Topic: Now this is just plain stupid....

[TD]

As you probably have heard, the Chevy Volt has been in the news lately, primarily b/c they announced the pricing. They have also made it known that it will be flex, but that's after the first year.



This from the Hybrid Car blog:


10 percent more for 5 percent better efficiency

So, the Chevy Volt will require premium gasoline,  but don’t worry, premium gasoline makes the Volt 5 percent more fuel efficient when in range extended mode. Unfortunately, however, premium gasoline costs about 10 percent more.

Then again, if you can afford a Chevy Volt, do you care about the cost of premium gas? Of course, if you can afford a Volt, do you need a $7500 tax credit?

“The Volt is a game-changing product,” says an Obama vehicles executive. The iPhone was a game-changing product, and it didn’t take a tax credit. And they sold over 90 million of the things. A game-changing product does not need a tax credit. They’re mutually exclusive.”

Rush Limbaugh made that point, recently, according to Straightline, which then used Limbaugh’s rant to ask whether vehicles like the Volt are deserving of tax credits.

I say yes, but not in the way the plug-in tax code is currently written. Like the Volt, the current plug-in tax credit doesn’t make cost-effective sense. Too much focus is on battery size rather than the potential of real world change. Unfortunately, if a plug-in is going to achieve success, it’s probably going to have to be a small battery plug-in hybrid according to the experts, and even then success will be difficult.

Consequently, while I’m not a big Limbaugh fan or hater (to be honest I’ve never listened to a show), he makes a valid point. Ultimately, competition and free markets are not purely evil tools of the devil’s capitalism, and when tax credits are focused on political favoritism rather than real world realities, inefficiency is inevitable.

Today, automakers have many tools to increase automotive efficiency, they just don’t have any incentive. Consumers don’t care that much, unless gas prices are sustainably significantly higher, and regulations don’t demand pushing the limits of efficiency. Thus,  if tax credits are the best solution, then they must inspire cost-effective, efficient competition. Otherwise, it’s all just tax-funded greenwashing and a prayer for a miracle.

On the other hand, to be sure, America can expect Japan, Korea and China, for instance, to compete against our products, and in the end it will all boil down to one thing: the most bang for the buck.On the other hand, to be sure, America can expect Japan, Korea and   China, for instance, to compete against our products, and in the end it   will all boil down to one thing: the most bang for the buck.  For now plug-in tax credits have little to do with the most bang for   the buck or real competition, and that might be OK, at the R&D   level. The possibility of speeding up a battery breakthrough is a   worthwhile endeavor, but it can’t be the primary goal, especially when   the science isn’t very supportive. Furthermore, the move to   battery-powered vehicles is ultimately about efficiency, and we should   be striving towards that efficiency as efficiently as possible if we   want the most bang for our tax-funded policies.

Sooo, I'm guessing they increased the compression with E85 in mind and it's too bad you have to wait a year for the flex fuel version.

[fleebut]

Premium may be fuel of choice for btu content. Meaning no ethanol. The auto is a high mileage hyper expensive environmental promise car. Better for them to convince the green crowd with high as possible mileage claim. These customers care little of ethanol. These are battery people.

This reasoning is the same for the import car companies that have little domestic ethanol production and see little other than U.S. or Brazil ethanol production. This the reason they are developing diesel engines as the public accustomed to simple mpg ratings. Battery cars have infinite mileage, so they must be extraordinary. Foreign auto manufacturers have more concern for high mileage and it is a very important image for them to keep. It was a successful strategy to hurt U.S. auto manufactures with the image created by U.S. environmentalist, whom actually angry at domestic business for not sharing their opinion and willing to support foreigners that feed into their opinion. It's a free country and open market so far. The foreign auto manufactures exploited a growing weakness in the world largest employer of union labor. Since U.S. manufactures hamstrung with labor problems and a whole bunch of legacy drag, the companies worked very hard to find an ever dwindling market place to produce profit. Foreign companies played the weakness and worked the green crowd to hammer domestic manufacturers. These competitors could afford quality and decided to make higher mileage autos more attractive to international crowd and impugn the U.S. as dinosaur companies, playing the domestic environmental crowd.

