

I want a small car that is solidly built and has good performance. Plenty
of European car manufacturers will sell me a car like that. I don't need
a Z3... I'd be happy with a BMW 1-series.

Mercedes will sell me a stripped down C-class for $26k. It's a fun car
to drive. Why can't GM sell me something like that for that price?
--scott

 

No, it's 100% correct.

The ONLY source of energy that the Prius uses is gasoline. Period. No
other source of energy is inserted into the car.

EVERY bit of energy that the system uses, comes from gasoline.

That the HSD has internal systems that manage the gasoline energy better
than cars without HSD, is incidental.

It ALL comes from gasoline. Period. It is--listen carefully here--a
gasoline car.

The Prius is NOT--repeat after me--NOT an electric car.

 

No, regeneration is simply part of how the gasoline energy is MANAGED.

And regeneration is merely a SMALL part of how that gasoline energy is
managed.

The SOLE SOURCE of energy that is ever put into the vehicle is gasoline.

 

I have not driven a new 'vette, but I have heard that it actually is a
respectable effort from GM. In fact, it may be the one GM product that
still has a little cachet to it.

nate