Volvo Phasing Out Internal Combustion Engines

[qw1cktype1]

Powering by gas will go bye-bye as soon as the price (via tax, rarity, etc) gets out of reach. I applaud those on the cutting edge of electrical transportation, but FFS stop with the hybrid BS.. I would rather have a lower output engine than further kill the planet with a battery strapped to my generator just to get some sort of smug factor. Every time you add something to a system there is a loss and maybe the U.S. needs to realize they don't need 300 HP to get to work (I shuddered while typing that).

Electric cannot take me to work, my kids to activities, and back home on a charge. America is a different demographic, unfortunately. A true, real life story to this is my ex wife bought a EV. We are going to court because I moved 35 miles away and her car cannot make it to my new house and back on a single charge (which takes hours). No she didn't equip it with a quick charge port, but none the less she wouldn't want to waist 30 minutes charging up what is a subsidized method of getting people to change their purchasing decisions.

I am eager to see what the next 5 years holds for these things, but for now they cannot meet my needs. I have no solution as hydrogen is so far off, and electric is outsourced to where the toxins contaminate another country. Imagine the cost if all the electric components were built in the U.S.

 

[tetris42]

Where you going to get the additional power from? Nuclear? Coal? Other fossil fuels?

Current estimate just to update the grid is $FIVE TRILLION.

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/22/49093...e-nations-electrical-grid-is-the-weakest-link

http://www.businessinsider.com/replacing-us-electrical-grid-cost-2017-3

A lot of people don't understand just how incredibly energy rich oil is and how we're DECADES behind on infrastructure in order to make a smooth transition once prices rise.

 

[nutzo]

Not true. Gimme a 1975-1978 Datsun 280z and some money to fix it up and I can show you a nice little sports car that can get 27+ mpg on the highway, around 20-25mpg in the city, has good acceleration and can go 120-140mph. And the handling on corners is to die for if set up properly.

Now if you are looking at the "smart" cars and wanting 35-40mpg+, sure you are going to have a crap car that will crumple to cracker-jack box size if it gets in a wreck.

My Camry Hybrid is rated at 40 city and 38 highway, so it easily falls into your "smart" car range. Except it's a mid sized car with 200 HP (combined) with good acceleration due to the electric motors. Plus it has a decent trunk and even a spare tire. With a 17 gallon gas tank, it has a range of almost 700 miles.

 

[nutzo]

It might not work in "Global warming doesn't Exist" USA, but the rest of the world is Changing.

So far, Norway, Netherlands and France have announced they will banning gas/diesel engines in the coming decades:
Volvo is just getting ready for reality.

Not selling gas/diesel engines is one thing, removing existing cars from the road is a different issue.

Unless they completely ban all gas/diesel engines from the roads (i.e. no longer allow them to be registered) I predict all those old gas/diesel engine cars will be around for a very long time. Repairing old gas/diesel cars could become a good job choice since there will so many people wanting to keep them on the road instead of buying an expensive golf cart.

 

[Shintai]

There is a reason why everyone with oil is desperate to get it thrown on the market before its over.

The government here also redefined the north sea strategy recently with that purpose.

 

[M76]

Powering by gas will go bye-bye as soon as the price (via tax, rarity, etc) gets out of reach. I applaud those on the cutting edge of electrical transportation, but FFS stop with the hybrid BS.. I would rather have a lower output engine than further kill the planet with a battery strapped to my generator just to get some sort of smug factor. Every time you add something to a system there is a loss and maybe the U.S. needs to realize they don't need 300 HP to get to work (I shuddered while typing that).

Electric cannot take me to work, my kids to activities, and back home on a charge. America is a different demographic, unfortunately. A true, real life story to this is my ex wife bought a EV. We are going to court because I moved 35 miles away and her car cannot make it to my new house and back on a single charge (which takes hours). No she didn't equip it with a quick charge port, but none the less she wouldn't want to waist 30 minutes charging up what is a subsidized method of getting people to change their purchasing decisions.

