GM wants tax incentives to build Volt in Detroit
Click on the above image for a high-res gallery of the Volt Concept
With both hands extended, General Motors has asked Detroit City Council members for tax breaks to ensure the highly-anticipated hybrid electric-powered Chevrolet Volt will be built in their city. This news comes on the heels of GM asking Congress for a tax break to ensure the price remains near $30,000 when it arrives in showrooms in 2010. Enough already. Stuck in the turmoil of a $38 billion loss last year, pending job cuts, UAW strikes, and in the midst of an economy favoring fuel-efficient vehicles (as pickups and SUVs roll down the assembly line), GM is scrambling to survive. Whether it arrives as a hybrid, or in all-electric versions, the Chevrolet Volt can't come to market soon enough... regardless of who GM panhandles.
Gallery: Chevy Volt Concept
[Source: The Detroit News]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Mi key 5:38PM (6/03/2008)
Hope GM doesn't do to Detroit what it did to the CAW.
Reply
renegade 5:58PM (6/03/2008)
You should watch the movie Roger and Me.
Reader 6:20PM (6/03/2008)
At least to see the Rabbit Woman.
Judy Zik 9:55PM (6/03/2008)
Exactly. If Detroit makes an agreement they better get job guarantees in writing.
For those that don't know they swindled the Ontario government out of money and the CAW out of concessions to keep open the plants in Ontario. The plants that they have now turned around and closed one by one. GM's word means nothing and with the way they have treated my home province of Ontario I would never buy one of their cars again.
why not the LS2LS7? 1:35AM (6/04/2008)
Nothing is iron clad. Things change. GM should be stuck with producing cars at plants that don't make sense when conditions change?
SUVs are on the decline and the Canadian dollar is on the rise. Canada isn't nearly as cheap a place to do business as it was before, especially for Americans.
Rocketboy 8:55AM (6/04/2008)
"You should watch the movie Roger and Me."
Why? Because M. Moore's version of the truth is so much more interesting then what really happened?
Rick 7:08PM (6/03/2008)
If they can't build it at a reasonable price, that's there issue. How many municipalities do they plan to ask for help?
Reply
Chris 5:39PM (6/03/2008)
Why not, it is a far better investment than building a new stadium which seems to be the political class's favorite way of frivolously spend tax dollars.
Detroit needs the jobs, it needs the plant, and it needs the possible halo this car offers. They would be fools to not consider it. Then again, considering their recent political problems they might not recognize the golden goose
Reply
willyjsimmons 5:41PM (6/03/2008)
The more time that passes...
the worse the Volt's prospects sound.
Maybe a 4 year moratorium on executive salaries and bonuses might get this puppy to market at a reasonable price?
Reply
Jim 8:07AM (6/04/2008)
When a glass is half full for you it is half empty. Why would you make such a statement? GM is coming out with a new technology and is making no false claims related to it, but you are there to shoot it down before giving it a chance. Why don't you say something that's more intelligent? Then, you might impress someone.
willyjsimmons 10:49AM (6/04/2008)
'Why would you make such a statement?'
Ha!
STFU.
styleguy 5:44PM (6/03/2008)
I think this post is a little misleading. GM has some great products that are sure to bring in some money (Malibu, CTS). GM isn't struggling to survive, but like the others in the Big Three, have to wait for some more sales to come in.
BUt about the Volt being highly anticipated, that's too vague. We want it and now! No matter what price.
Reply
Lithous 5:45PM (6/03/2008)
"as pickups and SUVs roll down the assembly line"
First, not sure if you heard but that is being addressed.
Second, have you ever seen a construction site (including home sites)? There are pickups there. Not sure pickups are inherently bad. Or that every SUV is that bad. Plus, I've see 26-30mpg highway in my 4 cylinder SUV. So, should 6 cylinder minivans be on your S-list too? Or is it because most of the U.S. domestics don't do minivans that they are fine?
But thanks for the info Micheal Harley-Nihonson
Reply
DKB_SATX 6:23PM (6/03/2008)
Construction sites and other places where trucks and big SUVs are actually useful are NOT the problem. On my block of 16 houses, there are 5 pickups, 6 SUVs and 3 CUVs. *ONE* of the guys with a pickup uses it for his business. The rest are stuck in traffic commuting to indoor jobs and have no practical use for the big vehicle most of the time, and that's the problem. The people who do real work with their trucks will probably actually eventually recover a little of the money they're throwing down the gas tank because when they're not status vehicles anymore and the used market is glutted, trucks and SUVs will probably get more affordable.
Derek 8:04PM (6/03/2008)
26-30 on the highway at what speed? That's still nothing to brag about with a four cylinder these days. My last two tanks in a V6 sedan have averaged 30 in mixed driving.
Lithous 8:57PM (6/03/2008)
Go back to sleep Derek.
You are talking about 2 tanks and I am talking about an estimation over 3 years of ownership. Anywhere between 60-80mph at different times and anything else in between. Never having done a trip more than about a half tank range (continuously on the highway) though I can't say for sure that I couldn't get more if it was 100% highway. So really my estimates are mixed driving real world. My main point without being exact on mpg is that a v6 minivan is acceptable to Mr. Nihonson (as he didn't mention those in his rant) yet implies all SUVs are so bad. They aren't as good as a sedan in some cases but they aren't all 12mpg by any stretch and if you have kids and actually go places with them and bring stuff...
Probably the same reason you have a sedan with 30mpg mixed (supposedly with a whole whopping 2 tanks to prove it) and don't instead use a motorcycle or scooter that gets 60 or 70mpg or 100mpg. The utility you want is best served with a sedan and mine a small SUV.
We travel somewhere every weekend and put large objects in the back just about every time. Chairs and luggage for the beach, etc. I'm guessing your sedan does not have the storage space of even our small SUV.
Carletti 5:47PM (6/03/2008)
$40,000? Can they be serious?
Our country is in the midst of an economic contraction, real incomes are withering away, and GM expects to beat the Prius thing with a $40,000 gas-saver?
Don't bother, GM. Just quit the project altogether.
Good-looking, reliable, cool-to-be-seen-in, fuel-efficient vehicles. Why can't you figure this equation out?
Reply
Torrent 5:55PM (6/03/2008)
I'm sure within a couple of years, owning the Volt would save you about 40,000 bucks AKA the Volt will pay itself off.
Dirk 5:58PM (6/03/2008)
I was curious about this myself. $40,000 is is pretty much out of everyones price range. Sub 25k and under is the current sweet spot because everyones slowly going broke. By the time this thing comes out everyone will be buying sub 20k cars to offset gas prices.
hoosker_doo 6:03PM (6/03/2008)
$40k is steep but I think they have to charge that much to see some sort of return. I'm not certain, and correct me if I'm wrong, but a lot of money goes into the r&d of a brand new car so in order to get that money back (including profit) they have to charge a certain amount. I'm probably off by more than a few clicks on that one but it is my best educated guess.
I’m guessing we’ll have to wait a few more years to see if 1) there are many more electric cars are on the market and 2) if the whole oil crisis dies down. If the oil crisis dies off then the market won’t need to price electric cars competitively. If electric cars start really taking off then maybe manufacturer will try to offer more economic versions.