TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
EPA Official Comment > Article
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Chevy Volt Gets 230 mpg City?
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
EPA Official Comment > Article
Syndicated_Death
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 1,603
But will it run Crysis?
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
I get what you're saying. Their MATH... I'd agree with that.
But to be clear, the EPA doesn't endorse the MPG rating on this at all...
But to be clear, the EPA doesn't endorse the MPG rating on this at all...
This may come as a shocker to you, but electric vehicles can have different classes of power, just like gas powered vehicles. And, what may come as a complete surprise, electric vehicles can (have been before and are currently) be made to outperform gas powered vehicles. (There is the obvious, like the Telsa Roadster. Then, there is the electric mini cooper that someone demo'd. Plenty of electric drag bikes, as well.) The only limiting thing there is about an electric car right now is the range.
I thought they were using some new generation battery that was supposed to improve that.
Yes, but the formula is the EPAs. Doesn't matter who calculated it.
They simply haven't tested it for themselves, is all.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
Regardless though, I still disagree with the 230MPG claim...
That's sounding like I can stick 1 gallon of gas and drive 230miles. Or 2 gallons and drive 460miles.
I think there might have to be some disclaimer about distances or something too, I don't know. I'm really torn. While 230MPG might be technically correct, it's misleading.
The formula is designed with the help of GM, at the request of GM. See this news story from a year ago. Clearly has the first PHEV maker GM was pushing for this standard and got the EPA to agree. The goal was not to inform consumers it was to have test that would lead to a big GM number. It even sounds like GM was trying to cajole the EPA into accept the standard last year by giving them acces to Volts computers.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a2GgcMQbsIcU&refer=us
WTF is the EPA bending over backwards to give GM what it wants, shouldn't the EPA be on the consumers side, not the automakers side.
I heap scorn on both GM and the EPA for this fiasco. But GM certainly doesn't get a pass by claiming it is EPAs test. It is the EPA Test that GM asked them to create. So this mess is primarily GM's fault. Partially EPAs for caving into it.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
EPA = Government Run
GM = Government Run
What's more to explain?
I wont ever give GM anymore business, that's for sure.
To be clear the EPA has said they havn't confirmed the rating, not that they disagree with it. Unless the EPA changes its math, then the real rating will be very close to this.
I'm not sure how you can be mad at GM for using the EPA's formula. I don't like the EPA's formula, but I can't fault GM for reporting it's expected number based on the EPA's formula.
farscapesg1
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2004
- Messages
- 2,648
While I would love to see something...anything take the place of fossil-fuel based vehicles, it needs to happen cheaply and quickly for the population to really adopt it. Releasing a technology that makes a vehicle cost 2-3x the price of an equivalent gas-based car, even with plans on the price being reduced to an equal playing field in say...3 years, just won't really get the buy-in from the general public.
It is like solar... by now you should be able to buy either a traditional house or a eco-friendly solar house for the same price... unfortunately you can't and until then it's just not really going to take off. We have an eco-friendly community nearby and the amount of house you get in that community compared to a standard house in our neighborhood is laughable.
However, IMO something needs to happen. For all the naysayers for electric/hydrogen/etc., what is your solution to move us away from fossil-fuels? We can't just continue to trod down the same path with our heads down. We need innovation, we need a government that truely supports that innovation, and we need that innovation to happen quickly and cheaply.
Of course, we could have been well down this path if California/oil companies/GM hadn't killed off the electric car idea the first time around (GM's EV1).
It is like solar... by now you should be able to buy either a traditional house or a eco-friendly solar house for the same price... unfortunately you can't and until then it's just not really going to take off. We have an eco-friendly community nearby and the amount of house you get in that community compared to a standard house in our neighborhood is laughable.
However, IMO something needs to happen. For all the naysayers for electric/hydrogen/etc., what is your solution to move us away from fossil-fuels? We can't just continue to trod down the same path with our heads down. We need innovation, we need a government that truely supports that innovation, and we need that innovation to happen quickly and cheaply.
