Click above for a high-res gallery of the Chevrolet Volt concept.
One of the many things General Motors boasted about when it unveiled the Volt concept at the Detroit Auto Show in 2007 was its 600-mile range. This was achieved partially by the battery pack, which could sustain a (theoretical) charge allowing the Volt to run for 40 miles without reverting to the gasoline engine/generator, as well as a 12-gallon fuel tank. According to Kicking Tires, GM has shrunk the size of the tank by an unknown quantity and the result is a reduction in range from 600 to 400 miles – or 360 miles without the aid of auxiliary (read: grid-provided) power.
The General maintains that since most owners don't travel more than 40 miles in one day, it wasn't necessary to fit the Volt with a larger tank. That reduction in capacity will save some weight, but what will it cost in public perception? The hype surrounding GM's supposed savior and game-changer are based on two figures: range and cost. If GM can deliver on both counts, they might have a hit on their hands. If not, the Volt will be DOA the day it hits dealers.
[Source: KickingTires]
Officially Official: 2010 Ford Mustang!
2010 Ford Mustang revealed early on Ford's own website!
2009 Nissan 370Z rolls out early in So. Cal
VIDEO: 2009 Nissan 370Z revealed early in So. Cal.
BRABUS begins business of tuning the Tesla Roadster
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 HUMMER H3T Alpha
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Mercedes Benz C63 AMG
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Hyundai Genesis
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse LT
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 9)
2004m3driver @ Jul 8th 2008 7:33PM
The worst thing is this car is 2 years away, yet everyone has so much damn input on it. They seriously should have waited a bit more before they started spouting out all those numbers. I seriously hope it succeeds.
azzo45 @ Jul 8th 2008 7:46PM
I'm starting to agree with other Autoblog posts (in other GM related posts...) Focus on traditional, light weight small cars that gets 35-40MPG.
Do the Volt... but do it right, or save the $$$. $40,000 Volts are not exactly entry-level bread & butter cars.
Johnny @ Jul 8th 2008 8:37PM
The truth is Kicking Tires asked GM engineers "how is the Volt and its 600 mile range coming along?".
The GM guys said "everything is great but the range is 40% less than before."
Kicking Tire was like "what happened?"
The GM guys are like, "oh nothing we cut the fuel tank by 40% thats why. We figured would you like a 12 gallon tank to go 600 miles or 8 gallons to go 340miles? We figure you like 340 more so we shrunk the gas tank"
Ford Wannup @ Jul 8th 2008 8:52PM
I couldn't agree more. GM wrought all these "problems" on themselves by boasting a bit too much during the intro. The range reduction to a still very realistic and useful 300+ miles makes news (almost in a negative way: breathless "oh...they reduced the range", when it shouldn't have any impact) only because they can't resist short term gains by boasting. Gosh....since the intro and breathless pronouncements, this has taken the aura of a vaporware. For crying out loud, they should now have a moratorium on Volt news, focus and deliver the damn product!
axiom @ Jul 9th 2008 6:01AM
--The GM guys are like, "oh nothing we cut the fuel tank by 40% thats why. We figured would you like a 12 gallon tank to go 600 miles or 8 gallons to go 340miles? We figure you like 340 more so we shrunk the gas tank"--
This is the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. Ask anyone would they rather go 600 on one tank of gas, or 340 on one tank. Who the hell would choose 340?? The oil cartel? OPEC? Dick Cheney?? They are SABATOGING the Volt, DELIBERATELY HANDICAPPING it to make it more acceptable to the oil industry. They're trying to guarantee you continue to go to the pump at least twice or so a month, just so you don't lose the habit.
This little move is very telling, and shows GM still has the same mindset they had when they killed the EV1. I fully expect the Volt to flop, shortly before GM does, permanently.
Dylan @ Jul 8th 2008 10:29PM
Are you really surprised though? This is the way American car companies work, boast about the numbers then deliver something that’s a lil more than what they talked about but all together nothing that focuses on what is actually important. deliver the horsepower and oh wait the price is 5 grand more than we said it was but you don't care, that’s the model they've been working on for years. Problem is with this car, supposedly the 'green' domestic they don't have a whole lot to work with so they're floundering. 40 grand for a car that can go 40 miles on electric, sure 40 miles is more than the average urban commuter but 40 grand, common now, it'll take you 40 years to make up the money they want you to think you're saving. It’s all a farce, GM's just using this as a last ditch effort to dig themselves out of the cheap, plastic vinyl hole that they've dug themselves into. In ten years none of this will matter cuz GM will be gone and the us economy will be dead.
Temple @ Jul 8th 2008 11:54PM
GM made a public spectacle of this because it sees the Volt as a PR tool. Bob Lutz claimed that GM could have beat Toyota to the Prius, if they had used a fraction of their billion dollar marketing budget for this purpose. Instead, GM spent the money advertising the virtues of its foreign-oil-dependency-increasing gas-guzzlers.
They should keep their mouth shut during the development, but that would lessen the impact of what Lutz calls the "Prius Effect", basically, its more important to take credit for fuel-efficient vehicles then actually selling it.
Seoultrain @ Jul 9th 2008 1:28AM
Agree with the original post. Toyota's next Prius is similarly close to production, yet we hardly hear any specific claims about it.