I am eager to see what the next 5 years holds for these things, but for now they cannot meet my needs. I have no solution as hydrogen is so far off, and electric is outsourced to where the toxins contaminate another country. Imagine the cost if all the electric components were built in the U.S.

In reality hybrids are more efficient than regular gas powered cars, why would they even make it if that wasn't the case? Where are you getting your information? The electric motor "strapped" to the flywheel acts as regenerative breaking as well.
Also "Hybrid" technology is used in locomotives since the thirties, do you think they would use it for 80 years if it wasn't more efficient? That industry is extremely sensitive to fuel consumption. Even if it is slightly different as it is decoupled from the diesel engine.

Why buy an EV that can't make it 70 miles on a single charge? That's simply a bad consumer decision, I assume there wasn't a gun at her head to buy that crap.

 

[Rob94hawk]

with the 2014 legacy I can go 520 miles before the gas light comes on and that is like going from St. Paul, MN to Hartford, MI following I94/90/94

Is this a hybrid? What are the specs? I'm interested. Thanks

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

Is this a hybrid? What are the specs? I'm interested. Thanks

it's just a 2.5i I average 31-33 mixed and about 34 at 68mph. The car has been nothing short of great for me...fuel economy starts dropping off fast above that 72 = 30mpg 75=28mpg

 

[Deleted member 184142]

Wait?! They are doing this without the force of the government? You mean, consumers have steered them towards this decision? Bananas.

Nope. It means government incentives and subsidy is ripe for doing it. Companies that produce only hybrids and EVs get special treatment, just like Tesla. When ever you have Government subsidize a product you will without a doubt have an inflation of that market. The majority of the EV market exist for this very reason.

Now, don't be confused in that meaning people don't WANT EVs, many people do, myself being one of them, however wanting and being able to afford one are not the same thing, no less being an actual value. Remove this and watch the bottom fall out of the market.

 

[Verge]

I likve volvo and all, but a hybrid is still based on an ICE.

 

[zkostik]

If a person worries about mpg or gas prices, they will always drive a shitbox grocery getter.

I'd partially agree but it does depend on your commute and traffic. Some of the folks at my work commute around 70 miles one way so yeah, mpg does kinda matter. My commute is not even 17 miles but it takes 30-45 minutes on average (DC area). I wouldn't say I care too much about mpg but sure as hell won't be driving a 10mpg car. It would be nice to have a decent balance of comfort/luxury and reasonable fuel economy. I would never get an electric though because these things are only useful for local driving. If you go all over the place you'd need a second car just for that.

 

[thejokker]

Fixed that for you.

I was trying to not taunt the electric zealots too much...

 

[thejokker]

Not true. Gimme a 1975-1978 Datsun 280z and some money to fix it up and I can show you a nice little sports car that can get 27+ mpg on the highway, around 20-25mpg in the city, has good acceleration and can go 120-140mph. And the handling on corners is to die for if set up properly.

You can have sporty, good mpg and good power if you know what you are doing.

Now if you are looking at the "smart" cars and wanting 35-40mpg+, sure you are going to have a crap car that will crumple to cracker-jack box size if it gets in a wreck.

Or you can buy a new VW GTI that is faster and gets better gas mileage. With the right tires it will corner pretty close to the 280z, has great brakes and will do 150+ mph.

 

[thejokker]

So you are an AGW denier. Sorry I don't have time for people who deny science.

Like I said, the rest of world is getting on dealing with scientific realities.

Volvo is preparing for that.

I'm your huckleberry...

Sorry but the science is not in your corner. Esper et al (2012, 2014) clearly shows that recent temperatures, while warming, "easily" falls within the range of normal temperatures when viewed from a 2,000 year timeline. The Roman and Medieval warm periods were as warm or warmer than recent temperatures.

Scientist Timothy Ball, whose research supports Jan Esper's work was sued by Michael Mann, of Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1998, 1999), after Ball accused Mann of data fraud. The court ruled in favor of Ball:
"Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.

