Sales of the GM Volt.

[rwh11385]

I was considering a Volt, but after driving the Tesla S, every other car seams obsolete. Hopefully after the success of the Tesla S and Tesla X, they can get on a smaller compact car in the price range of the Volt, as they intend to. Big fan of Elon Musk right now.

How could you not be a fan of Musk? He basically crammed a Dragon capsule up Ricky Perry's starfish after his whining the US needs to contract with Russia to get things up to the ISS. Cargo and crew might be a little different, but NASA CCDev is working on private crew operations.

Commercial Crew Development was a NASA investment funded by $50M of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to stimulate efforts within the private sector that aid in the development and demonstration of safe, reliable, and cost-effective space transportation capabilities. In a multiphase strategy, the program was designed to help spur the innovation and development of new spacecraft and launch vehicles from the commercial industry, creating a new way of delivering cargo – and eventually crew – to low-Earth orbit (LEO) and the International Space Station (ISS). As NASA retired the Space Shuttle, the ability of private industry to take on the task of providing routine access to space was of vital importance.

In addition to SpaceX and Orbital, NASA has doled out funds to additional companies for develop solutions for crew transportation to low-earth orbit (and thereby, help ‘catalyze‘the private space industry—and by association. the economy).

Obama signed it, so therefore private space flight ought to be hated on by the Right as well?

The lack of belief in American's technological ability to innovate by the Right is disappointing and sad.

[rwh11385]

Oh snap, Romney is repeating the same crap. What an imbecile.

http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2012/09/securing-leadership-space

Unfortunately, President Obama has failed to deliver a coherent policy for human space exploration and space security. As a result, he has created uncertainty and confusion within U.S.industry and the international community.

The President’s disjointed collection of scientific projects lack guiding principles, plausible objectives, or a roadmap for long-run success. They also have left American astronauts to hitch rides into space on Russian spacecraft.
America’s capabilities are eroding, and with each passing year will become more difficult to rebuild

I will reverse this course and set a clear roadmap for space exploration. NASA will retain the intellectual capital to conduct research and to develop new generations of spacecraft for government missions that are not commercially viable, but it will promptly transition out of routine space operations in low Earth orbit as private sector capabilities mature. In improving the competitiveness of U.S. industry, government can play important supporting roles as a steady patron of R&D, an enlightened regulator, and a first buyer or anchor tenant for space goods and services.

September 22, 2012

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/NASA-makes-a-substantial-investment-in-private-3761581.php

NASA makes a substantial investment in private spaceflight - August 3, 2012

The investments could accelerate the launch of the first human into orbit by a private company to as early as 2015. NASA is eager to have American firms build human-carrying capsules to end its reliance on Russia for that task.

Three competitors won awards in the latest round of NASA funding: Boeing Co., $460 million; SpaceX, $440 million; and Sierra Nevada Corp., $212.5 million.

Hutchison said the success of SpaceX in building and testing a new rocket and space capsule has given Congress more confidence in the capabilities of private spaceflight.

"We're certainly more comfortable that the commercial operators are more stable and reliable than some people may have thought," she said.


SpaceX expects to be ready before then. The company's founder and chief executive, Elon Musk, said after NASA's announcement on Friday that his company hopes to make its first manned flight by 2015.

Maybe Romney doesn't pay attention to the news and the progress being made already in private space industry and the fact that NASA has clear objectives and near-future timelines.

[joshh]

Another record month. 2961.

Conspiracy!


To put into perspective, they sold 1,108 in October 2011.
YTD 2012: 19,309
YTD 2011 at this time: 5,003

Yes another record month of shitty sales. And again having to lease these out for cheap to get them out the door. Just as expected...but even then they still aren't selling in good numbers...lol.

[tjts1]

You tell em girlfriend!

[rwh11385]

Yes another record month of shitty sales. And again having to lease these out for cheap to get them out the door. Just as expected...but even then they still aren't selling in good numbers...lol.

Ad nauseum much?

The Volt sales are better than half of models available, so the majority of cars must have shitty sales based on your logic. Re-defining shitty to keep up with the Volt's progress is moronic. At what point would the sales be good enough in your opinion?


For comparison:

BMW has officially ended production of the E60 BMW M5 after five years of production. 20,548 units of the fourth-generation M5 were assembled during this time, the majority of which were saloons.

