The new Chevy Volt: Overpriced and oversold

American Thinker ^ | 07/29/2010 | Henry Percy

[Natural Law]

The bottom line is that every “electric” car is in actuality a coal burner. Compounding the problem are the power conversion losses between the coal fired plant and the point where the tires meat the road. At best they are coal burners with a less than 20% energy efficiency from the combustion of the coal.

[nascarnation]

47% of US electricity is generated from coal.

If your juice is from nukes or hydro, no coal is used.

I’m not pimping for the Volt or Leaf, but in the right setting an e-drive car may be useful.

[appeal2]

Gasoline at $3 per gallon, 15k miles per year, 25mpg. Use 2/3 less gasoline and electric priced at 2 cents per mile. Gasoline used 600 gallons. Total price $1800. Volt in electric generation mode 5,000 miles-engine on 40mpg. Total gasoline used, 125 gallons or $375. Total cost of electric for 10,000 miles $200. Volt annual energy costs, $575

Cost savings per year $1225. Total cost savings over 6 years or 90,000 miles is $7,350.

Actual cost of Volt after federal tax credit, not including various state tax credits, $7,500. Actual cost of vehicle, $33,500.

Am not pushing tax credits, I don’t think any industry anywhere should be getting them. But these are the facts and the economic argument for this vehicle is not so lopsided as the posts here indicate.

If we assume $5 gasoline, which if the Bamster gets his way, will greatly impact the economics, annual cost savings is $2175 per year or $13,050 over 6 years.

The cost of this car will decline greatly once they start using diesel engines. Diesels are much better suited for electrical generation as they perform better at fixed speeds than gasoline engines and they can be built smaller.

However, this is a revolutionary vehicle from the stand point of power generation. Comparing it to a Leaf is totally unfair as the leaf will have a limited range and has not been adequately tested over different terrains and weather conditions.

[henkster]

Ah...the Vega! Thank you for reminding me! I had a 73 Vega with the aluminum engine block. Of course, the oil pan was steel and it never occurred to GM engineers that the different heat expansion rates of steel and aluminum meant that the oil pan would never stay sealed. It leaked oil like a BP well.

Oh, and I won’t forget the massive rust spot on the front hood that first appeared as soon as the car was driven off the lot.

They also put an air conditioner on it (one would have thought the rust holes would have provided ample air to the occupants). The engine was so underpowered that if you actually ran the air conditioner and came to a stop light, you had to put the car in neutral and give it some gas or the compressor would kill the engine.

These same people are bringing us the Volt. I think I would have preferred at Trabi.

[Noob1999]

If this piece of junk can run on a “small gasoline engine which powers a generator”, why even bother with all the batteries.

Just let the generator constantly charge one battery that feeds power to the electric motors at the wheels, and be done with it. Forget about the first forty miles of travel provided by spewing smokestacks.

[Lurking in Kansas]

Me too, a 1974 Vega GT, my first car. You're correct, sir; it was an underpowered, oil drinking, smoke spewing, rust bucket.

I well remember a good friend at the time always called it a bug killer because of the smoke it spewed. What a joke of a car. Back in those days my Dad always bought GM cars, but traded every 2 years. That was about the life expectance of them.

[WOBBLY BOB]

I’d like to see someone jump start it after they die during a MN winter.

[GraceG]

Funny you say that because a “Beta” nuclear based power cell could be used to constantly charge the batteries in an electric vehicle and when you plug into the grid power could be sold back tot he grid. A Beta cell could use safe Sulfur-35 in it.

[Ranger01]

I will not be buying one. The Volt is way over priced, and I will be one hundreds of thousands of people that feel the same. If GM wants to sell cars, and be a leader, then get on with it. You are not going to do it by gouging on new technology, but by making them cheap in price, high in quality, sell them like hot cakes, get them established as the standard, then start raising prices as improvements are made. That is what Toyota did, then because of quality rose to be a giant. $41,000 is way out of the average Americans ability to own a car. Let the highly paid UAW people buy it.