Volt Revealed
9/16/08 | 05:29 PM
#22
Closet American
Joined: July 17, 2005
Posts: 5,848
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, BC (Hollywood North)
Props to GM. Now read what Toyota had to say about the whole thing - what a bunch of sore losers 
From Automotive News (subscription required) >>
From Automotive News (subscription required) >>
Not content to let GM steal its hybrid thunder, the National Manager of Energy and Environmental Research for Toyota Motor North America Robert Wimmer told the Senate Energy and National Resources committee today that it should not pass new legislation that will give tax breaks to the Chevrolet Volt. The proposed legislation would give special tax credits to plug-in hybrids with batteries that hold at least six kilowatt-hours of electricity. The tax credits could reach as much as $7500 for light-duty vehicles. The Volt stores approximately 16 kilowatt-hours of electricity in its lithium-ion battery pack.
Wimmer said the legislation "redefines plug-in electric vehicles to seemingly eliminate consumer tax credits for all but one plug-in vehicle design."
"Toyota believes this approach is counterproductive," said Wimmer in a statement before the committee. "It will discourage manufacturers from developing and consumers from purchasing 'blended' plug-ins that are affordable to the greatest number of consumers."
Wimmer did not mention the Volt by name, but it is the most high-profile vehicle in the category, and a direct competitor to Toyota's new plug-in Prius. The source of Toyota's objection is likely the fact that the current Prius only stores 1.3 kilowatt-hours of electricity. Specifications for the new plug-in Prius have not yet been released, but given Toyota's vehement objection to this legislation, it's probable that the new Prius does not meet the six kilowatt-hour requirement.
"We believe consumer incentives should encourage all plug-in designs and allow the consumer market to select winners, not legislation," said Wimmer.
It is worth noting, however, that according to the U.S. Department of Energy, the Toyota Prius received the largest tax rebate of any hybrid car in America from the program's inauguration in late 2005 until enough were sold to rescind its qualification in late 2007. Additionally, there are conflicting reports about monetary support Toyota may have received from the government of Japan to develop the Prius in the first place. Given this, it seems suspicious that Toyota had no objection to receiving the maximum tax credits for its Prius, but opposes a bill that would likely favor the Chevrolet Volt, one which the Prius may not qualify for. The intent of the legislation would appear to be to encourage the development of hybrids and pure-electric cars with greater ranges by giving consumers large tax credits for buying them, much the same way past legislation benefited those who bought previous models of hybrids, such as the Prius.
What do you think? Is the proposed legislation unfairly written to benefit GM? Or is Toyota upset about the possibility of losing the tax rebates that helped make the Prius popular with auto buyers? Should the government stop meddling with the hybrid market? Or should Toyota focus its energy on making a car that meets the requirements instead of complaining about them?
Wimmer said the legislation "redefines plug-in electric vehicles to seemingly eliminate consumer tax credits for all but one plug-in vehicle design."
"Toyota believes this approach is counterproductive," said Wimmer in a statement before the committee. "It will discourage manufacturers from developing and consumers from purchasing 'blended' plug-ins that are affordable to the greatest number of consumers."
Wimmer did not mention the Volt by name, but it is the most high-profile vehicle in the category, and a direct competitor to Toyota's new plug-in Prius. The source of Toyota's objection is likely the fact that the current Prius only stores 1.3 kilowatt-hours of electricity. Specifications for the new plug-in Prius have not yet been released, but given Toyota's vehement objection to this legislation, it's probable that the new Prius does not meet the six kilowatt-hour requirement.
"We believe consumer incentives should encourage all plug-in designs and allow the consumer market to select winners, not legislation," said Wimmer.
It is worth noting, however, that according to the U.S. Department of Energy, the Toyota Prius received the largest tax rebate of any hybrid car in America from the program's inauguration in late 2005 until enough were sold to rescind its qualification in late 2007. Additionally, there are conflicting reports about monetary support Toyota may have received from the government of Japan to develop the Prius in the first place. Given this, it seems suspicious that Toyota had no objection to receiving the maximum tax credits for its Prius, but opposes a bill that would likely favor the Chevrolet Volt, one which the Prius may not qualify for. The intent of the legislation would appear to be to encourage the development of hybrids and pure-electric cars with greater ranges by giving consumers large tax credits for buying them, much the same way past legislation benefited those who bought previous models of hybrids, such as the Prius.
