GXT

Here I am. One of the "problems" with the Volt is that it has a 16KWh battery but it actually only uses about half of it before it starts charging. That means if the battery were $10,000 you would basically be hauling around $5,000 worth of battery you don't really use. Based on the IMAs Honda has made to date, I assume Honda will put something like a 2KWh battery in their car and based on this release as well as how their IMA system works, they should be able to use pretty much all of it. That would mean a $1,250 battery and you get to use most all of it. I believe the advantage of such a battery in a non-plug-in hybrid is that more energy can be recovered while braking and therefore more energy for acceleration and therefore MPG will increase. Difference between the Honda and GM approach: 1) Give the same capacity to make batteries, Honda can produce 8 times as many cars. 2) The cost of batteries for Honda's cars will be $8,500 less expensive than the Volt. 3) This would likely be a drop in for the GSH (<sarcasm>not a revolutionary moon shot of unimaginable difficulty</sarcasm>). 4) If 3 is true, based on the pricing rumours the Honda car will cost less than 1/2 of what the Volt costs. 5) If Honda can use all 2KWh, even though their pack is 1/8th the size of the Volt, they will have 1/4 of the usable energy. But the main difference is that GM tends to try to wildly distract you from the depressing reality with promises of future vehicles that never really pan out. On the other hand, Honda will quietly deliver an excellent product when the time is right. But I am more than a bit annoyed that GM has the automakers running around like a bunch of chickens with their heads cut off trying to demonstrate that they crap Li-Ion nuggets too.

And the Volt only "exists" because of the Prius, ipso facto Toyota would be putting Li-Ion batteries in the Prius because of themselves Seriously, I believe Toyota had hoped to put Li-ion batteries in the Prius long before the PRVolt concept debuted with a couple of lead-acid car batteries, a container of detergent, and a hefty dose of PR thereby technologically catapulting GM ahead of Toyota. But seeing as how the Prius is going to be a volume product available shortly they had to go with something that could be produced and at a cost-effective price. That meant Li-Ion had to wait. The Volt is only now starting to be constrained by reality.

In general I agree with you. However I would like to see your stats on the Cobalt VS Prius. It isn't for everyone, but for many people it is much better than you are implying. A base (LS 1LS) cobalt is currently 13,570 with offers. A base Prius is 22,220. That is a difference of $8,650. If you are a city driver that does 12,000 miles/year (~32miles/day), then the prius at 45 MPG (seems reasonable based on what reasonable people are reporting) uses 266.66 gallons. The cobalt at 24 MPG uses 500 gallons. At $4/gallon that is a savings of $933/year. That is a payback period of just over 9 years. If you want to compare to the volt, let's assume 40 miles/day as it is the optimal distance for the volt. That would be $3.55/day in gas for the Prius, $6.66/day in gas for the Cobalt, and ~$1/day in electricity for the Volt. That would be $1,295/year for the Prius, $2,430 for the Cobalt, and $365/year for the Volt. Assume $40,000 sticker for the Volt. Compared to the baseline Cobalt, it will take 7.6 years for the Prius to pay for itself and 12.8 for the Volt. As you yourself attempted to point out with the Prius, 12.8 years is longer than the 10 year life expectancy of the Volt's batteries, so technically it would never pay for itself. What if you drive only 20 miles per day? Then the Volt has a 25.6 year payback over the Cobalt (15.2 for the Prius). Also, if you option out the Cobalt to match the Prius (i.e. anti-lock brakes, auto trans, etc.) then it is more like a 16K car in which case the the Prius payback is less than 6 years. Ford has more than vague photos. They had actual vehicles on the road at the end of 2007 (http://www.greenlivingonline.com/GettingAround/ford-unveils-a-new-plug-in-hybrid/) $10,000+ to a Prius is $32,000 TODAY. A Volt in 2011 is apparently going to be $40,000+. From what I can see the Project Driveway Chevy Equinox were announced Sept 2006 (http://www.autoblog.com/2006/09/18/project-driveway-gm-launches-largest-ever-fuel-cell-fleet/) but didn't actually make it into the hands of drivers until 2008 (http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/chevy-equinox-fuel-cell-suv.htm). GM's Hydrgoen Equinox's have not been "around for the past couple of years". Nor is GM's current hydrogen state comparable to Honda's FCX Clarity. But the Project Driveway vs Honda Clarity does give some insight into how the companies operate (quietly working to deliver product vs PR and delays). Take note as the Volt continues to slide and get watered down.

