Sales of the GM Volt.

[jrobie79]

tax credits whatever, the car is overpriced because labor to build these cars is overpaid for. If they came to a price point the market could bear, I could see people buying this. (even though I dont agree with the whole green movement shit) The market seems to think its a popular idea, so go for it. But when other cars are equivalent in terms of mpg, why would anyone in their right mind pay 40K for this thing.

side note:

do you own a GM vehicle?

[u3b3rg33k]

The all-electric Leaf is selling pretty damn well, relatively. I would think making an all-electric Volt wouldn't be that hard given the car's current architecture. It runs on electricity almost all the time, right? Ditch the ICE, gearbox and gearset, expand the battery, drop the price.

You're missing the point of the volt then. You're supposed to be able to get in one, and drive across texas without stopping every 30 minutes for a day. Can't do that without the gas engine.

I would never buy a vehicle that I couldn't drive 1000 miles in under 24 hours, even if I only do it a few times a year.

[rwh11385]

tax credits whatever, the car is overpriced because labor to build these cars is overpaid for. If they came to a price point the market could bear, I could see people buying this. (even though I dont agree with the whole green movement shit) The market seems to think its a popular idea, so go for it. But when other cars are equivalent in terms of mpg, why would anyone in their right mind pay 40K for this thing.

side note:

do you own a GM vehicle?

Yeah, more ignorance... but hey, you're as misinformed as the average American.

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...1#.T1eW7fEge-0 - GM, Ford, Chrysler finally near wage parity with Toyota

Economist Sean McAlinden said wages and benefits now cost GM around $58 an hour, just $2 more an hour than Toyota, the Associated Press reports. But he said Detroit's wages will shrink further compared with Toyota's as it hires more workers at the lower wage and takes on fewer skilled-trades workers, who make more money than other factory workers. Now the wage pressure will be on Toyota:

McAlinden predicted that between 2013 and 2015, Toyota could even be paying $10 more per hour than GM unless the Japanese company reacts and lowers wages.

As alluded to in the first paragraph, the two-tier salary division is what allows the Sonic to be economical to be made here vs. Korea.

http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110711/OEM01/307119952&sectioncat=assets&template=printart

I had a G6 until recently. But more importantly, I actually read up on subjects before I go blurting out opinion. Try it sometime.

[jrobie79]

The labor unions and not right to work states force the labor to be higher than it should. I'm not saying its overpriced in comparison with other manufacturers, I am saying its overpriced for the product they are selling. Toyota, BMW, etc has the reputation behind that people will buy at that price point. You are looking at the surface of the issue. If the UAW didnt exist, and these plants built their cars with non-union labor the cost of labor would be lower. Therefor the cost of the car would be lower and in agreement with the perceived value. I bet ferrari's have way higher labor costs....doesnt mean jack shit, they have actual organic demand for their cars at the price point set.

The laws of supply and demand are 100% iron-clad and economies are organic, people simply don't want the volt at that price, its simple....lower price and maybe demand goes up.

[priapism]

You're missing the point of the volt then. You're supposed to be able to get in one, and drive across texas without stopping every 30 minutes for a day. Can't do that without the gas engine.

I get that. I'm saying the market clearly doesn't, and adding a second model that fits the market demand might not be too expensive to engineer.

[rwh11385]

Okay jrobie, let's review...

[you]: $45K
[me]: It's actually $39K MSRP
[you]: "until GM starts building cars people want to buy, they will keep driving their company into the ground"
[me]: 2011 was a record year of profits, with sales up and more importantly sale price up (people want to buy the cars they are making) with fewer rebates
[you]: "the car is overpriced because labor to build these cars is overpaid for."
[me]: Showed that the domestic big 3 have narrowed wage gap and working on having a cost advantage

Now proven misinformed once again, you literally babble mindlessly yet again:

The labor unions and not right to work states force the labor to be higher than it should. I'm not saying its overpriced in comparison with other manufacturers, I am saying its overpriced for the product they are selling. Toyota, BMW, etc has the reputation behind that people will buy at that price point. You are looking at the surface of the issue. If the UAW didnt exist, and these plants built their cars with non-union labor the cost of labor would be lower. Therefor the cost of the car would be lower and in agreement with the perceived value. I bet ferrari's have way higher labor costs....doesnt mean jack shit, they have actual organic demand for their cars at the price point set.