What do you think? Is the proposed legislation unfairly written to benefit GM? Or is Toyota upset about the possibility of losing the tax rebates that helped make the Prius popular with auto buyers? Should the government stop meddling with the hybrid market? Or should Toyota focus its energy on making a car that meets the requirements instead of complaining about them?
9/17/08 | 09:42 AM
#23
GT Member
Joined: September 28, 2006
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
I think it looks pretty **** good. Consider the fact that you'll never have to put a drop of gas into it and never have to give a dime to Arabs to drive it, and it looks even better. The let-down for me is that it only has a 40-mile range. If they could get that up closer to 100 miles I'd buy one in a second. I'd still keep the stang though.
9/17/08 | 11:26 AM
#24
Cobra Member
Joined: July 11, 2007
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
I'm pretty sure you'll have to put gas in it from time to time. It still has a internal combustion engine of some sort, right? Anyway, I don't think it looks terrible compared to your average 4-door sedan, but it's certainly not the cool, sporty looking car the concept was.
Last edited by Wolfsburg; 9/17/08 at 11:27 AM.
9/17/08 | 11:29 AM
#25
Authorized Advertiser
Joined: September 6, 2006
Posts: 876
Likes: 0
I read something this morning on it - said initial price was going to be in the $40k range. NOT for me - would buy a Fusion or Focus first and use the rest of the money to drive the car for a LONG LONG time.
9/17/08 | 06:30 PM
#27
Closet American
Joined: July 17, 2005
Posts: 5,848
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, BC (Hollywood North)
I think it looks pretty **** good. Consider the fact that you'll never have to put a drop of gas into it and never have to give a dime to Arabs to drive it, and it looks even better. The let-down for me is that it only has a 40-mile range. If they could get that up closer to 100 miles I'd buy one in a second. I'd still keep the stang though.
I'm pretty sure you'll have to put gas in it from time to time. It still has a internal combustion engine of some sort, right? Anyway, I don't think it looks terrible compared to your average 4-door sedan, but it's certainly not the cool, sporty looking car the concept was.
The Volt will actually go a few hundred miles while using the ICE to charge the battery.
Make no mistake, this car is revolutionary. Definite game changer. And yeah, the cost of admission is steep, but apparently the car will include lots of tech and amenities as well.
9/17/08 | 06:39 PM
#28
MOTM Committee Member
Joined: April 17, 2006
Posts: 9,181
Likes: 2
From: SoCal
The volt is an engineering accomplishment but it will fail miserably. GM loses about $5k on every one built, and there are much cheaper, proven alternatives. If I was in the market for one of the vehicles why would I buy a volt for $35k, when I can get a hybrid civic for $20k?
$15K is a lot of gas money...
$15K is a lot of gas money...
9/17/08 | 09:56 PM
#29
Closet American
Joined: July 17, 2005
Posts: 5,848
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, BC (Hollywood North)
The volt is an engineering accomplishment but it will fail miserably. GM loses about $5k on every one built, and there are much cheaper, proven alternatives. If I was in the market for one of the vehicles why would I buy a volt for $35k, when I can get a hybrid civic for $20k?
$15K is a lot of gas money...
$15K is a lot of gas money...
Well, maybe not THAT far, but you know what I mean.
It's the overall operational costs where GM hopes to save the public money. Plus they're looking for ways to subsidize both production and purchase on the part of consumers. And there are those early adopters who will buy them because they're even more concerned about emissions than they are about MPGs.