The defendant in the libel trial, the 79-year-old Canadian climatologist, Dr Tim Ball is expected to instruct his British Columbia attorneys to trigger mandatory punitive court sanctions, including a ruling that Mann did act with criminal intent when using public funds to commit climate data fraud. Mann’s imminent defeat is set to send shock waves worldwide within the climate science community as the outcome will be both a legal and scientific vindication of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a “hoax.”

http://www.newscats.org/?p=10216

Mann's work was the cornerstone of the argument for AGW. Billions of dollars for research supporting AGW has corrupted the (sic) climate research community. It appears rampant fraud is the consequence and AGW is just another hoax...

 

[jevans64]

Good. Now everyone can start driving one of these...

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Means a lot though to the majority of the world's urban population.

Times are changing.

Agreed, and increasingly shrinking percentage of the population actually lives somewhere where they can drive on a highway for an extended period of time without facing crippling stop and go traffic. The U.S. is already over 80% urbanized on average since 2010. (almost 90% in the west, ~85% in the east, high 70's in the south and midwest).

Personally I own a large Volvo sedan with a turbocharged 3L inline 6. (2009 Volvo S80 T6 AWD). Its been a good car to me, but its starting to get to that tender age where repairs are getting more expensive, and I am casually thinking about a replacement.

I recently started a new job (which has forced me to resign from news posting here, as I just don't have enough time) and I drive 55 miles each way. During my commute I have both highway cruising, and some crippling bumper to bumper traffic. Long story short, I go through two 18 Gallon tanks of midgrade gas a week, and I am seriously starting to think about going electric or at least plugin hybrid.

Problem is, I have been doing the financial calculations on it, and I have yet to find a plugin hybrid or electric vehicle that makes financial sense. Even if I get an all electric battery powered vehicle, my NPV calculations tell me that over 5 years the savings in gas would only amount to reducing the cost of the car compared to a non-electric by just under $15k. That still puts the likes of a Model S out of the question, as it costs WAY more than $15k more than an equivalent gas powered car.

The Chevy Bolt is an option, but it just looks too much like an econobox to me with its quirky design. If I'm going to spend $44k on a car, it can't look like some weirdo efficiency Toyota. I want something sleek, low to the ground, with excellent cornering and handling.

The Model 3 MIGHT be an option at $35K, but that damned thing is sold out for THREE YEARS. I would have had to pre-order one sight unseen without test driving when they first announced it in order to get my hands on one, and that's just irresponsible. I'm not the kind of fanboy who buys something without testing, or at least seeing it first. What If I find I can't sit comfortably in it?

So, this has had me thinking more about plugin hybrids. There is less gas savings with them due to the more limited all electric range, but I could still go all electric around town at the beginning and end of my commute, and whenever I get stuck in traffic, and only ever go gas when cruising on the highway, and since there are electric charging stations at work, I can take full advantage of the battery both on the way in and on the way home.

I can't bring myself to buy a Toyota, though, so I've been looking at the Audi A3 e-Tron and the BMW 330e

According to my calculations with these, the NPV of gas savings over 5 years is between $5k and $7k depending on assumptions and model, but these cars still cost more than that above their conventional models, so it still doesn't make sense financially. I mean, the thought of shrinking my carbon footprint DOES hold a little appeal, but how much am I willing to pay for that? Not very much.

On the flipside though, these calculations are based on two factors, current unusually high electric rates in Massachusetts (which politicians are trying to bring down) and current unusually low gas prices, which are almost certainly to go back up again under the pressure of increasing international demand and OPEC scaling back on supply again at some point, so the model only gets more and more favorable as time goes on, but I cant predict the future, so I can't factor that into my calculations without getting into a GIGO (Garbage in, garbage out) situation.

I could buy one of these now, and be REALLY happy with it if Massachusetts electric rates are 2/3 of what they are today and gas prices are above $4 per gallon again in a couple of years, or it could just turn into a big waste.

Not to mention the fact that with the rapid advances being made in electric vehicles right now, buying one today, one might regret it when in two years much more advanced models may exist...

Decisions, decisions...

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I'm your huckleberry...

Sorry but the science is not in your corner. Esper et al (2012, 2014) clearly shows that recent temperatures, while warming, "easily" falls within the range of normal temperatures when viewed from a 2,000 year timeline. The Roman and Medieval warm periods were as warm or warmer than recent temperatures.