Looking forward to it. "Yet another mistake" isn't really a big change for GM. To be clear, I am saying that even if they do bring this car to market, it is a mistake. The only change it will make for GM is to have distracted them from doing something meaningful NOW. Cost and range make the Volt a poor solution for vast majority of buyers. The stats continue to get watered down, the cost is going up, and the mass availability is being pushed back. A widely available sub 30K car with a true 40 miles of electric range and 50MPG on gas in 2010 is a good offering. 10,000 units in 2011 (hopefully!) of a $40,000+ car that gets 30-40 miles of electric range and sub-Prius MPG on fuel isn't. By the time this kind of technology is cheap enough to be meaningful GM will be an also-ran in a crowded market. Please refer to: Mitsubishi: miles ahead of the Volt. Ford: Already ahead of the Volt with plug-in Li-Ion prototypes driving around, but correctly determined now is not the right time. Toyota: Google is already getting 90+ MPG from their fleet of Li-Ion Priuses which involve an ~$10,000 (IIRC) battery add-on. Honda: Already leasing in limited quantities a Hyrdogen powered electric vehicle with a Li-ion battery.

I assume you are talking about CDN dollars as the US Prius is in the mid to low 20Ks. By that standard the Volt may cost $55,000+ in Canada. I imagine the people that you describe are much more likely to drop 30K than 55K to buy their peace of mind.

The PR-Saga continues. Add it the following impressive PR stunts: 1) GMTruckGuy74 said the "...Chevy Volt will be the savior for GM during this bleak economic downtime...". This is a common sentiment. Why are so few questioning how a money-losing-niche product that will likely remain that way until at least 7 years from now (as per GM itself) is going to save GM from the current economic downturn? 2) Why is charging a battery with house electricity or a small gas engine and then using that battery to drive an electric motor is equivalent to a "moon shot"? 3) How did GM apparently manage to technologically leapfrog every other manufacturer by simply talking about the trivial process in point 2? 4) Further to point 3, if the only reason no one else is doing it is because it generally makes little sense and is uneconomical, why does that make GM brilliant for doing it?

Love that 3/4 view. Compared to previous shots it looks much more put together and the stance is much better. It is growing on me quickly. Perhaps it isn't the best comparison as I am comparing to one of the bigger asses out there, but I am reassured that the TL's ass does look smaller than the Cobalt's. I also appreciate that they moved the e-brake handle towards the driver. In the current TL the passenger's left leg is almost always so close that you need to ask them to move it before you can pull the handle. Although if I weren't married I would think it would be a great ice-breaker with the ladies.

Can't say I've seen a single G8 on the road. I guess it is very exclusive. I don't think the TL is in the same league as a BMW5, but the G8 isn't even in the TL's league. Hence the G8 is no where near the league of the BMW5. Even suggesting that the G8 and the BMW5 are cross-shopped boggles the mind. To say that it is "generally agreed" shows a reality disconnect. I suspect that when I do go shopping I will drive the TL, 335i, CTS, and G35. Again, I would not even consider a G8 as I am looking for a little luxury and the G8's interior removes it from that category.

Because the only profitable vehicles they had are no longer profitable. Now they are resigned to selling all their vehicles at a loss. I don't recall where I saw the number, but I believe they lost ~6 Billion on continuing automotive operations. They have mountains of debt that continue to grow and earnings are WAY down. Certainly not all the quarters will be this bad, but they really have no hope of coming out from under the weight of their situation. Without a government bailout it sounds like they have 1 - 1.5 years before they are bankrupt.

I had been watching for it as well. The event was added very recently... almost like they didn't want people to know about it . Sounds like it should be pretty ugly. Sounds like it could be several billion... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...gM&refer=us

August 1, 9:30 AM ET according to GM's website.