BMW produced/sold roughly 342 M5's a month. Was the E60 M5 a pathetic failure in your opinion?

[tjts1]

Here's some more evidence of Obama fucking America in the ass. What say you Joshh?

Among plug-in electric models, the Chevy Volt sold 2,961 vehicles in October, compared with 1,108 in October last year, up 167% over a year ago.
Toyota sold 1,889 of its plug-in hybrids this year, compared with none last year.
The Nissan Leaf sold 1,579 vehicles this year, compared with 849 vehicles last October.
Tesla announced this morning that it had sold 253 of its sedans and 68 of its roadsters in the third quarter, but did not break down sales by month. hybridcars.com estimates that Tesla sold 250 sedans in October, and did not post any sales for Tesla a year ago.

Total sales for all of the makers’ electric models, hybrids and plug-ins, year-to-date compared with 2011:
Toyota – YTD sales of 270,837, up nearly 99% from sales of 136,226 in 2011
GM – YTD sales of 48,156, up more than 500% from sales of 7,904
Ford – YTD sales of 20,321, down 9% from sales of 22,113
Honda – YTD sales of 15,165, down 83% from sales of 27,714

http://247wallst.com/2012/11/05/whos...f-gm-hmc-tsla/

[rwh11385]

http://www.fastcoexist.com/1680814/t...-who-you-think

The military estimates security for gasoline in combat zones pushes its gasoline prices up to $100 per gallon, while at least 3,000 soldiers have died defending fuel supply lines since 2001.

"In a military environment," says Gartner in an interview, "the relative returns can be exponentially higher."

But where the effectiveness of renewable energy investment calculus really diverges may be how the military spends its money: Rather than invest strictly in R&D or incentives, it buys tons of actual hardware (although plenty of R&D money is spent as well). The military represents one massive, reliable customer that needs its hardware now. Technologies such as fuels cells (for NASA) and the Jeep originated from this relationship with industry.

Kinda goes against the "hippies drive EVs" argument.

[rwh11385]

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/Nov/electrification/1115_spark-ev.html

Spark EV’s driving force is an oil-cooled, permanent magnet motor that produces at least 100 kW (130 hp) and instantaneous torque of about 400 lb.-ft. with the coaxial drive unit, resulting in 0-60 mph acceleration in less than eight seconds.

Not only is Spark EV quick for its segment, its industry-first SAE combo charger will allow DC Fast Charging of up to 80 percent of battery capacity in approximately 20 minutes. That capability, available shortly after market launch, also will provide EV range among the best in the segment.

Spark EV’s more than 20 kWh lithium-ion battery pack will carry on Chevrolet’s tradition of industry-leading warranty protection of eight years /100,000 miles, and is capable of handling multiple DC Fast Charges daily.

“Spark EV’s battery has undergone more than 200,000 hours of testing in our global battery systems labs,”
--
The Spark EV team was able to leverage expertise gained on the groundbreaking Chevrolet Volt program and uses many of the same components and systems. More than 75 percent of the propulsion system components are from the Volt and GM’s hybrid truck programs.

Like I said, the Volt is a platform whose investment will be leveraged across many future chassis and so its dumb to divide its R&D costs purely on just Volts, let alone the Volts only sold so far.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/an-adva...4-hp-spark-ev/

Range

The battery pack should store 20 kWh of juice, giving the Spark EV a range of roughly 60 to 70 real-world miles. Its sibling, the Volt—a car from which the Spark EV’s engineers borrowed liberally—is good for 40 or so miles, while the Nissan Leaf averaged 58 miles in our testing.

GM is looking to be competitive with other pure EVs on pricing, and we’re guessing an MSRP in the high $20,000s—and that’s before the $7500 federal tax credit.

What I can't wait to see and drive:

[rwh11385]

http://rumors.automobilemag.com/2013-ford-c-max-energi-rated-for-21-miles-of-electric-620-miles-total-range-177221.html#axzz2CwLqP9o6

The 2013 Ford C-Max Energi has a 7.6-kWh lithium-ion battery pack and electric motor, as well as a 141-hp 2.0-liter inline-four gasoline engine. According to the EPA’s new range rating, a fully charged C-Max Energi can drive 21 miles at speeds of up to 85 mph. Factoring in the additional range possible on a full tank of gasoline, the C-Max Energi could hypothetical travel 620 miles before stopping to refuel.