Scientist Timothy Ball, whose research supports Jan Esper's work was sued by Michael Mann, of Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1998, 1999), after Ball accused Mann of data fraud. The court ruled in favor of Ball:
"Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.

The defendant in the libel trial, the 79-year-old Canadian climatologist, Dr Tim Ball is expected to instruct his British Columbia attorneys to trigger mandatory punitive court sanctions, including a ruling that Mann did act with criminal intent when using public funds to commit climate data fraud. Mann’s imminent defeat is set to send shock waves worldwide within the climate science community as the outcome will be both a legal and scientific vindication of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a “hoax.”

http://www.newscats.org/?p=10216

Mann's work was the cornerstone of the argument for AGW. Billions of dollars for research supporting AGW has corrupted the (sic) climate research community. It appears rampant fraud is the consequence and AGW is just another hoax...

Yeah, we don't need that kind of pseudoscientific bullshit.

Ignoring the tens of thousands of studies that support AGW, and picking out the handful that support the point that you want to make is the very definition of cherry picking data, and nonsense.

You complain about the overwhelming majority of the scientific community being biased, and then point to the pseudoscientific work of a man who has some t his entire career working for Exxon Mobil and other oil companies to counter them? What a joke, just like that legal case you cite.

Stuff like this was responsible for allowing the tobacco industry to claim that smoking was harmless for decades. How many people needed to die because of that? And need I remind you that big tobacco won many legal cases over those years as well. The courts aren't necessarily the best place to judge what is correct the in science. In fact they may be the absolute worst place. Judges are not scientists.

 

[thejokker]

Yeah, we don't need that kind of pseudoscientific bullshit.

Ignoring the thousands of studies that support AGW, and picking out the handful that support the point that you want to make is the very definition of cherry picking data, and nonsense.

Stuff like this was responsible for allowing the tobacco industry to claim that smoking was harmless for decades. How many people needed to die because of that?

Sorry but Mann, Bradley and Hughes "was" the cornerstone study of AGW. Thousands of studies which represents peer review of MBH and are based upon the mathematical assumptions and models of MBH, now discredited, are likewise discredited by association. Without MBH there is no scientific evidence that recent temperatures are anything other than normal. Nobody denies that recent temperatures are warming but one must also demonstrate that there is any cause for concern.

I guess the irony of your denying the research of Timothy Ball and Jan Esper, while accusing others of being science deniers, is lost on you... Thousands of intellectuals and scholars in the middle-ages denied the works of Galileo. They were wrong and warming alarmists likewise are wrong...

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Sorry but Mann, Bradley and Hughes "was" the cornerstone study of AGW. Thousands of studies which represents peer review of MBH and are based upon the mathematical assumptions and models of MBH, now discredited, are likewise discredited by association. Without MBH there is no scientific evidence that recent temperatures are anything other than normal. Nobody denies that recent temperatures are warming but one must also demonstrate that there is any cause for concern.

I guess the irony of your denying the research of Timothy Ball and Jan Esper, while accusing others of being science deniers, is lost on you... Thousands of intellectuals and scholars in the middle-ages denied the works of Galileo. They were wrong and warming alarmists likewise are wrong...

I'm sorry, but the man based his analysis on the thoroughly discredited "satellite data" conspiracy, tells us that the planet has actually been cooling since 1930 (or is it 1940, it differs every time you ask) when 100% of all moving averages have been going up to contradict him.

The man is a paid shill for the oil industry sent to muddy the waters and use the courts just like the tobacco industry did for decades.

You have to be willfully blind to believe a single Glenn word he utters.

What's more I find it amusing that the same People who in other thread s over the last several years have repeatedly complained about the courts ignorance when it comes to science and technology in various rulings, are the first to jump on and clamor to the Tim Ball ruling. It would be hilarious if not for how tragic the cognitive dissonance is.

