Did Lutz convince The Pope to postpone Easter? Wasn't the Volt supposed to be on dealer lots this spring or did he not specify the year?

Is it my imagination, or is GM going out of their way to very slowly develop the Chevrolet Volt? They seem to be getting quite a bit of mileage out of their advertising campaign telling the public how progressive they are and making it sound like the general availability of the Volt is right around the corner...

Keith

I wouldn't be surprised either if it were later than that. A lot later. In fact, I will be surprised if we see it in my lifetime. I'll bet they've already choreographed their entire public relations campaign, including their reasons for canceling the project in the end. I'll bet they've got an excuse so convincing that the average American car buyer will accept it and give them credit for having tried. I think that's what it's all about: Convincing the public that they're trying.

I'll bet the Zap-X becomes available for sale to the public before the Volt. Hmm. Maybe I'll start a poll.

Yes, the Pope DID get involved, apparently.

Bob Lutz, the Chevy Volt and the Easter Bunny

I'm still holding Wagnor Lutz to their every promise, being the big 215 pound dope that I am.

So Lutz has 8 days to demonstrate that the Volt idea can propel a Chevy Malibu 40 miles on electric alone, or he'll have egg on his face. Does anybody believe that he's got the car all ready and is just waiting for Easter Sunday to sock it to the naysayers?

Or is he going to say, "We'd have been able to do it if those nasty Japanese had let us use their battery technology!"? The funny thing is that they could have done it with the technology available NOW! It just really seems to me that if they cannot even hand-build a mule that goes 40 miles on electric, it's because they really do not want to.

40 miles just isn't that much. My Xebra did that when it had the seven lead batteries. Sure, they weighed 700 lbs, but all we're talking about here is a demo mule. GM could have built the car with lead batteries and claimed to have "demonstrated" the feasibility of the concept. For that matter, they could build an actual working prototype with existing lithium batteries, "demonstrated" the concept, and then promised to market the car as soon as the batteries were a bit cheaper.

But they didn't.

Somebody who believes in GM, please tell me, other than the cost of the batteries, what technology is lacking for them to built a proof-of-concept Volt? So, with all the money they're willing to spend on publicity, why have they not built even so much as a proof-of-concept mule vehicle? Unless they really don't want to and never intended to in the first place.

Seems I recall a certain forum member starting a "smoke and mirrors" thread awhile back. Hmmmm.

I thought that GM has announced the Volts LiOn battery supplier to be Hitachi of Japan and ordered 100.000 from them already?

Fighting Words
Mr. Lutz then took on naysayers of GM's advanced technology plans -- throwing barbs equally at competitors, environmentalists, the oil industry, and Democrats. The most direct attack was levied at Toyota. Lutz referred to comments made by his counterpart at Toyota, Kazuo Okamoto, executive vice president of R&D and product development. Okamoto questioned GM's ability to deliver on its plans for the Chevy Volt at the recent Tokyo Auto Show. The two companies have been waging a war of words over competing plans for hybrid and electric vehicles. According to Lutz, Okamoto accused GM of using the Volt concept as a marketing ruse, and chatacterized the lithium battery-powered Volt as "completely wacky" and "nonsense

Hmmm, Toyota's corporate guys such as Kazuo Okamoto,does not comment lightly in public using these words.

Toyota has been working dilligently in enhancing its electric power only driving range for its soon to come out Prius LiOn powertrain, but so far reliable battery alone cruising range has been limited to about 30 miles.

Interesting to see if GM can deliver this usable range on the Volt as stated. Apparently Toyota Scientists do not think so.

forgive me if this looks like a rant.

Some people seem to take some kind of perverse joy in hoping for and verbally promoting GM's demise.

These people have no idea of the economic consequences of GM going down the tubes. How do GM's woes add to the satisfaction of owning a Prius? Toyota is deathly afraid of pulling ahead of GM in sales.

