The Dirty Little Secrets About The Volt GM Doesn't Want YOU or Obama To Know

You have in GM's Volt a perfect car of the Age of Obama -- or at least the Honeymoon of Obama, before the reality principle kicks in.

Even as GM teeters toward bankruptcy and wheedles for billions in public aid, its forthcoming plug-in hybrid continues to absorb a big chunk of the company's product development budget. This is a car that, by GM's own admission, won't make money. It's a car that can't possibly provide a buyer with value commensurate with the resources and labor needed to build it. It's a car that will be unsalable without multiple handouts from government.

We're talking about a headache of a car that will have to be recharged for six hours to give 40 miles of gasoline-free driving. What if you park on the street or in a public garage? Tough luck. The Volt also will have a small gas engine onboard to recharge the battery for trips of more than 40 miles. Don't believe press blather that it will get 50 mpg in this mode. Submarines and locomotives have operated on the same principle for a century. If it were so efficient in cars, they'd clog the roads by now. (That GM allows the 50 mpg myth to persist in the press, and even abets it, only testifies to the company's desperation.)

Hardly mentioned is the fact that gasoline goes bad after a few months. If the Volt is used as intended, for daily trips of 40 miles or less, the car's tank will have to be drained periodically and the gas disposed of.

Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi now want to bail out Detroit once more, while mandating that the Big Three build "green" cars. If consumers really wanted green cars, no mandate would be necessary. Washington here is just marching Detroit deeper into an unsustainable business model, requiring ever more interventions in the future.

He ran a brilliant campaign, but his programmatic prescriptions amounted to handwaving designed to capture the presidency rather than tell voters what really to expect. This may have been a virtue in campaigning but it becomes a handicap in governing. The public now has no idea what to expect -- except miracles, reconciling all opposites, turning all hard choices into gauzy win-wins. Thanks to Detroit, his honeymoon is about to end before it begins.

Source: Wall Street Journal

Read Article

91z4me - 11/12/2008 1:07:35 PM

+13 Boost

Wow do you think this author has a grudge to bear or what?!

silver1 - 11/12/2008 4:37:27 PM

+5 Boost

Obama, Pelosi, Frank are not stupid.
They are very smart people. They stated before they give Detroit any money they want them to provide hard documentation on long term plans that have to become profitable in the long run.

silver1 - 11/12/2008 4:38:47 PM

+4 Boost

Bush just flat out and told GM NO....Dirty knows Dirty scams....

lexusrox123 - 11/13/2008 8:59:14 AM

+2 Boost

let the consumers deccide what to buy, dont make a gov't mandate for companies on what to make. the volt isnt cost effective

Porschinator - 11/13/2008 6:18:55 PM

0 Boost

Idiotic article that adds nothing to anything.

Bighead255 - 11/14/2008 9:12:11 PM

+2 Boost

001 works for the Republican Party

Whelan - 11/12/2008 1:26:10 PM

-3 Boost

What a bunch of BS. The Volt will return a profit and it will sell. People who park on the street are not the target market of this car. It is people who live in suburbia who commute to work each day. And ar able to plug it in at the office garage or at home overnight.

And how many damn times do I have to put the math out there that 40miles without using the gas engine is HUGE. Cause if you charge it each way you can essentially drive to and from work with using NO gas. So you would not delve into the the gas consumption of the car extending the range in my early figures to almost 1200 miles which far surpasses that of a tank in the Prius.

HSCenterconsole - 11/12/2008 1:43:47 PM

+9 Boost

Whelan, where are you getting your info from (other than your own opinions)? It is commonly known in both the automotive industry and by financial analysts (who study the industry) that the Volt will NOT make any profit during its first generation.

From what I understand, the Prius only started generating profit Toyota a few years ago.

ghosthunter - 11/12/2008 2:06:37 PM

+12 Boost

more advanced doesn't imply more profit. quite the opposit, more advanced often means more deficit.
in fact, toyota hasn't even break even with its hybrid investment yet. you may think after all those prius, hybrid camry or highlanders, toyota would have made tons of money already. the fact is, any new technology is very very costly. which is why german big3 insisted in refining diesel instead of inventing something that is breakthrough (plus the fact that diesels are much cheaper than gas in eu).

fuelfool - 11/12/2008 4:54:03 PM

+4 Boost

bimmerfan25,

Just stop.

pacotacolol - 11/12/2008 9:04:19 PM

0 Boost

Bimmerfan,

Its Bob Lutz, Not Putz. Was that intentional?

Hyundai - 11/12/2008 11:52:41 PM

0 Boost

"this volt is more advanced than the 3rd gen prius, let alone the first."

Wow. Talk about exposing your intelligence..