As a current 6MT TL owner I am looking forward to the new TL. I'm not currently a fan of the looks, but then I wasn't a fan of the new TSX pics but found it very nice in person. The only deal-breakers for me right now is whether or not I can get SH-AWD with a 6MT and whether or not Acura Canada will actually adjust their prices. The only GM that I would currently consider test driving is the CTS. The G8 isn't even worth considering... and yes I know I can get it with a V8. Let the car without the hood scoops, boring exterior, and ugly interior cast the first stone.

I picked only the accurate-looking high-% city numbers to compare because there is too much noise in general on that site. For example that one Vue entry getting 32MPG with 46% city. That is 22% higher than than the rated fuel economy and way out of line with the other entries. This reviewer managed 23.5 MPG with the Vue Hybrid in mult-day driving: http://www.canadiandriver.com/ctc/blog/tru...-vue-hybrid.htm Add 22.2 with the CR-V: http://www.canadiandriver.com/ctc/blog/tru...nda-cr-v-ex.htm Unfortunately their Rav-4 review used the V6. That is just under 6%. 6% is very bad. I expect more like 40-50% from a hybrid. I laugh when I hear GM advertising their hybrids as the cheapest in the industry (or do they say "least expensive"?). Sometimes you get what you pay for.

If you take a look here you will see some more "real-world" #s: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?acti...el=Vue%20Hybrid I wish the sample size was a bit larger, but you will see that the heavy city drivers are getting in the 22s for MPG. According to that site it also looks like the RAV-4s and CR-Vs get in the 21s for heavy city drivers. ~5% better city fuel economy is not a great result for a hybrid.

There was a comparison of the Rav4. CR-V, Vue Hybrid, and a few others in one of the major mags. The Vue Hybrid got the worst fuel economy, (IIRC) the worst performance, and the highest price of the lot. They managed only 20 MPG with the hybrid Vue and 24 MPG with the 4-cyl Rav4.

The author's premise is in the first few paragraphs: "When Ford Motor Co. came out with its new Edge crossover in 2006, the company hoped the truck-like vehicle built on a car frame would attract longtime Ford buyers trading in their inefficient sport utility vehicles." and "But if the trend continues, it's another blow to the profits at Ford, General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, all of which have developed crossovers to capture their traditional SUV and truck buyers." I think the difference is that the Asians are apparently able to survive selling cars, the domestics not so much. I know the bias claim is thrown around a lot. Didn’t the author spend enough time talking about the CR-V's decline?

From GM's public statements about what they have learnt in building the Volt (e.g. weight vs aero effect on range, stereos/components use a lot of power, etc.) I'd say that whatever knowledge transfer did take place it was less than ideal. I think the real lesson from the EV1 was not to force technology before its time. The price issue (originally ~30,000, then Loose-Lips-Lutz said ~25,000, now he admits ~40,000 just to break even, etc.), the range issue (it appears that 40 miles is city and the highway will be significantly less, ~25?), the availability issue (I believe Lutz the Leaker originally said 60,000 in the first year and 100,000/year after that, now GM is saying 200,000 over the first 5 years), the lack of testing and the admitted lack of usual rigor all once again indicate that GM is pushing something before its time. GM ran around making a lot of noise with the Volt. The fanboys and the media were talking about GM leapfrogging the competition. In the meantime Toyota and Ford already have pretty much production ready plug-in hybrid Li-ion vehicles driving around. Mitsubishi looks ready to beat GM to market with an all-electric Li-Ion vehicle. Honda is already leasing in limited numbers an electric vehicle with Li-Ion batteries powered by hydrogen (note that this is arguably the real difficult challenge for GM that they will do AFTER the Volt "moonshot"). GM likes to compare the volt to the "moon shot". They want you to believe that the relatively trivial task of charging batteries with a generator and using them to run an electric motor is a herculean effort. But it isn't, as can be shown by all the other companies that have already finished variations while GM is still talking. The real "moon shot" is to be able to mass produce it at a price people are willing to pay. GM hasn't done that before. And just like everyone else now, GM is nowhere close.