Of course, we could have been well down this path if California/oil companies/GM hadn't killed off the electric car idea the first time around (GM's EV1).
The EPA is in the wrong here. I don't have a problem with GM making suggestions on how to calculate these things, that's part of buisness. It's the EPA's job to sort marketing from fiction and they are failing this time.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
That's already happened here. There's some eco houses that pretty much self-pay for themselves in utilities, virtually no utility cost at all.
Nuclear. Granted that might be 100 years from now, but self-sustaining energy sources are obviously the way to go.
Like I said, they should both be punished for this consumer abuse.
I can. Very easily. Its called being objective and looking at things for what they are. GM knows full well they are misleading everyone. Psychology is not a mystery to people who have a slight bit of intelligence.
Fuck that blanket and generic excusing of corporate misconduct.
Oh, so you expect a car company to report a number that is different from the EPA's milage estimate that has been on every car for the last billion years?
There is no misconduct. The EPA asked for thier input, they gave it. Remind me again where the misconduct was from GM?
From that news story above, It didn't look like the EPA asking for input, it looks more like GM was pressuring the EPA.
From a news report on TV it looks like GM is still at it. The report said GM would ramp production faster if EPA would approve the standard.
GM is desperate to have this misleading standard ratified and they are pressuring the EPA by making it appear the production hinges on EPA cooperation.
GM is involved scumbaggery of the lowest order here.
Color me surprised, I didn't know fishy estimates were giving cars 230 MPG for all of history
I expect consumers to not be mislead and I expect regulation to enforce that. By saying, 50-infitiny MPG and settling for 230 MPG as an average is a goddamned lie. Its 50 MPG gasoline/ 40 Miler per charge electric.
Screw electric cars, Sir.
I want a sports car with a V8 engine with loud rumbling exhaust, the kind that scares children and little old ladies and sets off car alarms.
Not something that sounds like fucking star wars:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVv0NVLFPig
+1
And really that would be quite impressive if actually delivered 50mpg on the generator, but it will be a long time before we ever find out what it really does, because it will be buried in this kind of smoke and mirrors GM-MPG instead for real MPG.
JUSTJOEL73
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 669
This an article from '08 about possible batteries for the Volt and their performance targets they wanted to achieve.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4257460.html
They have been proclaiming to have hit all their targets, with one notable exception, the battery life of 10yrs and 150,000 miles. Make your own conclusions. QC to prevent factory defects in batteries are going to be critical as well. The Volt is going to have to come with a fantastic warranty.
By subsidize I mean they are going to sell the car at a loss at first in order to establish it. Yea, I borrowed that definition from a shitty journalist and won't use it again.
You don't have to buy a hybrid to get decent MPGs
But I've been looking at the Volt some more and I'm not quite as negative
It may actually work out given 3 things:
1.Crude oil goes above 90USD within a year and a half~ easily possible
2.The battery is awesome ~ so far they have revealed just about nothing about the battery.
How much horsepower will it lose after one year?
How well will the GPS system adjust to a decline in battery efficiency?
Will it have a system that will pull power during non-peak hours? - If you come home at 5 and plug it in and it starts pulling power right then that would be awful
Will you ever have to worry about overheating?
3. The competition doesn't outdo them again
Color me surprised, I didn't know fishy estimates were giving cars 230 MPG for all of history
I expect consumers to not be mislead and I expect regulation to enforce that. By saying, 50-infitiny MPG and settling for 230 MPG as an average is a goddamned lie. Its 50 MPG gasoline/ 40 Miler per charge electric.
Where are you getting the 50 mpg? I asked this before, because I havn't seen anything pointing to 50mpg while running on gas. I suspect it will be lower than that, I think 40mpg would be on the higher end of that estimate.
GM is evil, big surprise, they are a corporation thats what they do. The EPA is the one who is failing you. The EPA is the one that is suppose to be looking out for you. Why are you not getting angry at the EPA?