The laws of supply and demand are 100% iron-clad and economies are organic, people simply don't want the volt at that price, its simple....lower price and maybe demand goes up.

Look at GM sales, with cars being sold closer to MSRP than before and in great numbers. They worked hard to bring down labor costs, modernize manufacturing, and greatly improved their design quality and also global development cost savings. Much of this is thanks to Bob Lutz, and can be understood after reading "Car Guys vs. Bean Counters". - http://www.amazon.com/Car-Guys-vs-Be.../dp/1591844002

Look at the Cruze, Sonic, and Malibu. All three are cost competitive, which would indicate that it's not a fundamental inefficiency or cost disadvantage that GM has... so your 'argument', if that's what you want to call it, is invalid.

What could make the Volt, a PHEV, an outlier in cost compared to other passenger vehicles? Oh, it's the first mass-produced extended-range electric vehicle. The regular Prius isn't one, but rather a parallel hybrid with much less battery. Even the Plug-in Prius has less battery storage. The Leaf has more battery but no engine to pay for. The batteries on the Volt is a significant cost area... but that is going to drop in the future. That tried and true law of supply and demand you spoke of. People want useful battery life on their iPhones and iPads and laptops, and EVs, all at lower and lower prices. There are more and more battery manufacturers competing for business and more and more research into battery technology.

http://green.autoblog.com/2011/01/06/deutsche-bank-li-ion-battery-cost-forecast-per-kwh/

http://www.sequence-omega.net/2010/03/09/automotive-battery-prices-falling-faster-than-expected/

New reports (PDF) indicate (via GM-Volt ) that the cost of lithium-ion batteries for automotive applications (like the Tesla Roadster, Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf) are coming down faster than was previously expected. At a recent conference , A123 stated that they were negotiating contracts for automotive Li-Ion batteries for 2012 delivery at under $400/kWh, a reduction of almost 40% over 2009 prices ($650/kWh) in only 3 years.

Li-Ion was $1600/kWh in '99! Now it's $400/kWh. The Volt's batteries cost $8-10K. In 99, it would have cost $32-40K for just the battery pack! (That's how much Tesla's cost, but for a much greater range and capacity) Imagine what the market will have for us by next Volt generation.

People love comparing the Prius to the Volt, but remember the Prius Plug-In costs much more than the regular Prius: http://content.usatoday.com/communit...1#.T1fGfPEge-0

t's being priced at $32,000, compared to $23,520 for the Prius of today. A premium version would go for $39,525.

And reviews say that the Volt is much nicer than the Prius comfort-wise, so it's funny that their Premium is the same price as the Volt.

And it's only able to get a $2500 tax credit, not $7500, because of less battery capacity (making it cheaper to make) and has a smaller EV-only range. [Toyota also has the mainstream hybrid Prius to allow them to discount the Plug-in...] That puts the longer EV-only range Volt within $2k of the Plug-in Prius after both get their rebates! (Not too much difference considering Toyota can afford to have it be a loss-leader). With commutes less than 70 miles, the Volt is a better buy!

So is the cost that outrageous? No. Will it come down in time with its main cost driver coming down because of supply and technology improvements? Yes. Will Americans eventually be educated and not just biased against it by people like Rush or from other misinformation which you have exhibited? Hopefully.

[rwh11385]

I get that. I'm saying the market clearly doesn't, and adding a second model that fits the market demand might not be too expensive to engineer.

And why a pure EV like the leaf or gas-generator-less Volt isn't as good of a solution: As previously mentioned, to get a useful range you have to have a greater degree-of-discharge which stresses the batteries more and has them wear out faster. The Prius batteries have great life because they also have a means to re-charge in use and low stress with battery mgmt. The Volt can generate more juice if necessary and has a conservative batter management system which is better than a greater EV-only range but reduced battery life.

The cost might go down with no engine, but the usefulness and reason the Volt is smart and good is eliminated.

[priapism]

And why a pure EV like the leaf or gas-generator-less Volt isn't as good of a solution: As previously mentioned, to get a useful range you have to have a greater degree-of-discharge which stresses the batteries more and has them wear out faster. The Prius batteries have great life because they also have a means to re-charge in use and low stress with battery mgmt. The Volt can generate more juice if necessary and has a conservative batter management system which is better than a greater EV-only range but reduced battery life.

The cost might go down with no engine, but the usefulness and reason the Volt is smart and good is eliminated.

Cripes, I realize that too.