Saturn auto company was one attempt to stem the tide, but union politics soon broke that wall down. Unfortunately, the problem is still lurking beneath the tide and if ever the companies can succeed, they will need to offshore production. Meanwhile since foreign auto companies have no legacy costs, they can assemble autos in U.S. and convince public they are American made. Don't think nut runners the genius for auto business and the makings of auto business foundation. No, once the sales gimmick loses value they will avoid expensive labor, too. Were not an economic island and can't do business in a vacuum. We may be able to grow some local food for subsistence, but if we want quality of higher living standard we need to compete. Their was a reason in China and our past why the farm population migrated to city to make a better life. Our politics of city dwellers often romanticize making friends with wildlife and easy living feeding a few chickens and a garden, but unwilling to walk or give up the Iphone.   

[TD]

When I bought mine, the hoopla was over and it was just sticker price. Months prior it was MSRP + $2-3k.

[Dan M]

So with the $7,500 tax credit, the Volt will only cost early adopters $53,500 in LA.

I think that's the key.. early adopters..

The same was said about the Prius ..what was that 10 years ago now

I paid $2200 for a 37 Inch HD Set 6 years ago.. The 42 inch I bought 6 months ago cost $700

[TD]

From: http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/08/would-you-pay-61000-for-a-2011-chevy-volt.html#more



The 2011 Chevy Volt drew some flak when GM announced the extended-range hybrid would cost $41,000.   Even right-wing commentator Rush Limbaugh got in on the action saying   that the Volt should stand on its own, ditch the government sponsorship   and let the market do the talking.
Well, at least according to one Southern California dealership, the market isn't just talking, it's screaming.
An Edmunds employee looking to buy a new car emailed a local dealer   looking to secure a lease on a new Volt. Emailing the Internet   Specialist about the reported $350/mo lease, they received a surprising   response....
Hello *****
Thank you for your online request, as you know the Volt is   going to be a very limited production vehicle for the first 2-3 years.   Demand is going to far exceed supply for this vehicle, initially our   asking price for the Volt is going to be MSRP plus $20,000, we are expecting only receive 9 Volts all of next year.
I will keep you in my customer base for when the Volt comes out   and I will contact you with any information as I receive it.  We are   taking orders right now for the Volt, if you would like more   information, please let me know and I will be more than happy to help   you. Thank you.
***** *****, Internet Specialist
******* Chevrolet
********, CA
 
So with the $7,500 tax credit, the Volt will only cost early adopters $53,500 in LA.
We emboldened the price ourselves for effect, but think it's justified. $20,000 over MSRP. On a car that just received a 50% production boost.   Edmunds Autoobserver also reports, a GM spokesperson told Volt-watching   website GM-Volt.com, "We also aren't expecting our dealers to   overcharge anyone for this vehicle, either, and will monitor the   situation closely when we launch. Also added was, "we'll be paying close   attention when the vehicle launches and do our best to strongly   discourage this kind of behavior, as we always do with any GM-branded   vehicle."
We have no comment from the manufacturer at this time.

[fleebut]

What you post of market place, efficiency, customers, and government deciding winners and losers....well long term the hope and prayer process while throwing money at a good intentioned solution is a waste unless it has real economic advantages. How true.

First the market place is all knowing and the final judgement. Their isn't enough money in the country to prop up ineffective solutions permanently. Meaning talk is easy as spending other peoples money, but the buck stops when we all have to spend our hard earned money.  We lose our dreamy idealism as retirement is near or Jimmy has to go to college.