The gas market is going to have to go insane for this thing to become anywhere near reasonsable. Furthermore the futures market for crude oil doesn't put crude oil passing the 90$ mark until June 2013. If the price of gas tripples and the cost of electricty stays the same (assuming current price of 2.75$/gal and 0.11$/kWhr) the break even on buying a volt vs buying the existing Civic hybrid is over 5 years. (40mpg civic hybrid for 25K vs 40K MSRP of the volt and you drive the 40 mile electric range every day 365 days a year to maximize the electric benefits) Most people don't keep cars longer than 5 years.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
QFT.
EXACTLY
Who knows. Oil's such a screwed up market it's ridiculous. If it were left to true supply and demand, it wouldn't go above 90USD. But since we've got it on the stock markets which is subject to speculators, who in the world really knows what could happen.
That, 90USD crude wouldn't be near enough to actually pay for one of these. Think 300USD or more before these even start to become economical.
That's a huge IF... GM sucks at what they've been doing.
EPA could fix it, sure. But here's the issue. MPG is based on Miles per GALLON. Not Miles per Charge.
If this were to be true, they'd smack a MPC figure on the sticker, a MPG figure on the sticker, a Max Charge Miles, a Max Gallon Miles figures.
That'd tell the consumer EXACTLY what it'd be capable of.
Yeah, it can be virtually infinite, but they should have an "equivalent mpg" that takes account the cost of electricity. Say 12 cents per kW-hr. If it takes 10 kW-hr. to recharge it as the CNN article states, than it means driving 40 mi. costs $1.20 in e-fuel (electricity). That's the equivalent of 1/2 gal. of gas, hence the upper limit of 80 mpg.
As the car is driven more without being recharged and gets to the gas engine, the overall mileage starts sliding down toward 50 mpg. Hence my thinking that the equivalent mpg of the Volt is between 50 and 80. Let's call it 65.
Hey, still better than a Prius, so nothing to be ashamed of. But far from the bogus and misleading value of 230.This article just came out today.
"So what kind of mileage can a Volt driver actually expect?
That depends entirely on how much they drive. GM claims the Volt has a 300-mile range after the gasoline engine ignites, but the company hasn't released what the size of the Volt's gas tank will be. Engineers have said it could be as small as 8.5 gallons - and 300 miles on 8.5 gallons means the car might be no more efficient than 35 mpg.
Your mileage, then, will vary greatly based on how far you drive. For 40 miles, the Volt uses no gas. After that, it's probably going to net about 35 mpg. So if you commute 40 miles or less per day, you could expect an infinite number of miles per gallon. For every mile you drive over 40, the number drops precipitously, stabilizing at around 35 mpg as the needle drifts toward empty.
But that explanation is a mouthful, and not nearly as easy to market as 230 mpg."
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/aut...tions-surround-chevy-volt-fuel-economy-claim/
"So what kind of mileage can a Volt driver actually expect?
That depends entirely on how much they drive. GM claims the Volt has a 300-mile range after the gasoline engine ignites, but the company hasn't released what the size of the Volt's gas tank will be. Engineers have said it could be as small as 8.5 gallons - and 300 miles on 8.5 gallons means the car might be no more efficient than 35 mpg.
Your mileage, then, will vary greatly based on how far you drive. For 40 miles, the Volt uses no gas. After that, it's probably going to net about 35 mpg. So if you commute 40 miles or less per day, you could expect an infinite number of miles per gallon. For every mile you drive over 40, the number drops precipitously, stabilizing at around 35 mpg as the needle drifts toward empty.
But that explanation is a mouthful, and not nearly as easy to market as 230 mpg."
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/aut...tions-surround-chevy-volt-fuel-economy-claim/
He, me, and others who are quoting 50 mpg in gas-only mode saw it in the CNN article that was mentioned somewhere on the first page of this thread.
I also find it hard to believe that the Volt will get 50 mpg once in gas mode, but even if giving Chevy/GM the benefit of the doubt, averaging 50 and 80 (not infinity since electricity costs $) is well under 230.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
Since Chevy has these unknown or weird conditions to get 230 mpg, I'd like it for a gas-only automarker to claim that their car can get 230 mpg as well, in certain conditions, such as putting the car in neutral and coasting downhill.