 

[exlink]

Too soon to cut out of the ICE market completely. Volvos haven't exactly been selling like hotcakes over the past decade (although they're improving recently) and limiting your audience even further to those interested in electric/hybrid only cars in only a 2 year timeframe is not a good business move. They should choose to offer both and then slowly phase out ICEs by 2025 at the earliest.

 

[thejokker]

I'm sorry, but the man based his analysis on the thoroughly discredited "satellite data" conspiracy, tells us that the planet has actually been cooling since 1930 (or is it 1940, it differs every time you ask) when 100% of all moving averages have been going up to contradict him.

The man is a paid shill for the oil industry sent to muddy the waters and use the courts just like the tobacco industry did for decades.

You have to be willfully blind to believe a single Glenn word he utters.

What's more I find it amusing that the same People who in other thread s over the last several years have repeatedly complained about the courts ignorance when it comes to science and technology in various rulings, are the first to jump on and clamor to the Tim Ball ruling. It would be hilarious if not for how tragic the cognitive dissonance is.

There is no qualitative difference between receiving funding from a government agency (with a partisan agenda to advance) and a private corporation. One must judge the research on it's own merits.

Similarly the NOAA and NASA climate date you have cited (without actually citing) has been found to contain statistical errors which artificially suppresses colder temperatures while accentuating warmer temperatures. Much in the same way Mann has published fraudulent data NOAA and NASA has been forced to print retractions in past recent years.

With regards to the court case: Mann refused to share his data with the courts. One might conclude that it is very unscientific to use the court system to attack your scientific peers as Michael Mann has done. Why would he sue and not defend his work unless he has something to hide? Statisticians Stephen McIntyre and David Hand (former president of the Royal Statistical Society) have both criticized Mann's methodology. Timothy Ball "and" Jan Esper have both published research, independent from one another, that support the same conclusion: the medieval warm period (pre-industral) was as warm or warmer than recent temperatures.

With the collapse of Mann's credibility there is no scientific evidence to support recent temperatures are anything other than normal...

 

[mope54]

Using an ICE to charge the battery is not as easy as it sounds, as you need a rather powerful generator to do that and is in most cases less efficient than having the ICE drive the wheels. You also have this in a few cars, but they only use it as an emergency range extender because of this. They also have reduced speed and performance as the generator can't keep up with powering the car AND charging the battery, they have also run into thermal problems with charging and discharging the battery at the same time. This is why most hybrids still use the ICE to power the wheels and the electric motors to "fill" the areas that the ICE is less efficient at, such as take off and sitting in traffic.

Accidentally or purposely, you're relying on outdated and incorrect information.

 

[Deleted member 184142]

Accidentally or purposely, you're relying on outdated and incorrect information.

Waiting on sources.

I am fine with accepting new tech, as someone who wants an EV myself, but if you are going to claim new tech/efficiency or changes, you need to provide at least SOME sort of proof. If you can I will gladly read it and if correct, accept it.

 

[mope54]

Waiting on sources.

I am fine with accepting new tech, as someone who wants an EV myself, but if you are going to claim new tech/efficiency or changes, you need to provide at least SOME sort of proof. If you can I will gladly read it and if correct, accept it.

Sources? Your information is wrong. If you want to educate yourself, avail yourself of any current review of nearly all modern hybrids. This isn't about new technology, you're talking about a Prius circa 30 years ago or a BMW i3 REX. You didn't post any sources for your incorrect opinion on the matter, so why would you think anyone owes you the research you're refusing to do yourself?

I own an EV and I test drove and read dozens of reviews before our purchase. I'm not going to do it all again, but just because you'll ignore what I wrote without something I'll toss out the ones off the top of my head: the eTron, the Volt, the plymouth minivan, and the VW GTE all contradict what you wrote. The entire industry already shifted away from what you claim. The minority of vehicles use the ICE for drivetrain since it's the most inefficient way to do it completely opposite of what you wrote.

 

[TordanGow]

Counterpoint:

http://jalopnik.com/here-s-a-huge-reason-why-we-need-electric-trucks-1796495764

The ICE is a relic of the 19th century; better options have long existed. The only difference is those other options are actually getting looked into and developed now.

Replacing ICE with an EV in mass isn't anywhere near on the horizon, at least in the USA.

