Has GM overdesigned the Volt: Is a 40-mile all electric range too much?

[Wooski]

I think the best thing to do is to do what Toyota is probably doing and put out a fleet of cars with different configurations and see which produces the best results in the real world. You can theorize all you like, but sometimes there is just no substitute for test data. Whilst a certain solution may work best in a computer model it wont take into account the behaviour of actual drivers in real world conditions. I bet that these tests produce some interesting and not expected results.

[acdii]

One thing about trains in the US that a lot of people over look, and it is easy to do. The US is NOT Europe! The US is huge, if you build a rail system, it would be too complex to be efficient. You would still need cars to get from the train station to get to where you are going most of the time. Linking trains to major cities is a great idea and something sorely needed here, that I agree on, but when you need to get somewhere that is 3-400 miles or more away from a city, well, you have to drive. Good example would be when I went for training for certifications, the school was in the catskill mountains, and far from any cities, and would be very difficult to get a train up there anyway. It was in a ski resort, so getting there by car is the only way to go. The nearest airport was 75 miles away to the east, I came in from the west. So there are good and bad about rail in the US, and high speed? fgetaboutit, neva happen, too many roads, not enough right of ways as someone else mentioned.

The US has probably the best highway system in the world, with the exception of the autobahn, the fastest system as well. Sometimes it is just great to get out on the open road and drive, seeing the sights, the open country, the smells. When you grow up in a city, and go for a drive like we did growing up, from Chicago up north to Minog Wisconsin, it was exceptionally nice. Hundreds of acres of rolling farm land, forests of trees, mini mountains, huge rock outcroppings, and being able to get off the main highway to a backroad and visiting old time general stores and such. That is all something that you just miss out on in a train. OTOH, taking a train for a long trip say from Chicago to Orlando when you have the wife and 3 kids, PRICELESS! So you see, there is good in both methods of transport.

AS far as the truck subject, if the truck is paid for, why not park it in the garage and use it as needed? It costs me roughly $500 a year to keep the truck, but if I need it in a hurry, I have horses, and a horse trailer, it is there ready to go. Not everyone has a need for a truck like I do, and those who have a truck as general transport, well, idiots shouldn't complain on how much gas costs then, should they?

My daily commute with the wife and kids is roughly 100 miles a day, If getting half of that on EV alone was available, then it would be a good purchase, but OTOH if the car costs $40K, it is NOT worth it at all when you can get Hybrids, and some nice ones now, for $30K or less. I am looking forward to test driving the Fusion Hybrid, and if it does get what Ford claims, and the quality is on par or above what the Camry is, I may just get one. Chevy missed the boat, and there isnt an outboard big enough for them to catch up to it now. Speaking of which, anyone run any numbers on the units sold in their Hybrid fleet? I have yet to even see one around here, although I did see one on the dealer lot not too long ago, but @ over $50K for it, I dont think many people can afford one.

[DaveinOlyWA]

acdii: a lot of what you say is bout trains is valid. however, trains are under utilized simply because they dont provide transportation.

when i was invited to PCD in Detroit, i kicked around the idea of a train trip from Olympia (amtrak station is 500 feet from my home) to Detroit. well, the FASTEST (said with great derision) option would have taken 4 days.

with options like that its obvious that no one would take the train and that is why. there should be an option to get you there in 24 hours... like i said, best option was 4 days. now that is great for a sightseer, but for a business traveler or even a traveler with limited vacation time, it is not an option.

so dont say that Europe works better because they are smaller. they work better because they are better... much much better.

[acdii]

Originally Posted by DaveinOlyWA

acdii: a lot of what you say is bout trains is valid. however, trains are under utilized simply because they dont provide transportation.

when i was invited to PCD in Detroit, i kicked around the idea of a train trip from Olympia (amtrak station is 500 feet from my home) to Detroit. well, the FASTEST (said with great derision) option would have taken 4 days.

with options like that its obvious that no one would take the train and that is why. there should be an option to get you there in 24 hours... like i said, best option was 4 days. now that is great for a sightseer, but for a business traveler or even a traveler with limited vacation time, it is not an option.

so dont say that Europe works better because they are smaller. they work better because they are better... much much better.