Yep... There was one group of independant people that got something ridiculous (I want to say like 500 mpg or something) by just not braking and not accelerating. To stop? They drove around the block a hundred times until it eventually came to a stop.
Translation. Not as misleading as 230mpg, so harder to using in marketing.
I can smell the japanese fanboys from here. Ive driven hondas only for the past 15 years and can honestly say no one builds a better car. But for you guys to sit here with your yawns and putdowns is stupid. Hardly anyone drives more than 50 miles per day so this is a great common sense solution. Its a good looking car to. I think GM isn going to kill with this car, or one like it thats the 25k range. 40k is a bit high.
Do you live in the US? If so wtf are you talking about, There is diesel at every gas station in the country.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
The price is what kills it. For 40K you can buy a fully loaded Honda.
tnt3k
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 2,125
yeah i agree that 40k is a bit steep for a small sedan. on top of that the buyer would probably have to replace the battery every XX,XXX miles (like the prius) which equals additional costs.
Folks, the Chevy Volt does get 230mpg....when going downhill....with a sail...on the back of truck.
If you want to get the same mileage going uphill you're going to have to upgrade to this package:
So it's on the back of a truck for the downhill mileage... but then you have to buy the package with it on the back of a truck for it to go uphill in that fashion?
paradox.
Do you have mullet? If you knew cars or spend anytime at a road course or an autocross you would know thats civics/integra have earned their spot years ago. Ask any of the numerous BMW owners that been dusted by one at an autoX event.
Tsukuba circuit.
Nismo Skyline GT-R Z Tune 1 min 01.150 secs
Ferrari 360 Challenge Stra' 1 min 02.440 secs
Lamborghini Gallardo 1 min 03.605 secs
Honda NSX-R 1 min 03.920 secs
McLaren F1 1 min 04.620 secs
Porsche 997 Turbo 1 min 04.730 secs
Murcielago 1 min 04.760 secs
EVO IX RS 1 min 05.528 secs
997 Carrera 4 1 min 05.980 secs
Corvette Z06 1 min 06.020 secs
Lancer Evo IX 1 min 06.060 secs
NA1 NSX-R 1 min 06.198 secs
Nismo GT-R S Tune 1 min 06.232 secs (340 bhp)
[/U]Mugen Civic RR 1 min 06.38 secs[/U]
Ferrari F40 1 min 06.460 secs
WRX STI SPEC-C 1 min 06.651 secs ( Current STI)
NA1 NSX-R 1 min 06.80 secs (same race as F40)
BMW M5 1 min 06.560 secs
STI S204 1 min 06.800 secs
BMW M6 1 min 07.434 secs
350Z S Version 1 min 08.110 secs
BMW M3 1 min 08.200 secs
Audi RS4 1 min 08.368 secs
Supra Euro Version 330 bhp 1 min 08.460 secs
Mazda RX-7 1 min 08.70 secs
RX-8 A Spec 1 min 09.430 secs
Nissan 300ZX 1 min 10.70 secs
Not stock but a factory civic with warranty and very little tweaking. The base car is excellent and is borderline race car, try to find some cutaways of the chassis in these new civics, very impressive if you know what your looking at.
xX_Jack_Carver_Xx
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 2,542
I call bullshit, but the tech stuff later...
Obviosuly GM will be entering the XPrize contest in Sept, since it's an instant win... $10,000,000 for the first car that can do 100MPG on thier test circuit.
Obviosuly GM will be entering the XPrize contest in Sept, since it's an instant win... $10,000,000 for the first car that can do 100MPG on thier test circuit.
Folks, the Chevy Volt does get 230mpg....when going downhill....with a sail...on the back of truck.
If you want to get the same mileage going uphill you're going to have to upgrade to this package:
That was a little funnier the first time I heard it. On the Conan O'Brien show this week.