Porschinator - 11/13/2008 6:25:28 PM

+1 Boost

Original Prius did not make money, the new Honda Hydrogen vehicle will not make money, a lot of new tech 1st gen does not make money! Article is retarded! What 1st gen hybrids/elec autos do is set the initial launch and future cars of same type will be cheaper to produce since foundation is built and initial R&D money spent.

Toyotas new 3rd gen Prius in the same as 2nd gen except with minor facelift and updated batteries (lithium). It will make money for Toyota since R&D is minimal.

zorbeeze - 11/14/2008 7:46:49 PM

+1 Boost

"lot of new tech 1st gen does not make money!"
Finally somebody understands it.
Generally, when a company invests so heavilly on a new technology it's part of a LONG TERM plan, not to make money the next week, let alone the next year. Their are huge benefits to be the first company to release a new technology. If GM gets the Volt right and continues on pressing in this technology they will reap the benefits within 5 years not 1 year.

stash84 - 11/15/2008 3:56:09 PM

+1 Boost

so people will be allowed to charge their cars at work?

HSCenterconsole - 11/12/2008 1:35:43 PM

+1 Boost

001, you should be careful copying and pasting copyrighted material directly from WSJ Online. From what I understand, NWS can be pretty tough on this.

Anyways, I read this piece in the Journal this morning. I liked the suggestion of elminating the CAFE standards.

Agent001 - 11/12/2008 1:42:17 PM

-2 Boost

There is always a link back to the story and it is sourced.

You do your job and I will do mine.

001

zorbeeze - 11/14/2008 7:50:15 PM

+2 Boost

Eliminating the CAFE standards is the worst thing the government can do.
The big 3 need to learn to adapt, they are a textbook case of conservative companies who refuse to adjust to the new times.

HSCenterconsole - 11/12/2008 1:49:31 PM

+8 Boost

Bimmerfan25, rather than just calling the author an "idiot" why don't you combat his conclusion with facts?

I think the author makes a valid point. The Federal government is forcing GM to produce smaller and less-profitable cars (helping to contribute to their horrendous financial situation) while getting ready to bail them out of that very financial situation. Kind of a viscious circle.

GodfatherSHM - 11/12/2008 1:50:32 PM

+4 Boost

you have got the be one of the rudest people on this post. What is your problem. We have the right to our own opinions, what makes your opinions the right ones, we except your opinions as just that, opinions...if you aren't going to be productive please just leave this website, and let people post their opinions.

91z4me - 11/12/2008 2:04:23 PM

+4 Boost

The H2 is still profitable in small volumes. The investment to produce it was repaid a while ago. GM is still making them because they still sell and people still want them.

HSCenterconsole - 11/12/2008 2:06:21 PM

+6 Boost

The H2 was a huge cash cow for GM. It cost little to develop it since it shared the same platform as the Tahoe/Escalade/Yukon but was sold at a huge premium. Same deal with the Escalade. Same underpinnnings, higher price.

HSCenterconsole - 11/12/2008 2:06:48 PM

0 Boost

neutral - 11/12/2008 4:31:46 PM

+4 Boost

BimmerFan25 is right though..

GM/Ford could build the BEST mid-sized car ever, but people still wouldn't buy it. Then the government passes CAFE and other measures to stop Big3 from making profitable vehilces.

People still forget, WE NEED TRUCKS. Stop penalizing detroit for catering to a market. I challenge anyone on this site, that the next time you get a room in your house re-modeled, find a contractor that DOESNT have a truck.

zorbeeze - 11/14/2008 7:58:37 PM

+1 Boost

"The Federal government is forcing GM to produce smaller and less-profitable cars"
Smaller cars can provide good profit if done right. The problem the big 3 have is that their small cars are horrible and people won't buy them. They end up selling huge portions of their small cars to rental companies at a discounted price. If they didn't provide huge incentives such as o% for 72 months their lots would be filled with the small cars. They need to provide small cars that the public could actually picture themselves in. And i'm not talking about the cobalts, etc., the fusion, g6, etc. need to be improved. Toyota and Honda are where they are today by producing small cars. For GM, they have way too many brands that are competing with eachother. They need to trim down.

GodfatherSHM - 11/12/2008 1:57:13 PM

+3 Boost

learn about government before you bash it, you would realize that Congress passes things, well before a president signs it into law. So during the left wing control of the last few years these problems have come about.

Fundamentals are strong, investors are smart, why do you think people are taking their money out.

Fundamental:a basic principle, rule, law, or the like, that serves as the groundwork of a system..

"fundamentals of our economy are strong" does not mean the economy is strong, for being so smart and always trashing everyone else, figured you would understand that...

mscottc1 - 11/12/2008 2:08:04 PM

+3 Boost

ok, so next thing I know you're going to be saying something like "socialism is great" or "death to capitalism & the free market".... all these bailouts are the WORST possible thing that could have happened. Now our economy has swung so far that all these companies & business sectors feel they are "depending" on a bailout.