First there are all of the obvious drawbacks to EVs everyone cites:

• -short range on a full charge relative to a full tank of gasoline
• -cost
• -slow "refill" times relative to gasoline

So let's hypothetically grant that none of those are an issue for the entire population. That's a huge reach, but for sake or argument even if that was the case we don't have the ability to switch to primarily EV, heck even 50% EV.

The largest issue is infrastructure. If we suddenly switched over to all of these EVs, they need to be charged. Our electrical grid is not designed to cope with anywhere close to the load that would add. Heck, it's pretty common for something as simple as a hot day to cause blackouts. Now you take half of (or more) the nation's cars and start tossing them on the grid... Good luck with that. Also, that load would come in big bursts too. Everyone getting home between 4-6 PM would be tossing their car on their chargers all at once.. while simultaneously cranking up the A/C since they just got home. This would cause a massive peak power demand. We would have to completely revamp the entire grid, from transmission lines, substations, all the way down to the neighborhood level transformers. That is a truly monumental task that is being overlooked.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Replacing ICE with an EV in mass isn't anywhere near on the horizon, at least in the USA.

First there are all of the obvious drawbacks to EVs everyone cites:

• -short range on a full charge relative to a full tank of gasoline
• -cost
• -slow "refill" times relative to gasoline

So let's hypothetically grant that none of those are an issue for the entire population. That's a huge reach, but for sake or argument even if that was the case we don't have the ability to switch to primarily EV, heck even 50% EV.

The largest issue is infrastructure. If we suddenly switched over to all of these EVs, they need to be charged. Our electrical grid is not designed to cope with anywhere close to the load that would add. Heck, it's pretty common for something as simple as a hot day to cause blackouts. Now you take half of (or more) the nation's cars and start tossing them on the grid... Good luck with that. Also, that load would come in big bursts too. Everyone getting home between 4-6 PM would be tossing their car on their chargers all at once.. while simultaneously cranking up the A/C since they just got home. This would cause a massive peak power demand. We would have to completely revamp the entire grid, from transmission lines, substations, all the way down to the neighborhood level transformers. That is a truly monumental task that is being overlooked.

That is correct. The grid and power generation will have to be completely rethought if there is a massive migration to EV's.

Some of it can be made up for through decentralized power generation (micro generators, cogeneration, solar and other home generation using renewables) putting less load on the grid, but that can only go so far.

This is the problem with mass electric vehicle transit. The power needs to co.e from somewhere, and it takes a long time to upgrade power generation and distribution infrastructure.

 

[Deleted member 184142]

Sources? Your information is wrong. If you want to educate yourself, avail yourself of any current review of nearly all modern hybrids. This isn't about new technology, you're talking about a Prius circa 30 years ago or a BMW i3 REX. You didn't post any sources for your incorrect opinion on the matter, so why would you think anyone owes you the research you're refusing to do yourself?

I own an EV and I test drove and read dozens of reviews before our purchase. I'm not going to do it all again, but just because you'll ignore what I wrote without something I'll toss out the ones off the top of my head: the eTron, the Volt, the plymouth minivan, and the VW GTE all contradict what you wrote. The entire industry already shifted away from what you claim. The minority of vehicles use the ICE for drivetrain since it's the most inefficient way to do it completely opposite of what you wrote.

Oh, you have done research have you? Sorry, didn't mean to question such technical knowledge!

I built my first EV (customers car) back before EV was even a known word to most people. But hey, what does 12 years hands on shop work experience with ICE and EV have anything to do with it right?

Lets take the Volt, the best known of you list and by far most popular. When the very short battery life ends the ICE motor kicks in, removing one of the electric motors from power production, as the ICE now drives this motor as a generator, full power can't be used all the time in this mode either, only short bursts can you get full power out of the electric motor, because the ICE can't keep up with power demands. To top all of this off, when the ICE only mode kicks in due to low battery, it gets only 42MPG, out of a tiny 1.4L motor because running it this way is NOT EFFICIENT. Getting this also requires very easy driving because of reduced power availability.