I think it is interesting that the author calls the Prius at 100,000 units and growing (>90K YTD) a niche product but pins the GM turnaround on the Volt which GM recently indicated will sell about 200,000 units from 2010-2015.

I'm not sure that Toyota needs another division, but I think the difference is that GM has 8(?) divisions while Toyota has 3 and yet the have nearly the same market share. Add to that that GM is contracting while Toyota is growing (at least until recently).

The theory for quite some time has been that the Prius is some sort of halo vehicle that drives additional sales for Toyota. However now that people are really turning to more fuel-friendly vehicles Toyota is way down and Honda is way up. There are a lot of factors at play, but I'm not so sure that this conventional wisdom about the halo effect actually works as advertised. I agree with Siegen about where GM should be directing the money. It may not be glamorous, but the 1.4 turbo will probably be more important to GM's success than the Volt. An inexpensive but effective hybrid version of the 1.4 even more so.

Not sure what you are saying about the import sales suffering. Last I saw GM was way down, Toyota is way up, and Honda is running out of cars. That is likely why GM has dropped prices and Toyota/Honda haven't. June 2008 GM -23.8% Ford -13.7% Toyota +8.8% http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/07/02/j...os.html?ref=rss So does that mean the typical domestic buyer would sell their mother up the river to save $5? I had heard they were less educated and were of a lower socio-economic status but I didn't know they were cheap as well. Well, maybe I suspected. :AH-HA_wink: GM has done a good job of equalizing prices. I'd actually consider test driving a CTS if it looks like GM will be around to honour the warranty. That would be nice. However I still haven't seen the movement on Toyota/Honda.

As I wrote in post #73: "Maybe I'm just used to buying imports and I'm not used to these rebate games, but I want to buy the car that I want to buy. If I want a G35 M6, I want to pay the US price of $33.4K, not $48K in Canada. What does Infiniti Canada offer? 4.5K off the G35x AWD. Do they have other deals? I don't know. One of the reasons I avoid domestics is to avoid these games. I just don't understand how Canadian dealers think they will be able to get away with selling a 48K G35 when a new one is $33.4K. Do they think they can justify that forever? What about two years from now when a new G35 in Canada is probably 50K and a two year old version from the US will cost ~20,000?" You could save $~30,000 if you bought a year or two old G35 M6 from the states as opposed to a new one in Canada. PS. You read anything about this yet: "Canadians imported 151,169 vehicles as of June 30, compared with 189,738 in all of 2007..." http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/Business Momentum is building.

It is an issue. However some manufacturers honour the warranty. Also, you can afford to pay for a lot of repairs if you have $20,000+ in your pocket. If you get even 5% on it you could afford $1,000/year in repairs at "no cost".

I didn't mean to imply it was the dealers fault. I think it is the manufcaturers that are to blame, but it is the dealers that are my link to the manufacturers. No, of course not. Why would anyone look at a camry?? :AH-HA_wink: Actually, I meant on new cars. Traditionally the imports have been much more clear in that regard. But those times seem to be gone. Yes there is a simple solution. Don't buy a vehicle from a Canadian dealer. I noticed my co-worker put a for sale sign on his Jetta TDI. I thought that was strange as it is only 4 or 5 years old. He wants to trade up a year to get the newer body style. I asked him if he wasn't going to take a huge hit making a change like that. He was pretty sure he could sell his old Jetta in Canada for $6-7,000 more than he paid for it (and he said that he bought it when the C dollar was only 0.80 USD) , go down to the states and buy the newer Jetta and have money left over. What does automakers raping Canadians have to do with the availability of healthcare? Talk about blaming the victim. You'd better tell the Canadian government that you have the solution to our healthcare concerns: raise the price of all Cobalts by $5,000.

That seems to be GM's current official line. However it doesn't make much sense to me. Sure, software can be complicated, but if GM really has as many resources on the Volt as they claim then I doubt figuring out how to get a gas engine to charge some batteries is such a monumental challenge.