If the government can't keep roads up, and has corrupted and robbed from social security to the point that it's a joke, why in the world should we trust them to run businesses or tell business what they can or cannot build?

LONG LIVE THE FREE MARKET!!! (that is, if we can bring it fully back to life)

mscottc1 - 11/12/2008 3:10:45 PM

+1 Boost

Oh give me a break- the left hasn't been in charge of congress? What are you smoking? You quoted numbers from the Senate, not the house. And your numbers are wrong since both independents caucus with the Dems. PLUS, most of the Republicans have been acting like Libs voting for crazy spending policies & not holding government accountable to the people! REALITY is that the country is in the middle, not left or right. The politicians want us to think otherwise because divisiveness sells.

RE trusting the free market- look at home many people are above the poverty level now vs. before the Bush years- I'm not defending Bush's policies by any means- I disagree on lots if not most of them. But we've had a very long period of great prosperity. People got too greedy and the whole thing fell in around them- THAT's what happened. Letting these companies fail would have been smarter- weed out the problems, survival of the fittest.

R135 - 11/12/2008 4:23:29 PM

+6 Boost

mscottc1, socialism is great... death to capitalism... See that's not hard to say for someone who has not been brainwashed. Cheers.

09CTSVforMe - 11/13/2008 8:22:37 AM

+2 Boost

Do you guys think there weren't many aspects of socialism in the US prior to the "bailout"? Really?

The US is not a "free market" and has not been without socialist aspects for at least 120+ years. Ever hear of "public schools" or Medicaid or Social Security or ...well ,I think you get the point.

The single biggets problem with the Government regarding the greed of Wall Street is not derugulation or the bill Clinton & Gramm signed or what Bush did or who is where in what Congress.

We have had all the regulation and oversight in place, they just don't DO ANYTHING, even when abuses are rampant and obvious.

It is known as the SEC.

09CTSVforMe - 11/13/2008 8:36:42 AM

+1 Boost

1UAW, why in the world would you want the US worker to make products like erasers (or any other low-cost, low-price commodity item). Look at the big picture, and think along the lines of comparative advantage.

We outsource low-skill, low paying jobs to coutries who need/want them. We keep or create high-paying, high skill jobs here.

Would you rather the US make autos, jets, computers, and financial services or should we make erasers, socks, cheap toys, and sit in call centers?

The problem with the braod perception of sending jobs overseas is nobody looks at what kind of jobs we're sending, and what kind of jobs we should be working toward here. Americans need to retool their brains, learn new, more valuable skills, and pursue better jobs.

This same mentality is seen within our own borders. Detroit is crying because the auto industry is leaving them. That is because they aren't competetive, and why the plants move south. Go back and look at Bethlehem Steel and Mack Trucks and what happened to them in eastern PA. Then look at what type of jobs are coming into eastern PA (after two generations of cryin about it)...medical services, education, and such.

You can't continue to do something that someone is willing to do cheaper and expect to stay competetive.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 10:40:12 AM

+1 Boost

"Oh give me a break- the left hasn't been in charge of congress?"

They had a decent majority in the house, and a very marginal majority in the senate, but not a filibuster proof majority. If the dems did manage to push a bill through congress (usually with quite a bit of compromise due to filibusters) it was usually vetoed by Bush, unless the bill contained exactly what Bush wanted. After a veto, time and time again, the dems would bend over, take it up the rear, and give bush what he wanted. Thus while the dems have had a majority, they definitely haven't been controlling what has become law.

"why in the world would you want the US worker to make products like erasers (or any other low-cost, low-price commodity item)."

We DON'T want the US worker producing erasers, but why shouldn't they be made in US factories??? The jobs would be the people designing the machines and computers that run the factory, plus some highly paid technicians to monitor and repair the factory. There is no reason that the US cannot produce all goods that we use in our daily lives and do so competitively, we just need to embrace automation and make sure that our citizens get the proper education to design, build and maintain automation systems.

zorbeeze - 11/14/2008 8:13:31 PM

+2 Boost

09ctsvforme is the onyl one who actually understands the situation.
mscottc1, were you aware of the presidents veto power?

mercuryguy - 11/12/2008 1:51:49 PM

-2 Boost

PBS Frontline – the most respected news journal on television filmed the Chevy Volt during Frontline’s Global Warming Documentary. The Volt couldn’t even outrun a bicycle the day they filmed. GM asked Frontline to speed the footage up to make it look like the car was driving faster. Frontline doesn’t fake anything.

Wouldn’t it be a whole lot easier and less costly for GM to produce a Diesel Sedan with an 8-speed manual paddle shifter instead?

Pouring billions into a questionable car is very costly.