So lets see, I wrote that it's not common method used by hybrids, and you show less than a handful of cars that use it (but they dont), in gas mode it sees a drop in performance and MPG, Chevy has even argued with the EPA to not be classified as one because it means it would have to be tested for MPG without being able to use stored battery power, which would drop it under current normal hybrids.

So lets see, I said reduction in performance when being charged by the ICE....Check.
Worse efficiency than normal hybrids....Check.
Most hybrids still use the normal setup of filling and ICE to drive the wheels....Check.

So what was I wrong on again?

Worth noting that the etron and VW GTE use the same platform and are also conventional hybrids, it uses a normal dual clutch automatic transmission with a electric motor embedded in it, the ICE drives the wheels directly with the electric motor assisting, and gets a rated 120MPG, vs the very inefficient method of using the ICE to make power to then drive the electric motors of the Volt above that gets 42MPG in this mode, the high MPG rating of the Volt is ONLY that high because of plug in battery power and the ICE only filling, once that battery power is gone so is that efficiency as it then depends on the ICE. Another fact worth noting is that in hybrid mode, when allowed to also use it's plug in battery power the Volt still only gets 109MPG, again showing how less efficient that system is.

As for the "Plymouth minivan", what? They don't even exist anymore, I am assuming you mean a minivan from FCA now.

 

[Crosshairs]

I think it's a step in the right direction. Remove the heavy and expensive drivetrain/transmission and slap electric motors at the wheels. Run motors off battery power. Plop in a small, very tuned and efficient ICE to recharge battery. Doesn't seem like it would be that hard. A properly designed/tuned engine that only runs at specific low RPM ranges could be hugely more efficient as a DC generator. Also.. no more transmission problems.

The new Chrysler Pacifica hybrid does just this. It uses a 3.6 liter V6 Atkinson cycle engine who's sole purpose is to produce electricity.

The driver has pretty much zero control over the gas engine ..it will start when it needs to and it will run as long as necessary.
Since its not 100% electric, you are not range limited . This I can see gaining traction, but all electric I would say is doomed unless they can solve the range problem and still offer vehicles that are affordable to the masses

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I think it's a step in the right direction. Remove the heavy and expensive drivetrain/transmission and slap electric motors at the wheels. Run motors off battery power. Plop in a small, very tuned and efficient ICE to recharge battery. Doesn't seem like it would be that hard. A properly designed/tuned engine that only runs at specific low RPM ranges could be hugely more efficient as a DC generator. Also.. no more transmission problems.

The new Chrysler Pacifica hybrid does just this. It uses a 3.6 liter V6 Atkinson cycle engine who's sole purpose is to produce electricity.

The driver has pretty much zero control over the gas engine ..it will start when it needs to and it will run as long as necessary.
Since its not 100% electric, you are not range limited . This I can see gaining traction, but all electric I would say is doomed unless they can solve the range problem and still offer vehicles that are affordable to the masses

Are you sure about the Pacifica? I'll habe to read more I guess.

I believe this is how the original design of the Chevy Volt was intended, but during development they found that it wasn't feasible at the time, and actually linked the gas engine to the wheels rather than just using it as a generator.

We know this method works, I mean look at Diesel-Electric locomotives. For some reason it was deemed not desirable for the Volt though. Now that was a few years ago now, so maybe something has changed.

 

[Crosshairs]

Are you sure about the Pacifica? I'll have to read more I guess.

does pretty sure work..

We trained on these about 8 months ago,and naturally the vehicles we use are pre production. I don't think anything has changed, but we still don't have a final product at my work.

let me do some more investigating before I stick my foot to far down my throat....but I am pretty sure thats how they are set up...

 

[mope54]

That's how they're supposed to be setup...according to the articles I read and how it was explained to my wife and I when we test drove the non-hybrid Pacifica to try and convince her into a minivan purchase in the first place. Same as the then current Volt (2016) and again the 2017 when we test drove that one. I attributed the Pacifica to Plymouth because I'm old, hahaha. I hadn't stepped on to a domestic dealership in about 30 years when we decided to see what they were offering so whatever.