Disgruntled Goat @ Jul 9th 2008 8:40AM
You'll be able to buy the new Prius before you'll be able to buy the Volt. And if you're driving more than 40 miles a day and all you're doing is commuting back and forth to work you need to move. You can't really complain about spending too much for gas if you bought a house 20 miles from your office.
Dan @ Jul 9th 2008 11:35AM
Beyond that... the Volt suffers from analysis paralysis. It seems that too many people have put too many ideas together into what will most likely amount to a ill-conceived assemblage of conflicting encounters. Ex: I think the transparent "window" deconstruction in the door is a nice idea... but executed incredibly poorly.
Although I think the technology and drivetrain ideas are great... that design is most certainly not something I'd plunk down $40k for. It looks like it came from an aborted "Transformers" movie.
Kevin @ Jul 8th 2008 7:34PM
This means that GM doesn't have the technology, and lied. They claim in the article the average person drives no more than 40 miles a day? who are they kidding? I don't believe there will be a GM within the next 10 years, same for every US automaker, not that I want that to happen, but I think it will.
Jay @ Jul 8th 2008 8:10PM
no, it means they shrunk the gas tank, nothing else has changed...reading comprehension isn't your thing is it?
Yar @ Jul 8th 2008 8:09PM
Did you read? They're just shrinking the gas tank. The technology is absolutely no different, just a smaller gas tank.
sw @ Jul 8th 2008 9:44PM
It's not just the gas tank, first it was going to be fully electric, then a range extender gas motor. I still don't believe they have a firm delivery date as they seem to change it monthly. I have no idea how much of that is just Lutz shooting his mouth off and how much of it is the engineering department. After that GM stated that it'll be a greater car than the prius, which it can't really be since they don't have all the details worked out.
Chevy shouldn't really talk a lot about the volt until it's worked out the engineering issues. Start talking about it when the factories are tooling up to build them, it stays fresh in the consumer's mind and there aren't a lot of missed goals. In the end it may be a great vehicle, but people will think that it's not as good as promised, therefore not a good car.
Lithous @ Jul 8th 2008 10:23PM
"They claim in the article the average person drives no more than 40 miles a day? who are they kidding?"
I guess google is kidding people as well as here is quote from one of their sites...
"and since more than 70% of Americans drive less than 33 miles per day" source: http://www.google.org/recharge/overview.html
Now for one of the other guys in this thread...
"It's not just the gas tank, first it was going to be fully electric, then a range extender gas motor."
Please show me a link on a GM sponsored website that states the Volt was to be all electric.
"I still don't believe they have a firm delivery date as they seem to change it monthly."
Again, show me a link a GM sponsored website about release dates.
"After that GM stated that it'll be a greater car than the prius, which it can't really be since they don't have all the details worked out."
It can't be because they don't have alll the details worked out? So, a better design can't be better than a worse design at any point in the future if all the details aren't worked out before the design is released? That is some good logic. Except my Volt will be easier to convert to an electric vehicle than your Prius simply because it is a better design. Or how about since the only thing touching the drivetrain is the electric motor then it can be powered by batteries or fuel cells without changing the powertrain at all (just the energy source) Sound better? Does to me. Now it is time for the request for a link to a GM sponsored website with a quote about "greater car than the prius"
"Chevy shouldn't really talk a lot about the volt until it's worked out the engineering issues."
Because of misinformed people and Americans with below average test scores rampant throughout the U.S. they have chosen to do this project with full disclosure which is actually a disadvantage in giving competition insight. But again, they feel they have to so people like you aren't constantly spewing incorrect information about the project.
"In the end it may be a great vehicle, but people will think that it's not as good as promised, therefore not a good car."
I'm sure GM feels nice and warm inside knowing you are all concerned for their well being.
why not the LS2LS7? @ Jul 8th 2008 11:16PM
sw:
It's still fully electric with a range-extender gas motor.
If you go less than 40 miles on a charge, it's fully electric. If you go more, the range-extender gas engine kicks in and is good for approximately 360 miles it seems.
Torrent @ Jul 9th 2008 4:05AM
No. All they did was shrink the gas tank. The technology stays the same. If I'm wrong, please show me in this article where it says Chevy will change the technology in the Volt. I read before I post. I suggest you do too. Reading before you comment is like recycling- a little thing, but if everyone does it, it just starts to make sense.
Artie Lange @ Jul 8th 2008 7:39PM
Simple math says that the gas tank is now about 8 gallons (560/12=46.667; 360/46.667=7.7).
A 400 mile range is plenty; its what I get in my Grand Cherokee, and there didn't seem to be any problem selling those (until gas hit $4 a gallon).
tankd0g @ Jul 8th 2008 8:05PM
So much for the bi-monthly visits to the gas station though.
alex @ Jul 8th 2008 8:29PM
anyone who is complaining that a 400 mile range isn't enough because you'll have to fill up with gas all the time is a dumbass.
The only time you'd have to fill up every 400 miles is on a road trip where you can never plug it in since you're always driving. If you drive 60 miles a day and plug your car in every night, you'll drive 20 miles a day using gasoline and 40 miles a day on electricity. Since the car's gasoline operating range is 360 miles, that means you can drive your 60 miles a day for 18 days before you need gas.
18 days x 60 miles = 1,080 FREAKIN MILES BETWEEN FILLUPS!
And remember that most people don't drive 60 miles a day. Most people drive closer to 40 miles a day, meaning they would go even more miles between fillups.
Do the freakin math before you spout off a bunch of BS... dumbasses