Will Americans buy such a limited-use vehicle? How about all that coal that will need to be burned to create the increased demand for electricity to power these plug-ins?

Time to give-up on this Plug-In idea.
Go Diesel now, followed by a worthy effort to bring Hydrogen to the market as soon as possible. Diesel can at least save the company in the near-term.

VW and Mercedes have been successful with Diesel in Europe, Canada and 3rd world countries where gasoline is not readily available.

Why buy a Volt if I can out-pedal the thing on my $100 Bicycle.

09CTSVforMe - 11/13/2008 8:40:18 AM

+3 Boost

Yes, it is called "Nuclear" (not nucular, W)

We need to get past the fear of Three Mile Islansd (where NOONE was hurt or killed, BTW) and expand our nuclear electricity generation now and fast.

This is one area where France is a role model. They produce so much electricity that they actually export it!

DaHarder - 11/12/2008 2:03:40 PM

+4 Boost

Oh, Give Me An F-Ing Break!

If the Volt was sporting a badge originating from Munich, Bavaria or even Nagoya, these 'so-called' journalists would be drooling all over themselves already...

Personally, I hope it does extremely well, and serves as a true harbinger of future GM product development.

HSCenterconsole - 11/12/2008 2:09:45 PM

+6 Boost

Way to add to the conversation cptamazing. By being crass and insulting the author (rather than refuting his point with facts or intelligence), you just serve to strengthen his argument.

Sp33drac3r - 11/12/2008 2:17:27 PM

+2 Boost

Like most Halo cars, the Volt is not being designed to make a lot of money. Its being created to show what can be done and have the technology in the car trickle down into other cars with hopes of making them more efficient. Had GM been thinking about a more economical fuel efficient future instead of trying to focus on high profit SUV's for so many years, they wouldn't have found their backs up against the wall when sales of those vehicles died as gas prices hit almost $5 per gallon.

skippee - 11/12/2008 2:27:54 PM

-1 Boost

sooooooooo.....WHY DOES BOB FUTZ STILL HAVE A JOB???? dang good question....this guy has been the captain of a sinking ship for too long and still manages to hold on to the wheel???? this moron could have done a joint venture with a real car company and rebadged a viable hybrid that we could be driving today but instead has wasted what little money they had left on some golf cart of the future.

91z4me - 11/13/2008 1:18:22 AM

+2 Boost

skippy,
You may want to read more and rant less. Rick Wagner is CEO of GM. Bob Lutz is head of global vehicle development, he is the car czar. He has improved chassis sharing, economies of scale, and upped the interior materials and design. That IS his job. The Malibu, CTS, GMT900 trucks/suvs, and Lambda crossovers demonstrate that he is doing a very good job.

mercuryguy - 11/12/2008 2:28:57 PM

+1 Boost

We are spending billions to re-invent the wheel.

Going 5mph doesn’t seem like progress. What happens when you approach a hill to climb? Seems to me, one could also bypass the gas-pump with the olde Horse and buggy. You only need to bring along a bucket of oats, which costs far less than a gallon of gasoline.

It would seem that the Amish are the brightest and most innovative Americans at the moment.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 10:52:26 AM

+1 Boost

"Going 5mph doesn’t seem like progress."

Clearly the car in reference was a development model that was restricted in one or more ways.

"What happens when you approach a hill to climb?"

It goes right up the hill without missing a beat. Electric motors have amazing amounts of torque, so hill-climbing is not an issue. The electric motor is no toy. The gas engine is not even attached to the power-train because it is a series hybrid. The electric motor provides ALL of the horsepower that moves the car. The gas engine is just a generator. In fact the gas engine in a series hybrid is much more efficient than the engine used in a typical car or parallel hybrid car because it only needs to run at one speed and load.

mercuryguy - 11/12/2008 2:42:29 PM

-2 Boost

More electrical components=More trouble.

Years ago, the cooling fan was connected to the Crankshaft on motors.

One day, someone got the bright idea to make car fans electric.

Years ago, Cooling Fans lasted the life of a car; well over 100K miles, today replacing electric fans is a common problem on cars.

Heat, Oil, contaminants and coolant cause these components to fail prematurely.

I don’t call more repairs and higher-maintenance as progress. The consumer loses on the cost of these cheaper technologies. Mechanical components tend to be more robust.

Electric cars are nice when they are new, but, I wouldn’t want to buy a used one that is a few years old. It is costly enough in my state to get a car to pass inspection, even a late model car.

Get 1-idiot light on the dash, and it is time to get your wallet out, if you want to drive to work the next day.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 10:57:18 AM

+1 Boost

A fan attached directly to the engine runs constantly... even when the car has just started and it is -20. This robs power from the engine and decreases efficiency.

chewy - 11/12/2008 3:03:49 PM

+3 Boost

A 5,000 tax credit for the Volt would be reasonable. You can't expect people to go green without some incentives.

