Chevy Volt Gets 230 mpg City?

2 prius in my family and both are truly great cars, people that talk shit know nothing of them and just like to be pains in the ass.

hell my corolla is a great car too, 40mpg highway, the prius made me a toyota fan.
 
Draax said:
I never really understood the importance people put on 0-60 times ... I don't take my daily commuter to the drag strip.

Ya thats great you can accelerate from 0-60 in under 4 seconds ... but how are the groceries doing spilled everywhere and smashed against the rear windscreen? and what does the wife have to say after flooring it as soon as the light turns green?

I don't see much rear world use in quick acceleration.
Click to expand...
I guess you don't have to merge in traffic where you live. Or that you don't like to do the occasional flooring from a traffic light when no one else is in front of you. Or heck, make the quick pass and have confidence you won't have to make the person behind you tap his brakes.

I'll take high mpg and high mph (well, at least high acceleration) anyday. Which is more important? "It depends." :p
 
clok1966 said:
As for good, its already been stated many times that these cars use more OIL to produce then they will ever save (batteries use alot of oil to make). So the gas you arent useing has already been used up in making them. As for cheaper, I wish i could remeber the source, but the hybrids wont save you any money till gas reaches about $6 a gallon for a 10 year period (but most guess say the battieres will only last about 5 to 7), so that argument doesnt work either. So they dont save oil, they dont save money, they are butt ugly, small, and underpowered. No upside except its research for better stuff, it makes the owners smug (who wouldnt have bought one if they had actually researched, unless the "keep funding research" idea is why they bought it, but I have yet to hear any owner say that).

The volt is actually the best "current" solution, but its not a good one.
Click to expand...

This is why I like driving my V8 Grand Marquis. Hybrid owners give me dirty looks and I give them apalling ones as I call them the environmental killers.

What I want to know is - what are they going to do about battery replacement, and disposal?
 
DeathFromBelow said:
Yucca Mountain. Its a shame they keep trying to kill it by cutting funding. Boomer fucktard partisian politics, democrats kill the good things republicans want and vice versa.

Nuclear power generates relatively litte waste, and nuclear fusion power doesn't seem to be that for off. Most scientists seem to think it will be an option within this century.
Click to expand...

Yes, we need Yucca Mountain, it is as safe a place we are going to find on this planet to store nuclear waste for the next 10,000 years. I am also familiar with the salt barrier systems, it is as safe as we can make it with our current technology and engineering. It is even "safe" geologically speaking in terms of seismic events. However it is 10,000 years we are talking about. It has to be kept there safely for longer than man has been on the planet. We are talking about 500 generations here, don't you see a problem with 1 generation creating toxic waste that will be around and become our children's children's children's .... problem? We can do better then that, we should not be taking the easy way out on this, just because the energy is cheap to produce.

If fusion is not that far off, why can't we wait for it? Why build a plant today that could be obselete next year and for the next 50 years(you can't just shut these beasts down once you get them going).
 
I like the comment about how generating the power remotely, sending it over a transmission line while transforming it up and down multiple times, and THEN storing it in a battery is more efficient than burning the fuel in an internal combustion engine. This may be true when comparing modern/update grids with the fuel efficiency of a dodge charger... But comparing existing LA/new York power grids to the fuel efficiency of a honda accord... or even better a VW/BWM diesel... you're probably better off shipping the fuel to people's doorsteps right now.

Diesel engines are pretty darn efficient. The loudly and constantly buzzing/arcing power lines of Los Angeles that can barely keep up when the few people with AC actually turn it on... not so efficient or effective. Not to mention battery retention and lifespan.

You underestimate the fact that the massive shipping industry has had a strongly vested interest in making the diesel engine as efficient and reliable as possible and has spent almost a century doing so.

If we had a system built on electric engines (or better yet, diesel powered electric hybrid engines! -look at the rail shipping industry) and spent 3-4 decades developing it and updating infrastructure, I'm sure we could come up with something better. Don't get me wrong, I would support such a move. But the theoretical world of superconducting transmission lines to your doorstep doesn't even come close to matching reality.