Directly attacks the poor argument that a plug-in hybrid can't drive as much as any other car. Intelligent marketing against the ignorance about them.

The 2013 Ford C-Max Energi goes on sale later this year from $33,745 (after destination)

It only get a $3750 tax credit, so a shade under $30,000 after.

http://rumors.automobilemag.com/ge-buys-2000-ford-c-max-energi-plug-in-hybrids-186557.html#axzz2CwLqP9o6

GE Buys 2000 Ford C-Max Energi Plug-In Hybrids

GE already has more than 3000 alternative-fuel vehicles, like hybrids and CNG-fueled cars, in its fleet, and hopes to eventually bolster than number to 25,000 vehicles. GE and Ford will work with the Georgia Institute of Technology to study the driving and charging habits of GE employees using the C-Max Energi, with the hope that data can help inform future battery and charger upgrades.

As far as the Fusion Plug-in goes, it will be priced at $39,495 and available next year. It will also only have the $3,750 tax credit based on its lower capacity battery which will correlate to a lower range as well.

So after all the complaints about the Volt's price, Ford's offerings (of less capable PHEVs) will sandwich the Volt above and beyond based on a smaller and larger vehicle. (~$30K for Prius Plug-in and C-Max, $32Kish for Volt, $35Kish for Fusion) Prius PHEV has ~10 miles on a full charge, C-Max ~20, and Volt 38.

[joshh]

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/n..._spark-ev.html



Like I said, the Volt is a platform whose investment will be leveraged across many future chassis and so its dumb to divide its R&D costs purely on just Volts, let alone the Volts only sold so far.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/an-adva...4-hp-spark-ev/





What I can't wait to see and drive:

Translation....

The Volt was a failure and GM finally realized they had to make a whole different car so they can *make a profit* on this technology. It's very easy for you to find a quote saying GM will use 75% of the same propulsion system while GM scrambles to cut costs so they can actually be competitive in this market for once. While they already lost their ass on the Volt.
What the 75% is I don't know or if it ends up even being 75%.
But their doing the right thing in making a whole different car because the Volt is over priced and I said it from day one. But the Volt will continue to drain them.

[rwh11385]

Translation....

The Volt was a failure and GM finally realized they had to make a whole different car so they can *make a profit* on this technology. It's very easy for you to find a quote saying GM will use 75% of the same propulsion system while GM scrambles to cut costs so they can actually be competitive in this market for once. While they already lost their ass on the Volt.
What the 75% is I don't know or if it ends up even being 75%.
But their doing the right thing in making a whole different car because the Volt is over priced and I said it from day one. But the Volt will continue to drain them.

I'm glad we have such an expert on the automotive industry to provide unbiased insight into strategy such as yourself. The concept of leveraging drivetrains is completely unorthodox move in the industry and certainly highlights weakness. Such as can be seen in BMW.

And what rationale do you have that it is overpriced if the Fusion Energi is a PHEV with less capacity and will cost MORE? And the cheaper competition is only a couple grand less.

In your wealth of knowledge of the auto industry and engineering/manufacturing, what is a good price for the Volt to be? You certainly must have that in mind if you have the ability to call it overpriced.

[joshh]

I'm glad we have such an expert on the automotive industry to provide unbiased insight into strategy such as yourself. The concept of leveraging drivetrains is completely unorthodox move in the industry and certainly highlights weakness. Such as can be seen in BMW.

And what rationale do you have that it is overpriced if the Fusion Energi is a PHEV with less capacity and will cost MORE? And the cheaper competition is only a couple grand less.

In your wealth of knowledge of the auto industry and engineering/manufacturing, what is a good price for the Volt to be? You certainly must have that in mind if you have the ability to call it overpriced.

Ignoring all your typical red herring nonsense, we already know GM tried as best they could to get the Volt price as low as possible so it could be competitive. It was't enough.
They finally sharpened up and are now planning to make a competitive car. This is what they should have done from the start. But when government is handing you money hand over fist, you do what your told for the greenies. A side effect of not going through bankruptcy.

[rwh11385]

Ignoring all your typical red herring nonsense, we already know GM tried as best they could to get the Volt price as low as possible so it could be competitive. It was't enough.
They finally sharpened up and are now planning to make a competitive car. This is what they should have done from the start. But when government is handing you money hand over fist, you do what your told for the greenies. A side effect of not going through bankruptcy.