The several thousand tax credits for diesels and hybrids are something that manufacturers use in advertising.

If anything, the cheap gas (right now/or when the Volt is out) will probably hurt the Volt somewhat.

And it will get some sales from the richer people if their favorite celebrity gets of the Prius bandwagon.

chewy - 11/12/2008 3:08:43 PM

+1 Boost

7,500 tax credit is a little high, but is still reasonable

and the guy does raise some good pointers, especially about the bogus 100 mpg rating. the Volt supposedly will max out at around 92 mpg (energy equivalents) in all electric mode (the most efficient obviously)

holmstar - 11/13/2008 11:00:45 AM

0 Boost

"the Volt supposedly will max out at around 92 mpg (energy equivalents) in all electric mode (the most efficient obviously)"

Even so, the "gallon" of electricity costs a fraction of the gallon of gas. So the cost per mile is still much less. At least for the first 40 miles.

g2ok - 11/12/2008 3:12:08 PM

-1 Boost

What does the President elect have to do with the Volt ?
The Volt is GM's response to the popular Prius and they are at least trying to get a product to market that will shift the reliance on gasoline motors to electric using a new nano-tech based battery.

The oil industry made a lot of profit at the expense of the auto industry and now the finance sector has collapsed. Yes, GM made some stupid decisions. The Volt may cost more up front to make, but will get cheaper as the tech matures. I say we bail out the American car companies using finances from a nationalized oil industry.

neutral - 11/12/2008 4:14:15 PM

+1 Boost

Don' know about nationalizing the oil industry (kinda hard to do since we really don't have much oil on our turf, AND... most other big oil companies are foreign...so we would just be introducing government inefficiency), but I'm all about cutting the "extra" speculators.. you know, the guys who didn't exist before Clinton signed in the Enron legislation in Dec 2000.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 11:07:17 AM

0 Boost

"kinda hard to do since we really don't have much oil on our turf"

Actually, we are the third largest producer of oil in the world, right behind Saudi Arabia and Russia. We just don't export any of it.

EL34 - 11/12/2008 3:16:34 PM

-3 Boost

GM needs to dump GMC, Pontiac, Hummer and Saturn ASAP.

Chevrolet, Buick and Cadillac is all we need.

But, will the fascist UAW allow any job cuts?

Well, if GM goes bankrupt I will assume the pigs in charge of the UAW will have no choice.

mscottc1 - 11/12/2008 3:44:14 PM

+3 Boost

I say drop all but Cadillac and Chevrolet. Pretty much covers all the bases that way-

RE the UAW- I heard something earlier today that makes me want to puke- this proposed bailout of the auto industry really is nothing more than a bailout of the UAW. $48/hr for Toyota's mfr costs vs. $78/hr for GM..... that pretty much says it all. (those numbers include healthcare, retirement, actual pay and other benefits all lumped together)

neutral - 11/12/2008 3:47:24 PM

0 Boost

Mscottc1,

LOTS of that number has to do with legacy costs. GM still trail toyota in terms of "here & now" manufacturing costs, but the difference is MUCH smaller than you would think.

09CTSVforMe - 11/12/2008 10:41:02 PM

+1 Boost

Buick?!?! Really?

Keep Chevy, Caddy, and the new Saturn (aka Opel) in the US and you'd have a competetive product line in a massively more efficient business model.

They don't need a bailout to continue doing bad business. If they can produce an effective new business model, I'd consider helping, but GM has GOT to change as a corporation, or bailouts will only delay the inevitable.

bigTYME - 11/13/2008 12:02:30 AM

+1 Boost

Buick can be a winner. I've driven a Lucerne lately and it is freakin comfortable. It's kinda nice to drive a mattress every once in a while. The interior is made of decent quality too. I mean it isn't as nice as the new CTS interior, but I would say it is about 85% there. The upcoming LaCrosse looks good too; a good competitor to the Lincoln MKS, ES350. As for Pontiac, I really think they should just badge the G8 as a Chevy and get rid of the rest of the models.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 11:18:03 AM

+1 Boost

"Buick can be a winner."

While I agree that the new Buicks are nice cars, the problem is that, like the Lincolns they compete with, they really aren't needed. If anything, they probably draw down the sales of Cadillacs more than they steal sales from Lincoln.

neutral - 11/12/2008 3:45:26 PM

+5 Boost

EXCUSE ME....

For everyone that says the volt only goes 5mph because Frontline said it does...

There have been numerous sightings of the disguised volt parading around GM's test facilities at near-full capabilities.

Could we all please stop with the 5mph BS... please.

Case & Point - For everyone that is upset NOW that GM is building the Volt, you'd be the same people who would be whining if GM wasn't building the Volt. You'd be saying "GM is making no effort for electric-based cars, GM only makes trucks & SUV's"...Blah blah blah.