The primary advantage to centralized power generation vs distributed, is that you get to place that hot, smelly, polluting power plant a hundred miles or more from your city. If you want to close all the hot, smelly, and/or polluting power plants... well, time to buy a horse.
 
Dont know why anyone is worried about 10,000 years, hell look what we've done to this place in only a 100
 
You guys need to watch a little more discovery/science channel. I wish I could remember the show, but there was an episode about the new recycling methods for spent nuclear fuel. Currently, a fuel rod is "spent" after using up some ridiculously low percentage of the actual fissionable material in the rod (something like 3-5%). With the new techniques they're coming out with to recycle that material, a fuel rod will potentially last up to 20x longer than before.

Now I want to watch that again. I guess I've got something for Tivo to find me when I get home tonight.
 
JUSTJOEL73 said:
Let's not get ahead of ourselves, the Volt still has unproven technology. We will not see the Volt in any great numbers until GM ramps up production and they will only ramp up production if there is a sustainable demand(i.e. a large permanent subsidy specifically for the Volt only). Personally I wouldn't even touch the car until it was in its 3rd of 4th generation.
Click to expand...

That wasn't the point of the post. It's going to be in mass production by next year. Just like the 1st gen prius, mebe not perfect, but it will get the job done. My point was people are waaay exaggerating the actual up-front cost of the car. It won't be $40,000. I wouldn't be surprised it it comes out around $28-$30k, if not less after all subsidies and markdowns are made.

nutzo said:
Yep, lets let the poor taxpaying public subsiside it. (it makes us ALL poorer in the long run.)

Since we don't have enough power plants to charge all these cars, lets raise the electric rates for everyone so we can build expensive solar and wind power plants.
Then we will need to upgrade the power grid, so lets increase the rates again.

Then we will need to subsidize the replacement of the batteries, since they are so expensive....
Click to expand...

This is a flawed logic scheme. You can say the exact same thing about any alternative energy source. Gotta produce all of the start-up somehow, but oh noes! We have to use fossil fuels to make it, whatt are we ever going to do?! Give it a rest, you can't make something from nothing. Fact is there won't be enough of these on the road for a decade to really affect energy prices.

As for subsidies, it's all about opportunity cost. Fact of the matter is taxpayers gain in the long run. Especially if you want to follow the environmentalist argument. It's by far a small price to pay for better air quality etc. Just like the success of C4C (cash for clunkers), you have to create incentives for the tech to get off the ground. Give GM some credit to be willing to sell a car such as the Volt at a loss just to get the technology out there.

I'd also like to comment about Nuclear power. There are two big problems. The biggest of which in this country is the waste. Waste really shouldn't be an issue. Almost 95% of waste is recyclable to the point of needing only a fraction of the storage time. Problem is the laws in this country prevent the recycling of any radioactive material. It was a stupid cold war law which never got repealled. You may hate the republicans, but the push to repeal this really was a great idea.

Second problem is cost to build new plants and nobody wants them in their back yard. True, the price to build a plant is much higher now with all of the regulations, and people are just scared after the three-mile island accident. Maybe gen Z won't give a flying f, but x/y have parents who do. Hence since like 60% of voter base is anti-nuclear, nothing is going to change.

*hops off podium
 
Vaelin said:
The primary advantage to centralized power generation vs distributed, is that you get to place that hot, smelly, polluting power plant a hundred miles or more from your city. If you want to close all the hot, smelly, and/or polluting power plants... well, time to buy a horse.
Click to expand...
Another advantage is the pollution control mechanisms you can put on that power plant. You can build a lot more effective pollution contol on one big stationary power plant than putting a million smaller, mobile ones on a million cars.
 
until someone makes an affordable solution that ALL can afford, this isnt even worth it. Only the rich can be more earth conscious and save the environment currently as it stands with these high price tag offerings from companies? Every new and *clean* technology gets squashed due to cost. Yea all these environment friendly developments are great and all, but will we be seeing the roads saturated with them in the next 3 years......nope.
 