If GM sells the car globally (not sure if they will or not) that will help to amortize costs, too. Eventually the price will fall, but the important thing is that GM stepped up and made it happen...showing the automotive world what can be done if we put our minds to it. The fact that Toyota is whining about this car and how "unfair" it is that the government is going to rewrite the book on what defines a hybrid and what the standards for hybrids should be, is of significance - and I for one am happy to see Toyota squirming a bit for a change because of something we innovated right here in North America.
9/17/08 | 10:30 PM
#30
Post *****
Joined: October 9, 2007
Posts: 32,752
Likes: 159
So it's kind of like the old fashioned WWII submarines. Under water they ran on electric because they could not exhaust the gas from the combustion engine, but on the surface they ran on diesel. But they also used that diesel engine to charge the batteries for the electric motors when they ran underwater.
It's a smart setup. Although it never actually runs on the i.c.e.
It also looks a **** site better than the Prius, and as a first of its kind it holds promise for the future. The model T was probably a little ugly in its day too.
It's a smart setup. Although it never actually runs on the i.c.e.
It also looks a **** site better than the Prius, and as a first of its kind it holds promise for the future. The model T was probably a little ugly in its day too.
Last edited by 2k7gtcs; 9/17/08 at 10:53 PM.
9/17/08 | 10:51 PM
#31
MOTM Committee Member
Joined: April 17, 2006
Posts: 9,181
Likes: 2
From: SoCal
Except that the Volt is as technologically far ahead of a Prius as an iPhone is ahead of stone knives and bear skins.
Well, maybe not THAT far, but you know what I mean.
It's the overall operational costs where GM hopes to save the public money. Plus they're looking for ways to subsidize both production and purchase on the part of consumers. And there are those early adopters who will buy them because they're even more concerned about emissions than they are about MPGs.
If GM sells the car globally (not sure if they will or not) that will help to amortize costs, too. Eventually the price will fall, but the important thing is that GM stepped up and made it happen...showing the automotive world what can be done if we put our minds to it. The fact that Toyota is whining about this car and how "unfair" it is that the government is going to rewrite the book on what defines a hybrid and what the standards for hybrids should be, is of significance - and I for one am happy to see Toyota squirming a bit for a change because of something we innovated right here in North America.
Well, maybe not THAT far, but you know what I mean.
It's the overall operational costs where GM hopes to save the public money. Plus they're looking for ways to subsidize both production and purchase on the part of consumers. And there are those early adopters who will buy them because they're even more concerned about emissions than they are about MPGs.
If GM sells the car globally (not sure if they will or not) that will help to amortize costs, too. Eventually the price will fall, but the important thing is that GM stepped up and made it happen...showing the automotive world what can be done if we put our minds to it. The fact that Toyota is whining about this car and how "unfair" it is that the government is going to rewrite the book on what defines a hybrid and what the standards for hybrids should be, is of significance - and I for one am happy to see Toyota squirming a bit for a change because of something we innovated right here in North America.
Like you said, their only hope is to market this car towards more eco-minded buyers than MPG minded.
As a mechanical engineering student, I commend them on the job that they've done though. It just sucks that it won't work IMO.
9/18/08 | 02:23 AM
#32
Closet American
Joined: July 17, 2005
Posts: 5,848
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, BC (Hollywood North)
True, everything you said is correct. But I read Lutz saying that they would have to charge $40k to break even on these cars, and they are only charging $35k right now. My point is while it is a step in the right direction for a more environmentally friendly car industry, it is two step backwards for a company like GM trying to get into the black.
Like you said, their only hope is to market this car towards more eco-minded buyers than MPG minded.
As a mechanical engineering student, I commend them on the job that they've done though. It just sucks that it won't work IMO.
Like you said, their only hope is to market this car towards more eco-minded buyers than MPG minded.
As a mechanical engineering student, I commend them on the job that they've done though. It just sucks that it won't work IMO.
Call it socialism if you want, but my guess is that GM will get plenty of government breaks towards making a go of this car.
Have you noticed we're seeing more true innovation and leading-edge design from the American makers than we are from the Japanese right now? Two good examples are Ford's new Fiesta (which will quickly be the B-segment leader for quality and fuel efficiency) and Chevy with the world's first true plug-in series Hybrid).