Shut up already. God.. no matter what the domestics do, there's always someone complaining.

This technology, even if it is going to drain money NOW... will secure our FUTURE. Once again, to all of you who are complaining, I am tempted to go and see if you've ever written in previous posts complaining that GM is short-sighted.

Also... I'd like a sound off of everyone on this site who ACTUALLY WORKS FOR THE AUTO INDUSTRY. Everyone seems to know SO MUCH yet I want people from the inside to voice their opinions. Too many people blabbing the same old garbage, especially when there's talk of Detroit, or flame wars about BMW/Toyota/Infiniti.

Styles79 - 11/12/2008 5:05:49 PM

+1 Boost

Well I work in the industry, for a fairly major manufacturer. I think that GM are going in the right direction with the Volt, but am a worried that it's a little too late. I fear for GM's future, but that said, I just don't see how the USA government can't bail them out, there's just too much at stake.

PlanB - 11/12/2008 5:58:24 PM

+1 Boost

100% agreed. GM needs the Volt. And as far their bailout goes, its sucks that the government has to but they're in a sort "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. Nobody wants to give them the money but if it doesn't happen the economy will falter a lot more so than now. So whats the lesser evil? That should be a no-brainer.

jayr1 - 11/12/2008 3:54:49 PM

+2 Boost

I agree with you EL34. GM has too many redundant models that are just re-badged; thus nullifying any economy of scale in production savings. The Volt is a good idea - the problem is it will not be available to purchase until 2010/2011. By that time many others competitors will have already come to market with less expensive alternatives. Only solution is if we provide federal money it needs to be attached with many stipulations that would in effect need to re-engineer GM, starting with a new management team and consider releasing the Volt next year.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 11:25:09 AM

0 Boost

The thing that sets the volt apart from the other hybrids that are available is the fact that it is a series hybrid. It is the only one that is driven entirely by an electric motor. The gas engine is just a generator to charge the batteries. In fact the gas generator could be replaced by whatever new technology becomes more efficient, such as a fuel cell stack, or micro fusion device, or antimatter generator, etc. OK the last two are pretty far fetched, but the point is that parallel hybrids are likely to be the future. Maybe not right away, but eventually.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 12:03:03 PM

0 Boost

oops, I meant series hybrids will be the future... not parallel hybrids.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 11:29:11 AM

+1 Boost

I'll fix that for you:
"BTW: Ships and trains are VASTLY more fuel efficient than cars!"

holmstar - 11/13/2008 12:00:09 PM

0 Boost

Hey man, I'm trying to help your point here.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 4:08:33 PM

+1 Boost

Well aren't you feeling pissy today. I didn't to it just for the sake of doing it. The point was to emphasize what you said. If you find that obnoxious, I really don't care.

AgentOrange - 11/12/2008 4:08:23 PM

-2 Boost

It's Obama's fault...

neutral - 11/12/2008 4:18:55 PM

0 Boost

Please no one respond.. AgentOrange is dragging a line to see if anyone will bite.

BMWsuk - 11/12/2008 4:14:26 PM

+3 Boost

Well, GM and domestic car makers must ask themselves why Americans are buying Toyota, Honda etc....Making a good car is not enough b/c domestic car makers do have some decent cars but they are not selling.

It is a bad idea to bail out failing ventures b/c it won't stop the bleeding anytime soon. Biz fundamentals tell you biz fail b/c they don't have solid biz plans.

The bailout price tag is now 3.5 trillions and rising fast....How much more can the gov do? not much in my humble opinion. The goc can't run GM, Ford etc....

Consolidation is probably the answer here. Produce fewer models but saleable models. Engineering resources must be spent on designing better cars, more salable cars etc....Maybe create a new brand instead of keeping Ford, Chev, etc.....Call them anything you want but the old brands are dead. I don't have the answer but we do know they can't keep pumping money into a black hole.

Obama and Congress can't do anything so they must stay out of this mess.

dodahman - 11/12/2008 5:03:10 PM

-3 Boost

It's spelled, "sellable."

Styles79 - 11/12/2008 5:14:49 PM

+3 Boost

sal·a·ble also sale·a·ble (sa'l?-b?l)
adj. Offered or suitable for sale; marketable.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 11:38:13 AM

+1 Boost

Actually, the idea of wiping the slate clean and starting a new brand or two is an intriguing idea... It would certainly allow them to dump some of the stigma of poor quality that has plagued the US auto industry. Unfortunately, this would be a HUGE financial investment, and the big 3 just don't have the cash to undertake a change of that magnitude.

But...

GM is widely expected to file for bankruptcy if they don't get assistance. Currently there is fear that if GM does go bankrupt, that they wont be able to find investors to fund the reorganization that will have to occur during bankruptcy.