Benjus said:
I'd also like to comment about Nuclear power. There are two big problems. The biggest of which in this country is the waste. Waste really shouldn't be an issue. Almost 95% of waste is recyclable to the point of needing only a fraction of the storage time. Problem is the laws in this country prevent the recycling of any radioactive material. It was a stupid cold war law which never got repealled. You may hate the republicans, but the push to repeal this really was a great idea.
*hops off podium
Click to expand...

My personal favorite use for recycling spent nuclear waste is those depleted uranium rounds in the 20mm and 30mm variety.

Initial production numbers in the first year are estimated to be 10k units ramping up to 60k in the 2nd year according to Wiki. Sales figures of the Prius are roughly 8K a month for 2009, if the Volt is "successful" against the Prius and grabs half of this small market share, 60K unit production should be more then enough to fill market demand. The Volt is not going to save GM as a company unless they can apply the same tech to more vehicles.
 
JUSTJOEL73 said:
However it is 10,000 years we are talking about. It has to be kept there safely for longer than man has been on the planet.
Click to expand...
Assuming we don't find a better way to deal with it in the future. Yucca Mountain would provide a safe, centralized short-term holding facility.

Even if it stays there you have to keep in mind that 10,000 years is nothing in geological time.

If fusion is not that far off, why can't we wait for it? Why build a plant today that could be obselete next year and for the next 50 years(you can't just shut these beasts down once you get them going).
Click to expand...

Because like all things it requires an investment. Why spend a ton of money on inefficient and expensive solar/wind tech? I'd rather pump money into the nuclear industry, building safer and more powerful nuclear plants while also advancing nuclear research.
 
curtcheese64 said:
Do you own or have you ever driven a Prius? They are very well put together vehicles and an engineering marvel if you dig into the technology. Sure there are 50MPG diesels from the likes of VW, but easily/conveniently fueling them in the US would be a pain. The Prius is a great vehicle for what it is.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. Diesel is everywhere because trucks rely on it. VW sells every jetta TDI it builds. We have no issues finding the fuel.

The prius is a good car. But it is no longer innovative. The technology was paid for and developed by the Japanese government over ten years ago and given to Toyota for next to nothing. It has seen little change since then. Toyota is smart to not revise the technology: it's like printing money. They tweak it a little but that's it. Still no plug in, still uses NiMH technology.

The Volt on the other hand is an innovation in the hybrid space. It is an EV with ICE reserve for charging. It never runs on the ICE directly. For most commuters it will never start the ICE. Charge it at night when rates are low and you'll only need gas on longer road trips. We are seriously considering one to replace our 1st gen Civic hybrid.

But I don't think GM can sell them at a profit. It will be a prestige car to showcase their technology.
 
Sometimes I'm still amazed at how many people are against progress. Anyway I've been watching the VOLT thing for awhile and it seems pretty nifty. It's not really a hybrid so much as a better energy management system within the car. Ion battery system has been proven by hobby builders. We'll see what happens after the production starts
 
Benjus said:
. Just like the success of C4C (cash for clunkers), you have to create incentives for the tech to get off the ground. Give GM some credit to be willing to sell a car such as the Volt at a loss just to get the technology out there.
Click to expand...

Man, kids like you terrify me. Yeah the "success" of the ridiculous C4C program. The government takes money away from one group, then offers to give it away to another group. I am shocked that it ran out of money. I mean, who would of thought that giving away free, unearned money would be popular? What brilliance.

Oh and I love that they are destroying perfectly good cars because they don't meet some silly leftist environmental criteria.

And concerning GM, is this the same GM that taxpayers recently bailed out so they would not go into bankruptcy, then they did anyway just so Obama could hand over a private company to the union thugs? What bravery.

Can't wait to see what kind of electricity costs this golf cart incurs, but I am sure that will be swept under the rug like it is in every other article. Hey, has anyone heard from ethanol lately? Guess he was SOOOO 2007...
 
Nanan said:
GM isn't going anywhere, a few divisions have been folded or sold to cover the bankruptcy but the main GM,Chevy, GMC will survive.
Click to expand...

You got that right, no matter how bad they get, those of us that earn enough to actually pay income taxes will be forced to subsidize it.
 