Wait, so you are ignoring the fact that the Fusion PHEV is going to cost more than the Volt? And it is not even on par in regards to range.

It wasn't enough for what? Being the top selling EV on the market?

The car was designed before the bankruptcy and before their bailout, if you care to base your arguments on facts (which you never do). Likewise, they did file Chapter 11, although for some crazy reason you have argued that they ended up not doing so.

Everything you say is opinion devoid of any understanding of reality or the facts. Why do you think that blatant lies, misinformation, and BS is going to convince anyone that you are right? Because that's what you believe from Faux News?

[joshh]

Wait, so you are ignoring the fact that the Fusion PHEV is going to cost more than the Volt? And it is not even on par in regards to range.

It wasn't enough for what? Being the top selling EV on the market?

The car was designed before the bankruptcy and before their bailout, if you care to base your arguments on facts (which you never do). Likewise, they did file Chapter 11, although for some crazy reason you have argued that they ended up not doing so.

Everything you say is opinion devoid of any understanding of reality or the facts. Why do you think that blatant lies, misinformation, and BS is going to convince anyone that you are right? Because that's what you believe from Faux News?

The Fusion goes without saying. But for you I'll say it...fail. If it is what you posted ( I haven't read about it).

Top selling EV on the market...with terrible sales...impressive...lol. And they continue to have to give out huge incentives to get them off the lots. Including government incentives...

More red herrings eh...lol. Design vs build cost vs a company that received bailout money in the billions. Let them go throw a proper bankruptcy where they have to balance a real budget and make cars that are bread and butter cars not holy fuck what are we going to do with all this money cars (the volt), retooling etc.

Yet here they are making a car for the competitive market...keep ignoring that fact. How much of the Volt technology they use we don't know because it's very expensive to use. They can claim what they want to make it sound good.

[rwh11385]

The Fusion goes without saying. But for you I'll say it...fail. If it is what you posted ( I haven't read about it).

What? Do you know how to type a complete thought? What about it goes without saying? What exactly is fail? Do you even know what you are trying to say?

And glad you have proven you determine success or failure based on ignorance.

Top selling EV on the market...with terrible sales...impressive...lol. And they continue to have to give out huge incentives to get them off the lots. Including government incentives...

What is your definition of terrible sales? What hard number for a car is failure? Should all car companies stop producing vehicles that sell less than 3K a month? Would you want the M5 to be killed off because it's a terrible failure?

More red herrings eh...lol. Design vs build cost vs a company that received bailout money in the billions. Let them go throw a proper bankruptcy where they have to balance a real budget and make cars that are bread and butter cars not holy fuck what are we going to do with all this money cars (the volt), retooling etc.

I really think you should become educated in the meaning of words before you use them. Talking about when a car was designed when you claim the order of events was different from reality is NOT a red herring. It is directly relevant to the subject at hand, although you object because it doesn't support your twisted and incorrect view of the world, which is based on ignorance and bias.

This is what they should have done from the start. But when government is handing you money hand over fist, you do what your told for the greenies

The government didn't tell GM to build the Volt in exchange for them handing money hand over fist as you said, mostly because it was Bob Lutz's push and years before the recession, bankruptcy, and bailout. The concept was shown in January 2007, with lots of research and testing obviously completely before that. The lack of understanding or care for facts that leads your arguments to attempt to say that the bailout money directed the design of the Volt is incredibly stupid and demonstrates you are at a complete lack of credibility here.

Have they not redesigned most of their vehicles and improved their "bread and butter cars"? Is the Volt not a halo car and a technological platform for future vehicles? (Which is proving its value for that in leveraging the technology in other vehicles and legitimatizing their Eco models.)

Yet here they are making a car for the competitive market...keep ignoring that fact. How much of the Volt technology they use we don't know because it's very expensive to use. They can claim what they want to make it sound good.

So you first hate them for making an EV halo car and being the first to market in the US with a PHEV because it wasn't competitive, and as other makes have followed in their footsteps in the same cost range and they have leveraged the technology into a model that even you think is competitive, you are still complaining.

What? On what basis do you have to claim that the Volt technology is 'very expensive to use'?? Development and research costs are very different than manufacturing cost and service expense.