I wonder if these investors would like the idea of introducing new brand and dropping the existing ones over several years. That might just be something with enough future potential to attract wary investors...

BigShow50 - 11/12/2008 4:25:29 PM

0 Boost

Guys we are jumping the gun here big time with the Volts possible capabilties...GM still has to prove this product in the real world. All they can say for now is "perfection" from their end just to save face for themselves and whoever investors are still around. At the end of the day GM continues to struggle in the most brutal way, and they will provide nothing but words to buy time and we are talking the next few years at least before this Volt product actually hits the market, ohh and by the way you honestly think Toyota is worrying about this Volt?!?!...They are not even breaking a sweat. The Volt has to compete with other brands, not only against Toyota, but other who are working and willing to release a product also running on electricity even before the Volt breaks ground. And besides when the Volt does make it our into the real world I'm sure the Prius has something up it's sleeve by then...remember Toyota is good in keeping it "Politically correct" no matter how technologically advance Toyota can really be, but just to not save face for themselves but also GM for that matter...GM had their chance in the past and it was called Saturn EV1 and other financial chances in the past with or without the governement's help and they still don't get it?!?!? Greed they abused to the extreme not caring about their own American people and its' long term...so they took their lousy chances again and again, it caught up to them and they failed "AGAIN!!!" and now they should accept defeat and pack up their bags and leave Detroit...

mercuryguy - 11/12/2008 5:53:23 PM

0 Boost

I’m not bashing GM for wanting to build an electric car, I just think it is fool hardy to think the Volt will be the lifeboat, and bet the farm on it when Diesel can be brought on-line quicker and at less cost.

It amazes me that GM refuses to build a Diesel Business Sedan in this environment. They give the consumer little chi=oice and marketing people decide what people should drive. Huge mistake!

The closest thing GM has to a business sedan is the Impalla, that is very sad. The Deville is nice, but gas powered as well.

Building 4x4s and SUVs with a Gas engine was a joke from the onset. I’m not sure why people didn’t understand this.

Gas engines is not the answer to move large vehicles. The Boat building industry and Motorhome industry learned this lesson many moons ago when their gasoline products didn’t sell.
Diesel is a far more logical choice for larger vehicles. GM used GAS engines because they wanted to build things as cheaply as possible. Same reason the Automakers decided to use plastic bolts as a bogus answer to the CAFÉ standard.

The fact is, I want to buy a Diesel sedan from one of the big three, but none of them offer one.

So there is no compelling reason for me to buy a new car since they are currently all the same.

Why do we have scores of cookie cutter car models, but not one Diesel Sedan or Diesel Wagon?

VW, Audi and Mercedes are the only offerings. Even Subaru is testing Diesel.

Styles79 - 11/12/2008 7:31:22 PM

0 Boost

Subaru isn't just testing, they've already released diesel Legacy and Outback, with Forester and Impreza to follow in December.

09CTSVforMe - 11/13/2008 8:47:22 AM

0 Boost

Read up on the deisel refining capacity and infrastructure of the US and then imagine what would happen if 10% more deisels were on our roads. 25%? 50%? Wow! I'll be glad to have my gasoline burner then!

09CTSVforMe - 11/13/2008 9:05:39 AM

0 Boost

Here, in simple chart form, from the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association:
48% gasoline vs. 17% on-road diesel.

http://www.npra.org/docs/ourIndustry/fuelfacts/TypicalRefineryProd2005.pdf

t_bone - 11/12/2008 6:36:58 PM

0 Boost

LOL: "Hardly mentioned is the fact that gasoline goes bad after a few months. If the Volt is used as intended, for daily trips of 40 miles or less, the car's tank will have to be drained periodically and the gas disposed of."

So, reducing fuel stops to a bi-monthly event is a BAD thing in this writer's mind???

mercuryguy - 11/12/2008 8:24:40 PM

0 Boost

Regarding the stale gas question:

This is precisely why I plan to buy a Diesel Portable generator. Generators are seldom used and the carburetors gum up due to lack of use. Gasoline will last a bit longer than you might think if there is no carburetor. I’ve had old gas in a boat. I usually stabilize the gas for winter storage. Adding Isopropyl Dry Gas is important as well. Methanol isn’t as good as Methanol tends to break down rubber hoses and gaskets. If the gas is not over a year old, you might still be ok.

I will say that I’ve had many small gas engines that went downhill after long periods of storage. The gas engines just don't hold up to non-use.