PheonixChameleon said:
Wow.. just wow. Why the hell would anyone mod a Volt to make it faster? People would buy it solely for the MPG.. and people that want a faster car would obviously get something else. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Most people will buy it for MPG, but some do see potential for performance.

I wouldn't use Telsa as a benchmark for performance electric cars, but there has been people who get impressive results with electric motors. The Torque is amazing, and they don't even need a gear box.

If people can push a Honda Civic beyond Go-Kart speeds, then people will do the same for electric cars. The future is electric, no matter how much I love the sound of a roaring V8.
 
maleitch said:
Man, kids like you terrify me. Yeah the "success" of the ridiculous C4C program. The government takes money away from one group, then offers to give it away to another group. I am shocked that it ran out of money. I mean, who would of thought that giving away free, unearned money would be popular? What brilliance.
Click to expand...

Kinda like a tax cut?

At least C4C directly helps the economy, reduces pollution, and reduces gas usage.
 
Lulz at the guy who thinks a V8 is necessary for highway driving and that the Prius is trash.

I carpool in a Prius to work every day. 3 adult males, plus whatever our cargo is (being a whoelsale precious metals distributor sometimes means some pretty hefty cargo) has never left the car feeling anemic or slow. It's a perfectly capable vehicle that gets 40 - 45mpg in a consistent, real-world manner. It's comfortable, roomy, has a smooth ride, and performs fine. My boss needed a new car, he got the Prius, and has been nothing but satisfied. He's never complained of it being weak, or slow, or underpowered. Lest you think he knows not what he speaks of, he also owns an '09 Corvette (GM going under made that a relatively cheap purchase).

Having driven it extensively myself, I can say without a doubt I'd buy one if I were in the market for a new car.

I love big engines and fast cars, too. My first car was a Camaro. The Prius handles better than my old Camaro ever did. The state of mind that would make someone claim that high HP is needed to not crash on the freeway... I can't even grasp that. And I live in the Bay Area and drive through that mess of traffic every day. I've never hopped on 580 or driven through the Maze and thought "Man, a V8 would totally help me in the situation." Usually it's more like "How handy it is that the Prius turns off the motor when we're stuck in this stop and go rish hour traffic."
 
piscian18 said:
Hes lolwuttin at this.



We've theoretically been on the planet for around 4 million years depending on your belief system.
Click to expand...

My wife requested me to clarify

Homo sapien is 200,000 years

Lucy is 4,000,000 years

dragons and angels and what not like 7,000 years or something...
 
JUSTJOEL73 said:
Yes, we need Yucca Mountain, it is as safe a place we are going to find on this planet to store nuclear waste for the next 10,000 years. I am also familiar with the salt barrier systems, it is as safe as we can make it with our current technology and engineering. It is even "safe" geologically speaking in terms of seismic events. However it is 10,000 years we are talking about. It has to be kept there safely for longer than man has been on the planet. We are talking about 500 generations here, don't you see a problem with 1 generation creating toxic waste that will be around and become our children's children's children's .... problem? We can do better then that, we should not be taking the easy way out on this, just because the energy is cheap to produce.

If fusion is not that far off, why can't we wait for it? Why build a plant today that could be obselete next year and for the next 50 years(you can't just shut these beasts down once you get them going).
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reactor_technology#Future_and_developing_technologies

Those are available with today's technology, no waiting for fusion to happen. Why continue to use fossil fuels for the majority of our energy when we can not only get much more energy out of these fission reactors, but also at the same time clean up the very same problems that past nuclear tech left us. Not to mention many of those designs are meltdown-proof to boot! Let them run until we expend the "spent" fuel and easily obtainable fissile fuels, by that time (at least 200 years from now) fusion will hopefully be a cheap and viable source. In the meantime, cheap fission can bolster our power grid so you can play with your brand new plug-in Ferrari all you want to without aggravating the tree huggers.

P.S. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-06/nsf-ehs060903.php

*hides from creationists*
 
Nanan said:
GM isn't going anywhere, a few divisions have been folded or sold to cover the bankruptcy but the main GM,Chevy, GMC will survive.
Click to expand...