The market is speaking. It doesn't matter what you preach to everyone or what makes the most sense, they're voting with their wallets. I'm speaking as to what might SELL, not what "makes sense".

If I ran GM, I'd have two variants, that's all I'm saying. Sheesh.

[Kershaw]

i posted last page that all jrobie is doing is whining, why are you even bothering to refute him anymore?

you cant fix stupid. im pretty sure it's impossible for people like him to learn new things.

[z31maniac]

Has anyone calculated the payback on a Volt vs say the Eco version of the Fiesta that gets 40mpg hwy?

I bet the break-even point is nearing 200k miles on the car.....that's a tough sell and likely doesn't even take into account the original battery pack likely wouldn't last that long.

Cool technology, but again, there's a reason the avg income of the Volt buyer is approx 5x that of the avg household income..............it just doesn't make economic sense to most.

[Cabriolet]

right now to DD my e30 in bumper to bumper traffic it costs me $.30/mile in just gas. I am paying something like $4.60/g
it cost me $2.82 to do my 9.4mi commute. and if i did not use the free charging stations provided at work it would save me about $2.30 a day in gas. it would take me 38 years to pay for its self completely.
now if i did use the free charging stations and bought the volt over the Malibu(same size car ish) which gets 22mpg city. or about $.20/mi it would take 50k miles to save the difference. or 14 years for me with my current commute. granted i have a very short commute. but still i love the Volt and if i had the cash i'd get one.
if i have done the math right, with the savings of using electricity to charge the car it would take years and years to save. so maybe i need to examine the environmental impacts to see more of a benefit.

[gwb72tii]

the chevy volt and all electric hybrids are hazardous waste
any greenie would do as i do, buy used cars only, which saves way more energy than driving a POS like a volt

[rwh11385]

Cool technology, but again, there's a reason the avg income of the Volt buyer is approx 5x that of the avg household income..............it just doesn't make economic sense to most.

Beware of statistics, they lie from lack of context... and sometimes lie because of it being twisted in transmission. 5X the average household income of $50k is $250K... The ACTUAL statistic is $170K, so you are a bit off...

And for context, the average household income IS NOT the average household income of new car buyers... (How many people below it could even afford the cheapest new car?) And Google employee outliers slant an average must more than a median (basic understanding of statistics).

For even a Ford Focus... "The median age of a C-segment car buyer is 42, with a median household income of $73,000." http://fordauthority.com/2011/05/int...ew-ford-focus/

The $50K average household income isn't relevant... http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.05/neo.html

Wealthy suburb-dwellers, who comprise about 5 percent of US households, bought 11.5 percent of all new cars in 2004. But they bought 17.5 percent of all new Priuses, according to Spencer, who crunched the numbers for Toyota and Honda. J.D. Power and Associates found in 2003 that while the average household income of all new car buyers was $85,000, the average household income of hybrid purchasers was $110,000.

Hybrids were, and Plug-in electrics now are still in the early adopter phase. With time, costs will go down and the general public will start to enter.

http://www.hybridcarblog.com/2005/01/hybrid-vehicle-sales-for-2004-rise.html

Article from 2005:

According to Matt Nauman of the Mercury News, "Power, the Westlake Village researcher, projects that U.S. hybrid sales will reach 222,000 this year and 500,000 by 2009. If that prediction comes true, hybrids would account for nearly 3 percent of the U.S. car and truck market in 2009. In 2004, hybrid sales represented about 0.5 percent of the 16.9 million vehicles sold."

http://www.hybridcars.com/market-dashboard.html for Current %: The share of total sales is 3.2 percent, which has only been exceeded by 3.3 percent in April 2008 (a time of rising fuel prices) and 3.6 percent in July 2009 (the beginning of the cash for clunkers program)."

3% isn't huge, but it is progressing as predicted.

It should also be noted that the Volt is also classed higher than just an entry-level compact:

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/rankings/Upscale-Midsize-Cars/

Car Rankings: Upscale Midsize Cars
2012 Audi A4
2012 Cadillac CTS
2012 BMW 3-Series

"Rob Peterson, spokesman for GM, says about 20% of people who buy a Volt trade in a luxury car, and another 20% trade in a Prius. "
http://autos.aol.com/article/why-the...ealthy-buyers/

"The Volt has comparative drive train dynamic to some luxury vehicles," says Volt communications director Rob Peterson.