I have a new 2nd car that get very little use. I use it as a vehicle to fall back on when servicing my primary car. I keep only a quarter tank so I can empty and refresh the tank every few months and I haven’t had any problems. I haven’t used Stabil in that vehicle, but I do use the dry gas in winter.
The bigger challenge is keeping the Battery Charged, I usually charge the battery every few weeks with a waterproof marine trickle charger that I can leave on overnight without over-charging. If batteries loose charge in severe cold, The Electrolyte freezes, warping the plates and destroying it by shorting the battery out.

mercuryguy - 11/12/2008 8:36:57 PM

0 Boost

When the energy crisis hit during the Carter administration, the big 3 offered manual transmissions with overdrive and many people bought them. It quickly made cars more efficient overnight without re-tooling factories and spending billions on R&D.

It seemed we were better equipped to handle the energy crisis then as opposed to today.

holmstar - 11/13/2008 11:54:54 AM

+1 Boost

Actually, the problem is that cars are already much more efficient PER HORSEPOWER today than they were after the energy crisis in the seventies. It is more difficult to improve on something that is already much more refined. The easy improvements are already done. The problem is that cars have grown much heavier, and thus require higher horsepower for decent performance. In addition, at least in the American market, people expect a car that has strong acceleration, which of course requires even more horsepower.

If there is an "easy" solution to efficiency now, is is by making smaller and/or lighter cars. The problem with making cars lighter is that often conflicts with crash/safty standards, so you need novel materials, such as carbon fiber that are both strong and light. Unfortunately, for now such materials are expensive, so you end up buying a smaller car that gets better fuel economy, but costs more. If it costs too much, then it will offset any gain in fuel economy, and won't sell. It is a difficult situation.

TheDepressingTruth - 11/13/2008 7:19:29 PM

+1 Boost

What the Government REALLY needs to do (after the "Bailout") Press for American EXPORT POLICY that empowers the Car Makers to sell their products in other countries Not "Free Trade" but "FAIR Trade"

Let's look at Germany as an example..When Mercedes exports a Car, the German Government gives Mercedes an aprox. 20% tax abatement...If GM wants to import a Cadillac into Germany there is a aprox. 20% importation tax...Not exactly a "Level Playing Field" is it? Why don't the FOOLS in Washington do something about this?

For those of you who say that "We cant sell our American Crap...Japan,Korea and Other Countries didn't have the best of products at first..what we do have is a cost advantage...The World is awash in U.S.Dollars... They might as well buy something with them

EL34 - 11/13/2008 8:19:37 PM

-3 Boost

Nobama

Keep the change.

FBO

Welcome back Carter.

Audiphile - 11/14/2008 10:00:52 AM

+1 Boost

Agent001,

I don't know anything about the background of Holman Jenkins, the auther of this Wall St. Journal article. It is obvious, however, that he doesn't have much science or engineering education or experience.

I cite the following four sentences from his article:

"The Volt also will have a small gas engine onboard to recharge the battery for trips of more than 40 miles. Don't believe press blather that it will get 50 mpg in this mode. Submarines and locomotives have operated on the same principle for a century. If it were so efficient in cars, they'd clog the roads by now."

He's right about subs and locomotives using onboard internal combustion engines to recharge batteries. However, the large, heavy, inefficient and expensive batteries of yesteryear could be used in such vehicles but were unsuitable for passenger automobiles. Only in the last few years have batteries become sufficiently small, light, efficient and inexpensive to be used in mass-market passenger cars.

Mr. Jenkins has some good points, but he is clearly overreaching in the above passage.

Audiphile - 11/14/2008 10:00:52 AM

0 Boost

izfuney - 11/14/2008 1:06:38 PM

+1 Boost

Wall Street Journal .. isnt that an oxymoron now ... I mean it should be called Govt Bailout Cheatsheet.

This is a report from a crowd that said a shitty investment brokerage like Bear Sterns is too bog too fail . Why ? the billions of dolalrs spent to prop them up for their stupid greed and bad calls in overleveraging their position is supposed to be for the good of the system.
I dont see that the execs in the banking industry getting the shaft for their blind stupidity ..
Instead Paulson and Republicans are handing them our tax money .
So why not Detroit ? If a bunch of prissy suits who eat caviar and lobster Thermadore for lunch on my money are eligible for bailout , why not Detroit who employ shit load of more people .
Do i think Detroit needs to be overhauled .. definitely .. but so does Wall street and the clowns in the Sec Exchange who blitzed the current market.

Lexus1555 - 1/6/2009 5:44:52 AM

+1 Boost

These are the exact same kind of opinions that hit hybrids when they first came to the marketplace. Back then, hybrid cars were slow, dumb, resource hogs, not-financially-smart, ugly and worthless, and were doomed for failure. Now, hybrids are a panacea (if not a necessity) in the auto marketplace.

And now with plug-in hybrids, it comes out again. Why must we all forget the creative, inventive power of humans and our ability to problem solve. Sure plug-ins may be troubled now (version 1.0 of any new product will always have kinks), but they'll get much better fast.

Have some patience!