GM is certainly not going anywhere. GM is still a very impressive company, as far what they've done. What they've sold is a different story. :eek:

GM had the technology to compete with other companies, but they always went cheap. Majority of their engines sold were push rod based engines, though it worked out well for the Corvette. Their V6 engines were so homogenized, that the parts from a modern GM 60 degree are interchangeable with engines from the early 90's.

Yet, if anyone looks up their Quad 4 engines with W41 cams, they're still impressive to this day. A 2009 Honda Accord Coupe gets 22/31 MPG with their modern 2.4L 16-Valve DOHC i-VTEC. Yet a 1990 Chevy Beretta GTZ got 22/31 MPG with the GM 2.3L Quad 4. The accord having only 10 more HP but the Beretta having 10 more Torque.

Sure that old car doesn't meet today's safety and emissions standards, but it showed that GM had the technology. Instead of refining that technology, GM bought Opel's Ecotec engines.

The modern Corvette even shows that GM has the engineering to beat out it's competitors. Why their mid range cars never got the same treatment is beyond me. Especially since that's where the big bucks comes from.
 
What is with so many people bashing solar and hybrids (I can understand wind, it was never a good large-scale idea in the first place). Yes, nuclear is great, but we are at least 50 years away from sustainable fusion reactions that are net-energy positive. That, and we have to get over the capital sticker-shock and public view of "ahhh the world will collapse" before it ever happens.

Here's a Global Exergy Resource diagram that shows how much exergy is available to us on this planet (and no, I will not attempt to explain exergy if you don't know what it is already).

Solar is good...perhaps not solar PV, but CPV (concentrated solar) and thermal solar systems are rapidly gaining popularity and efficiency. Hell, we already have a 40%+ efficient solar cell...it just costs 40,000$ to make.

Batteries simply need a projected two-fold improvement on their capacity capabilities, then I can guarantee you electric cars will take over, very quickly. I've seen and heard some lectures on some very interesting battery developments that see a five-fold increase in capacity. Impressive, I'd say.

The fact is, oil won't sustain us forever. We are making a step in the right direction. These companys have not been doing this for much longer than a few years, so cut them some slack if they're not exactly perfect. Either way, I'm glad more and more of them are realizing that we don't want huge ass trucks and cars that suck up hundreds of dollars of gas every week or two. Well, I'd take an Audi R8 any day...


And on the Tesla subject...they're a 3 year old company. The roadsters are most definitely not overpriced especially when you consider the battery pack costs about 30-40 grand to make. I sure as hell will be buying a Model S when it comes out. Those things are sexxxxy.
 
Xaero_toast said:
You guys need to watch a little more discovery/science channel. I wish I could remember the show, but there was an episode about the new recycling methods for spent nuclear fuel. Currently, a fuel rod is "spent" after using up some ridiculously low percentage of the actual fissionable material in the rod (something like 3-5%). With the new techniques they're coming out with to recycle that material, a fuel rod will potentially last up to 20x longer than before.

Now I want to watch that again. I guess I've got something for Tivo to find me when I get home tonight.
Click to expand...

There is also a show that tells how cars are the least polluting when compared to earth changes, factories, power plants and the worst believe it or not is live stock. I agree we need to get off oil for the most part but not for the air pollution thing but to not rely on other country's for it. Car exhaust pollution has very little to do with global warming if any at all. Now if we all ran without any pollution control on the vehicles (old days) then it would be different.
 
I really feel auto manufactures should just skip this whole hybrid thing and work zero emission fuel efficient gas based cars and put all funding into making Hydrogen Cell based cars affordable. But then what would this do to the oil industry, and what would we do with all of these gas based. If you really look at this situation, someone is gonna get screwed, and ppl will be put out of a job.
 
haven't seen a gas station with out the green pump nosel yet, the only problem with diesel is their maintenance costs
 
They just need one of those yellow energy star rating stickers put on the car, yeah ok you don't use any gas if you only drive X miles per day, but how much in electricity will that cost you? How many kWh is that worth? Many places have tiered metering such that the more you use it starts getting more expensive by a lot.