Some reviewers compare the car, after tax credits, to a loaded Chevy Cruze, which costs about $10,000 less than the Volt after tax credits.

But that may be a false comparison. The technology and driving experience could well be compared with a Volvo C30, the loaded version of which is about $32,000 or very close to the Volt after rebate. The same goes for the Audi A3.

Compare a Chevy to a German lux brand? BMW of North America President Jim O'Donnell last August told AOL Autos, "We are very impressed with the Volt ... it's surprising that they didn't make it a Cadillac instead of a Chevy."

http://www.mymoneyblog.com/driving-a...education.html

Compared to the luxury cars 20% come from, is the household income that different? And either way, it's closer to double the average income of new car buyer than 5X.

Early adopters are risk-takers, like with hybrids, and eventually more people buy-in. Just look at how many more hybrids are being sold today than just a few years earlier, with many makes and models to choose from.

[rwh11385]

Has anyone calculated the payback on a Volt vs say the Eco version of the Fiesta that gets 40mpg hwy?

I bet the break-even point is nearing 200k miles on the car.....that's a tough sell and likely doesn't even take into account the original battery pack likely wouldn't last that long.

Depends on gas price and also percentage driven electric. But Edmunds compared a lot of hybrids with non-hybrid options from same make: http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/with...rid-or-ev.html [12 years Volt vs. Cruze @ $4/gal, 9 years @ $5 gas, but comparing to one of the more efficient new cars]

11% of Volt buyers came from BMW, Mercedes, or Cadillac which have far worse mpg than a Cruise. (26/39 is higher than vast majority of cars so baseline is a hurdle, so is a Fiesta) Within the first six months of launch, cars like the Audi A4, BMW 3-Series and Volkswagen Jetta represented 6% of all trade-in cars.

If someone is as happy in a Volt as a new 3 series, it's $399/mo lease for BMW and $349/mo lease for Volt. (instant payback)

And would be much different if, like the average American, if the daily commute was 30 miles or less total and used no gas most of the time [3/4ths of Americans live within EV-only commuting range]. (So think the guy with 547 mpg... or 1000 mpg - http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread....0-Lifetime-MPG)

Let's assume you never use a drop of gasoline based on average annual driving miles of 15,000. Divide by 365 days and you get 41 miles a day. Let's round that down to the 40 miles GM says the Volt will travel on just a fully-charged battery.

For the charging, it'd costi about $390 (10.7 usable kwh * $.10 * 365) a year, so that's your total fuel cost.

15,000 miles / 31 mpg combined for Cruze = 483 gallons.
@ $4/gal = $1935/yr, or $1545 more than the Volt
@ $5/gal = $2419/yr, or $2029 more than the Volt

And I don't like Greg freaking out about $6-7 gas right now, but $5 is possible soon and and even $6 in a few years.

The price difference (including tax credit) between Cruze and Volt is $12K.

$5/gal gas, with a 40 mile daily commute: 5.9 year payback, versus a highly efficient alternative
$4/gal gas, with a 40 mile daily commute: 7.8 year payback

And drop the payback period even more if you don't drive stick...or come from a car that doesn't get 26/39.

GM has a warranty for 10 years / 150K miles on the batteries, and part of the reason they were very conservative on the battery management and DoD choice. In ten years, batteries will be a fraction of what they cost now as well and you'll have a reasonably un-used internal combustion engine, whereas how many oil changes have you done and tune-ups? (Using the 8% CAGR performance/price trend, you'd have batteries costing 43% as much in 10 years.... even if they fail just after the warranty, that's $4k and what work have you had to do to the Cruze engine? At least $1k in oil changes alone And even at $4, you have been saving $1545 a year after break-even point and therefore saved $3400 in fuel afterwards, so net win still)

[rwh11385]

Oh well, but that's what you can find out with some research and analysis. The basic concept is that batteries will get cheaper with time with increasing supply and technology and gas is going to continue to climb with growing demand, so PHEV will get better in terms of economics.


Anyway, seems the Nissan attack ad didn't encourage people to buy the Leaf vs. Volt:

The Nissan Leaf had a surprisingly slow month in February with just 478 units delivered

The Leaf has struggled a bit since last fall, with the Volt being over 1,000 units every month except for January while the Leaf hasn’t sold over 1,000 units since last September when they delivered 1,031 versions of their super-green hatchback.

http://www.torquenews.com/106/chevy-volt-outsells-nissan-leaf-better-2-1-february-2012