So, the market place is on the hunt for cost effective solutions. The Volt as introduced a joke of a viable solution. Maybe in future? With a whole ton of break through technology. The battery cars all in need of break through technology.  This is dangerous to bet the farm on. Remember how the hydrogen fuel cell and predictions we will want for nothing as the inventors are hard at work decreasing cost. That mass production would make them cheap. You could graph the incremental improvement and extrapolate extremely low cost in 10 years. Never happened. It doesn't work that way. Same with solar cells and same with batteries. We can not predict the future and should not bet the farm on projections.

Give you an example a market game changer. That OPOC engine based on proven technology....nothing new but a remodeling and adaption of electric over exhaust turbo. The potential so vast private investor money easy available. The project attracting best talent away from automotive. How would the market react to an engine one half the weight, one half the size, and much cheaper that would produce 2x the torque and at much higher mileage. Mileage 30% above current technology diesel. It's just an more efficient package of current ICE technology. No break through required.

[TD]

Here's a video promoting the Volt.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iPsvTEq0PQ&amp;feature=player_embedded" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">What Makes the Chevrolet Volt a Better Electric Vehicle?</a>

[EMAS]

You're right, it is just plain stupid.  Why on earth would they not make it FFV?  All they had to do was tweak the computer and get it certified with the EPA.  Now they have to certify it twice.

Ridiculous.  Nothing like shooting themselves in the foot.

It's a little more than just "tweaking" the computer and they still have to certify it twice, once on gas and once on E85. Plain and simple GM didn't have the money and time to perfect it as a FFV. Also the cost per unit will be astronomical on what will be such a limited volume vehicle at least initially.

On the one hand I do agree that requiring premium goes against the low cost of operation theory, but on the other hand the higher the octane the more efficient the vehicle can be tuned to operate at. Since they do plan to make it a FFV which can also benefit from higher compression. So it does make some sense, in the long run, saving the need to redesign the engine with higher compression, to take better advantage of E85 once they have the time and $$ to test and dial in FFV operation fully, and then certify it for use on E85.

[fleebut]

GM over hyped the technology and said they gambled the companies future upon the Volt. That was back a few months when all were PO'd at GM ignorance for not building efficient mpg autos and hybrids. That was back when Toyota was the darling for intelligent auto management. Well, what the public didn't understand....

The cost of manufacturing for GM was above all competitors. They couldn't compete upon the small efficient machines. They made big bucks building luxurious SUV loaded with customers desires. They were leaders and enjoyed  command of this market. Enter the crushing petrol market during our election. Politics and costly fuel magnified all emotions to demand change. GM hit the financial wall, disgraced management, and investors. They paid the price. But, just today the car market indicators have full size SUV's the fastest growing. Go figure. By the way Toyota started the hybrid sales sensation with a net loss of $2,000 per vehicle.

Leap ahead to today's market. Toyota suffering financially and understand they can not compete in the plain Jane Lithium battery car. They are focused on advanced batteries. China has the lithium battery market cornered with a strategy of partnering with advanced U.S. R&D. The partnership hopefully will be mutually beneficial?

BTW China has a most capable auto company with a CEO owner described as modern day hard working Henry Ford type entrepreneur. Warren Buffet heavily invested. They have a Chinese "Volt" waiting to invade U.S. with a price tag in $20's and range of 150 miles. The Chinese government is holding their competitors back per the cooperative agreement.   

[TD]

It's going to be released in limited numbers in a handful of markets initially, primarily in the sunbelt. Since this is a new technology, there could be a lot of tweaking initially and maybe they want to get the FF certification later on so as to only do it once. We've seen this in many other vehicles.

I bet this could really work nicely with E30.

[Steve-O]

Yeah especially if higher octane is desirable in this application - an enging not driving wheels but electricity generation. Not taking away from the concept of the extended range electric in general - I like it. But this is another disappointing move by GM. It would have been soooo easy to make that little engine flex.

[rusty70f100]

You're right, it is just plain stupid.  Why on earth would they not make it FFV?  All they had to do was tweak the computer and get it certified with the EPA.  Now they have to certify it twice.

Ridiculous.  Nothing like shooting themselves in the foot.