Last edited by Hollywood_North GT; 9/18/08 at 02:27 AM.
9/18/08 | 02:40 AM
#33
MOTM Committee Member
Joined: April 17, 2006
Posts: 9,181
Likes: 2
From: SoCal
Yeah they already are getting tax breaks on the car, and Toyota is pissed lol. I am glad to see American automakers with some innovative products though. There are plenty of new technologies out there that could help fix a lot of problems. Even if the Volt doesn't sell well, hopefully it will pave the way for change to come about...
9/18/08 | 09:44 AM
#35
My boss brought in an old toploader VHS player the other day. He said his grandpa about it for like $300 back in the early 80's...technology is always expensive when only one company is doing it.
9/18/08 | 09:52 AM
#36
Post *****
Joined: October 9, 2007
Posts: 32,752
Likes: 159
Cody,
I vividly remmeber my parents paying $999 dollars for a Sony Betamax when it was new in late 70's, and $999 for that very first Amana microwave. I'm serious $999, in the 70's!!!
Edit: I wish Ford had something close to this, just for bragging rights alone. Way to go GM!
I vividly remmeber my parents paying $999 dollars for a Sony Betamax when it was new in late 70's, and $999 for that very first Amana microwave. I'm serious $999, in the 70's!!!
Edit: I wish Ford had something close to this, just for bragging rights alone. Way to go GM!
Last edited by 2k7gtcs; 9/18/08 at 10:08 AM.
9/18/08 | 10:06 AM
#37
Cobra Member
Joined: May 16, 2006
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 0
From: NV
Yeah they already are getting tax breaks on the car, and Toyota is pissed lol. I am glad to see American automakers with some innovative products though. There are plenty of new technologies out there that could help fix a lot of problems. Even if the Volt doesn't sell well, hopefully it will pave the way for change to come about...
And to Toyota tax breaks are fine, as long as only their products get them!
9/18/08 | 10:36 AM
#38
Authorized Advertiser
Joined: September 6, 2006
Posts: 876
Likes: 0
Cody,
I vividly remmeber my parents paying $999 dollars for a Sony Betamax when it was new in late 70's, and $999 for that very first Amana microwave. I'm serious $999, in the 70's!!!
Edit: I wish Ford had something close to this, just for bragging rights alone. Way to go GM!
I vividly remmeber my parents paying $999 dollars for a Sony Betamax when it was new in late 70's, and $999 for that very first Amana microwave. I'm serious $999, in the 70's!!!
Edit: I wish Ford had something close to this, just for bragging rights alone. Way to go GM!
I think if EVER we needed a car like this in the U.S. its now.
9/18/08 | 01:01 PM
#39
Post *****
Joined: October 9, 2007
Posts: 32,752
Likes: 159
Can they even sell a diesel car in California? I thought they weren't allowed to be sold in NY, California, NJ, Massachusettes. I mean if you can't market a car in these states then why even bother bringing it to the U.S. market. Why try to sell a car where it's illegal to for a third of the population?
Now if it is legal now, I know it once wasn't. So this would be another reason why we are behind the 8 ball on this one. Why develop technology to sell in a state where it's illegal?
Now if it is legal now, I know it once wasn't. So this would be another reason why we are behind the 8 ball on this one. Why develop technology to sell in a state where it's illegal?
9/18/08 | 01:30 PM
#40
Authorized Advertiser
Joined: September 6, 2006
Posts: 876
Likes: 0
Can they even sell a diesel car in California? I thought they weren't allowed to be sold in NY, California, NJ, Massachusettes. I mean if you can't market a car in these states then why even bother bringing it to the U.S. market. Why try to sell a car where it's illegal to for a third of the population?
Now if it is legal now, I know it once wasn't. So this would be another reason why we are behind the 8 ball on this one. Why develop technology to sell in a state where it's illegal?
Now if it is legal now, I know it once wasn't. So this would be another reason why we are behind the 8 ball on this one. Why develop technology to sell in a state where it's illegal?