Slashdot Mirror
Chevy Volt Meets High Resistance, GM Suspends Sales
Hugh Pickens writes "The Hill reports that GM has announced to employees at one of its facilities that it is suspending production of the Chevy Volt for five weeks and temporarily laying off 1,300 employees. Back when GM launched the beleaguered electric car, it boldly targeted sales of 10,000 in 2011 and 60,000 in 2012 but GM only sold 7,671 Volts in 2011 and just 1,626 so far this year. 'We needed to maintain proper inventory and make sure that we continued to meet market demand,' says GM spokesman Chris Lee. 'We see positive trends, but we needed to make this market adjustment.' Although President Obama promised he would buy a Volt 'five years from now, when I'm not president anymore,' the Volt has come under criticism from Republicans in Congress because of reports of its batteries catching on fire during testing. Ironically, the shutdown comes as gas prices are soaring, exactly the time when an electric car should be an easy sell." If it's still true that GM was taking a loss on every Volt sold, perhaps this is a blessing in disguise.
Without significant subsidies GM would have sold even fewer cars. The subsidy is a just transfer payment to the well off. High efficiency diesel engines are probably the most cost effective option for the masses and our stupid EPA requirements keep best ones out of the USA.
I'm never going to save $15k - $20k in gas over the life of the car, so buying a comparable car that runs on gasoline is probably a better value.
Lately I've been finding this argument a little disingenuous. For example, if I were to lease a $38K all-electric vehicle my payments would be roughly $360/mo. At $4/gal the money I'd save on gasoline would make my monthly payments comparable to leasing a vehicle worth $20K under identical terms*. In terms of affordability, these who vehicles would almost the same for the duration of the lease. And yes, I figured the cost of electricity as well as gasoline.
The cost difference manifests only in the residual cost, but I need not pay that if I decide not to buy out.
=Smidge=
*Your mileage may vary, of course.
Last time I went to a auto show, they had the then-new Ferrari 575.
I waved the sales guy over from beyond the velvet rope (the unwashed crowds not being allowed to mix with the "real" customers) and asked him "how much is a 100,000 kilometer service on one of those things?"
the reply?
"none of our vehicles /ever/ do that many kilometers."
Delivered with just the right amount of "how dare you even THINK about driving your Ferrari that much? For shame, sir. FOR SHAME." sneering.
Tesla Motors
Telsa is planning on an ~$30,000 model in the next few years. If they achieve this price point and maintain the quality of their current models, I think that they will have an all electric car that many people will want
This!
Hybrids are all the rage. But they really aren't that green. Batteries use metals that can be difficult to obtain and energy intensive to produce. They take far too long to recharge. And then they don't last. Pure electric would be the way to go if we had decent batteries, by which I mean batteries that approach the convenience of the humble gas tank. So we have this hybrid approach which uses both gas and electricity in combination. And it still needs a bit of battery capacity. All the expense, trouble and weight of both kinds of drive in one package!
As if battery troubles aren't bad enough, a conventional gas powered direct drive vehicle is quite capable of beating the fuel economy of a hybrid. There's lots of low hanging fruit that manufacturers are still ignoring. They are finally improving transmissions, putting in more gears and dumping that huge, huge waste of gas known as the torque converter. Took them long enough, and there's plenty more. Aerodynamics could so easily be much better. Instant on/off for the gas engine would save big time, and erase the one big advantage hybrids do have: the better city fuel economy. Put up with bad batteries, and then not even get better fuel economy?!
The Yaris is a start, but it is only a start.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
You are absolutely correct that running the electric heater decreases drivable range. EV manufacturers and owners have employed various tactics to deal with this: Preheating the car while it's still plugged in is the primary one, which significantly decreases the load on the heating system. The Nissan LEAF comes with a heated steering wheel and heated seats to keep the driver and passenger(s) warm without heating the entire cabin. Some owners have tried 12V electric blankets, adding homebrew or aftermarket heating systems, or most often just dressing warmly for the trip.
But the real issue is not cabin heating, it's keeping the battery warm. A cold battery means lethargic chemistry, which means reduced power and (temporarily) lost capacity. This is the true nature of EVs in extreme climates.
Fun fact: If the Volt's computer deems it the most efficient method, the gas engine will run just to generate heat. What a waste IMHO...
=Smidge=
No, my math is correct. Don't forget that if you lease, the dealer claims the $7,500 federal tax incentive (perhaps soon to be $10,000?) so that comes right off the top of the car's price. At that point you are no longer comparing $40K to $20K, you're comparing $32K to $20K. This makes ALL the difference.
So... assuming MSRP minus incentive for a gross capitalized cost of approx. $32,000. 36 month lease, 45% residual. Bullshit fees and tax paid up front, plus $4,000 down (total money down: ~$8,100). Monthly payment is $370/mo.
Based on the last 12 months of driving (9557.2 mi) and assuming $4/gallon + 28.88 MPG average over the past 12 months (yes, I keep detailed records), I would be saving about $110/mo. Based on mileage and electricity costs, I would be paying about $35/mo in electricity. Net savings of $75/mo which makes leasing this car comparable to $295/mo. Working backwards, with the same terms and down payment, that's equivalent to a $22,500 vehicle.
So I rounded off from memory instead of re-opening my spreadsheet and was off by $2,500. Sue me. *shrug*
You'll probably complain about the large money down sum. Fine, but it cuts both ways... How much I put down is irrelevant to the relative cost. Example: At $1,000 down the payments become $460 and $385 respectively - still a $75 difference.
I used a 0.00224 money factor and a 15,000 mile/yr lease if you want to try it at home. I'll be happy to compare notes.
=Smidge=