There's a huge heap of difference between someone charging up at 4cents per kWh in the middle of coal burning hell and someone out in this general area paying 33 cents per kWh because everything else they have put them into the 300%+ baseline usage category.
 
It's going to need that 230 mpg to make up for the $7,500 tax credit... What you say? tax credits are good you say? No, that money contributes to our deficit. Our deficit eventually has to be paid, or more realistically inflated away.

The price of government is not what it taxes, but what it spends.
 
Silent.Sin said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reactor_technology#Future_and_developing_technologies

Those are available with today's technology, no waiting for fusion to happen. Why continue to use fossil fuels for the majority of our energy when we can not only get much more energy out of these fission reactors, but also at the same time clean up the very same problems that past nuclear tech left us. Not to mention many of those designs are meltdown-proof to boot! Let them run until we expend the "spent" fuel and easily obtainable fissile fuels, by that time (at least 200 years from now) fusion will hopefully be a cheap and viable source. In the meantime, cheap fission can bolster our power grid so you can play with your brand new plug-in Ferrari all you want to without aggravating the tree huggers.

P.S. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-06/nsf-ehs060903.php

*hides from creationists*
Click to expand...

The problem with nuclear power is that most people still think of Three Mile Island, The China Syndrome, and Chernobyl and so don't want to have anything to do with it. I'm torn though. I think it is a good, reasonably safe and cheap source of power;however, I look at the idiots that I work with all day in my government job and I imagine them running a nuclear plant and it makes me shudder.

Yucca mountain will never happen as long as we have the senators we have. Harry Reid is a senir member of Congress and a very powerful man, and is firmly against the dump. It's too bad. It may have been a job possibility for me. I like the idea of shooting the waste into space.

People don't like to think about it, but just like the water situation in the west, sooner or later we will have to do something about the oil situation in the US. Whether we go bankrupt and can't afford skyrocketing prices for foreign oil or the supply just runs out, it is a situation that will have to be dealt with, by your children, or the generation after that.

And just for flamebait, let me say that GM always has sucked and always will. American cars are shit. Toyotas and Hondas are the only good carmakers. I personally prefer Honda, but I have friends with Priuses and they are fine cars. Remember, we're talking about everyday driving here, not NASCAR.
 
archevilangel said:
It's going to need that 230 mpg to make up for the $7,500 tax credit... What you say? tax credits are good you say? No, that money contributes to our deficit. Our deficit eventually has to be paid, or more realistically inflated away.
Click to expand...

Oh, inflated away is what will happen. Neither side is interested in curbing spending or raising taxes in order to pay for it.
 
Pyroja said:
Lulz at the guy who thinks a V8 is necessary for highway driving and that the Prius is trash.

I carpool in a Prius to work every day. 3 adult males, plus whatever our cargo is (being a whoelsale precious metals distributor sometimes means some pretty hefty cargo) has never left the car feeling anemic or slow. It's a perfectly capable vehicle that gets 40 - 45mpg in a consistent, real-world manner. It's comfortable, roomy, has a smooth ride, and performs fine. My boss needed a new car, he got the Prius, and has been nothing but satisfied. He's never complained of it being weak, or slow, or underpowered. Lest you think he knows not what he speaks of, he also owns an '09 Corvette (GM going under made that a relatively cheap purchase).

Having driven it extensively myself, I can say without a doubt I'd buy one if I were in the market for a new car.

I love big engines and fast cars, too. My first car was a Camaro. The Prius handles better than my old Camaro ever did. The state of mind that would make someone claim that high HP is needed to not crash on the freeway... I can't even grasp that. And I live in the Bay Area and drive through that mess of traffic every day. I've never hopped on 580 or driven through the Maze and thought "Man, a V8 would totally help me in the situation." Usually it's more like "How handy it is that the Prius turns off the motor when we're stuck in this stop and go rish hour traffic."
Click to expand...


I don't get it, Sir:

You like camaros yet bought a prius. The new corvette gets like 30+mpg on the highway due to its aerodynamics and gearing, why not have gone with that?

Yeah there's a difference between 30 and 45mpg, but its not like 30mpg is that bad.

:confused::confused::confused::confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top