Oh I don't disagree with you at all. Europe did it right with transportation. The difference here is Europe developed a full blown rail system for travel, where the rail system developed here was stuck in the 1800's, and the highway system took over. It was so much easier to get from point A to point B on our highways, that the trains fell to the way side. Cheap cars, Cheap gas, big empty roads that reached everywhere grew into what we have here today, trying to change that now will be so much more expensive and time consuming that just discussing it doesn't seem to be worth their time. I am still waiting on the rail extension to Rockford from Chicago to go through, but I am not holding my breath.
I can drive 7 miles to a train station, then take that to downtown Chicago, but it takes 2 hours to get there, where in 1 hour 15, I can drive the same distance and pay $14 to park all day across the street from the same train station. Sometimes it is worth the extra $4 to $6 for the gas I used to get there and back.

[DaveinOlyWA]

i personally know a few people whose lives are hampered by our ineffective rail system. granted she is from Europe and is deathly afraid of air travel. so she only does trains, but in a very limited fashion (the bus can usually get her there in about 12 less hours!!). so there are a lot of trips she simply does not take. last month, she had a death in the family and was forced to fly because of time constraints and the fact that she had to do the crisscross to Florida from WA state. she practically had to be sedated and is lucky that she is young and healthy otherwise she probably would of had cardiac issues.

now, granted, we do have a very large country complicated by the large central area that separates the coasts. in fairness, stopping at these one horse towns is simply right and providing both a commuter and express option would be expensive. but considering the massive amounts of issues with air travel today combined with greenhouse gas output (trains can EASILY run on 100% renewable sources... expensive yes, but there are not any technological hurdles... planes simply cannot and there is no future vision of them either at any cost)

call me Chicken Little, but i have to say that at best, we are greatly underestimating our effects on GCC. we need to look at everything we can do to slow its roll. air travel is an area that will not go away, but can be greatly reduced. the "passenger mile by train"(besides dual roles for suburban/country commuting into city centers) carbon output is a very small fraction compared to airplanes AND cars.

with the very limited train service we do have, we have seen great successes especially in the area of medium length trips of say 500 miles give or take. also, commuter rail systems in New York, Chicago and San Fran.

i was living in Cali when BART was being expanded and it met with HUGE opposition. after all, it was very very expensive and the thought of not driving one's car in California is something that was simply unimaginable. well, those neigh-sayers dont say much anymore. BART has become a runaway success and its only real shortcomings is its limited coverage. so sure, it should be expanded and im sure it will. granted Bay area traffic is probably still a disaster (havent lived there for 15 years) im guessing, but BART has taken a ton of cars off the road.

[Muhahahahaz]

Originally Posted by PriuStorm

I think for every person who say's '40 miles is too much', there's ten crying '100 miles isn't enough!' about the Aptera or the Tesla.

Yes, but 40 miles isn't the absolute stopping point of the Volt. It can go much further than 100 miles if you use the gas tank (don't remember how far total).

The 40 miles is just a convenient distance that will allow most people to run on electricity-only during their work week, while having the possibility of driving much further when necessary by using gas.

[Muhahahahaz]

Originally Posted by TonyPSchaefer

I have to agree with PriuStorm on this one. And, in my opinion, it's not a fact-based or statistical argument. Those who I have spoken with insist that less than 300 miles of battery time is worthless because it means that they will need to be constantly plugging the stupid thing in. They simply want to be able to drive about a week between charges. It has nothing to do with using the current technology or the fact that 40 miles is more than they daily round-trip commute.

Then they think I'm stupid when I say that I would be thrilled to tears if my Prius had as little as ten miles of EV capacity with regen ability.

Just plug the car in every night... what's SO hard about that? And I mean... I'm REALLY lazy, too...

I really don't understand... I guess they'd rather stick to screwing up our planet then.

[Muhahahahaz]

Originally Posted by TonyPSchaefer

Agreed. I did see something on television in which people are trying to implement an idea I should have attempted to patent when I originally thought of it years ago. The batteries are easily accessible and replaceable. You don't buy the batteries but rather you lease them.

Drive into a fueling station and there are attendants who swap out your nearly drained battery for a new one in the time it normally takes to pump 15 gallons of gasoline into a conventional vehicle. They could check the charge level of the replaced battery and credit you the remaining dollar value towards the lease of the new one.

With an infrastructure setup such as this, a person could have their cross-country trip in their electric vehicle. Of course, I'm not so silly as to not recognize that it would require a whole new infrastructure being developed and would be many times more efficient if all manufacturers agreed on a single battery size, shape, type. Good luck with that happening.

This will be obsolete when ultracapacitors come out... (however long that may take )

Although I guess your idea is like the current hybrids. An interim solution until we have something even better.