I don't think the early Volt's design was due to inefficiency one way or the other but rather how they expected people to drive the cars and those assumptions were later refined over the years as they realized (and consumers realized) how their driving patterns played out in practical terms.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Agreed, and increasingly shrinking percentage of the population actually lives somewhere where they can drive on a highway for an extended period of time without facing crippling stop and go traffic. The U.S. is already over 80% urbanized on average since 2010. (almost 90% in the west, ~85% in the east, high 70's in the south and midwest).

Personally I own a large Volvo sedan with a turbocharged 3L inline 6. (2009 Volvo S80 T6 AWD). Its been a good car to me, but its starting to get to that tender age where repairs are getting more expensive, and I am casually thinking about a replacement.

I recently started a new job (which has forced me to resign from news posting here, as I just don't have enough time) and I drive 55 miles each way. During my commute I have both highway cruising, and some crippling bumper to bumper traffic. Long story short, I go through two 18 Gallon tanks of midgrade gas a week, and I am seriously starting to think about going electric or at least plugin hybrid.

Problem is, I have been doing the financial calculations on it, and I have yet to find a plugin hybrid or electric vehicle that makes financial sense. Even if I get an all electric battery powered vehicle, my NPV calculations tell me that over 5 years the savings in gas would only amount to reducing the cost of the car compared to a non-electric by just under $15k. That still puts the likes of a Model S out of the question, as it costs WAY more than $15k more than an equivalent gas powered car.

The Chevy Bolt is an option, but it just looks too much like an econobox to me with its quirky design. If I'm going to spend $44k on a car, it can't look like some weirdo efficiency Toyota. I want something sleek, low to the ground, with excellent cornering and handling.

The Model 3 MIGHT be an option at $35K, but that damned thing is sold out for THREE YEARS. I would have had to pre-order one sight unseen without test driving when they first announced it in order to get my hands on one, and that's just irresponsible. I'm not the kind of fanboy who buys something without testing, or at least seeing it first. What If I find I can't sit comfortably in it?

So, this has had me thinking more about plugin hybrids. There is less gas savings with them due to the more limited all electric range, but I could still go all electric around town at the beginning and end of my commute, and whenever I get stuck in traffic, and only ever go gas when cruising on the highway, and since there are electric charging stations at work, I can take full advantage of the battery both on the way in and on the way home.

I can't bring myself to buy a Toyota, though, so I've been looking at the Audi A3 e-Tron and the BMW 330e

According to my calculations with these, the NPV of gas savings over 5 years is between $5k and $7k depending on assumptions and model, but these cars still cost more than that above their conventional models, so it still doesn't make sense financially. I mean, the thought of shrinking my carbon footprint DOES hold a little appeal, but how much am I willing to pay for that? Not very much.

On the flipside though, these calculations are based on two factors, current unusually high electric rates in Massachusetts (which politicians are trying to bring down) and current unusually low gas prices, which are almost certainly to go back up again under the pressure of increasing international demand and OPEC scaling back on supply again at some point, so the model only gets more and more favorable as time goes on, but I cant predict the future, so I can't factor that into my calculations without getting into a GIGO (Garbage in, garbage out) situation.

I could buy one of these now, and be REALLY happy with it if Massachusetts electric rates are 2/3 of what they are today and gas prices are above $4 per gallon again in a couple of years, or it could just turn into a big waste.

Not to mention the fact that with the rapid advances being made in electric vehicles right now, buying one today, one might regret it when in two years much more advanced models may exist...

Decisions, decisions...

So I have been doing more research.

The Model 3 is not booked as hopelessly into the future as I first thought. Only until mid next year.
Trying to decide whether or not to put a fully refundable $1,000 reservation in or not.

Not sure I'll be happy with the size of the car. It will be 6" shorter overall than the smallest car I ever owned (tied between a 2001 and a 2004 Saab 9-5 Aero) and I never like the feeling of my head space being constricted.

That and damn, that grille-less front hump looks awfully weird to me. Having a really difficult time getting used to the look of it. It looks somehow unfinished, like a last minute hack job to me...