Yeah, Lutz is playing the "smoke and mirrors" game for all he's worth until he has something to show. But guess what? Toyota did the same thing years ago when they had crappy cars that crumbled into piles of rust if you just said the words Rain or Snow.

GM has a great engineering organization that just needs a little more freedom to create better cars. The bean counters have held sway way too long.

How about those of you who are U.S. Prius owners trying to give at least a little support to one of the home teams?

Well said!:thumb:

If I recall correctly, it was the GM Engineering organization that designed and built the EV1. It was GM Management that killed it. My hat is off to the Engineering guys that created the vehicle - they really did a great job. However I'm still pissed at GM management for killing the EV1 when it had everything going for it (including the public). I'd really like to support the home team, but I don't believe in positive reinforcement for bad behavior.

Regards,

Keith

1. Kindly point out the "great engineering" in my Intrigue.

2. Greatness does not come from counting beans.

3. GM is getting as much support from me as I got from them over the Intrigue. Payback is a bitch.

Cyclone,
You TOTALLY missed the point. NO one wants GM to spiral to their death. Problem is that GM has antiques that are leading GM to their demise. Sadly, the board hasn't fired their vile arses long ago, and put leaders in charge, that can put GM on track. GM has capitol to hire genious engineers, but with the powers in charge, GM is heading towards a cliff on the horizon ... guess what? The board will HAVE to finally fire them.

And THAT's why many cheer. Many see the consequences of Lutz/Wagner taking it's toll. Many cheer, because they know these bad consequences force GM's board to finally do what they've been to scared/dumb/lazy to do, long ago.

As for "home team". Don't even go there. GM's leaders, lay off, downsize and close manufacturing here, and take it abroad. That means NO social security for YOU, because when companies send 10's or even 100's of thousands of decent paying jobs off shore, those jobs no longer fund YOUR social security plan. Cheer for the home team? GM took the team to Mexico, China, Canada & who knows where else. Only the board stays in the U.S. That said, the "cheer for the home team" doesn't wash.

Oh, no s***. Really??

Sir, it appears YOU do not "get it." Most of us are well aware of the CORPORATE MISMANAGEMENT and borderline criminal INCOMPETANCE of GM's corporate structure.

Consider every major "old school" US or Canadian company that has crashed and burned. According to the theory of the "GM apologists" - as I like to call them - us evil backstabbing unpatriotic consumers are to blame

I personally find that offensive. After all, I did serve 10 years in the Army. There are a lot of armchair "patriots" out there who wouldn't even dream of risking their cubes. That's the reason for us 'po trash, fight/work for everybody else

I worked myself up with my own effort. No wealthy Old Family money there to help Yours Truly. So if I can do it, GM can do it too. Unless their corporate management borders on Functionally Disabled

Whether it was Adelphia, Enron, DC, GM, oh hell, even Hudson's Bay, there was a complex mixture of incompetance, criminal intent, and Old Boys Club mentality. No sympathy from me, but plenty of contempt

I call a Spade a Spade. I see no reason whatsoever to "apologise" in any way for Toyota. When they make a mistake and get burned for it - the engine sludge issue comes to mind - they rightly DESERVE the bad press, lost sales, and loss of goodwill. If Toyota whines, I'd tell them to STFU and grow some cubes, and deal with it

I have the same advice for GM, Ford, DC (Or whatever they call themselves now): you broke it, you fix it. STFU and grow some cubes

Prove to us that you actually can do something instead of laying off a bunch of line-level workers. There is a lot of wealth concentrated in that management structure, funny - ironic - how they don't appear to be punished for any blunders.

LOL JimN! As well as global warming ... (we saw the sun today)

I do NOT want GM to fail. I WANT them to build the Volt. But given their history, and their behavior, I don't believe they have any intention of doing so.

I repeat my question:

Why have they not built so much as a "mule" with Volt technology as a proof of concept??? They claim the batteries are not ready. But they could build a "mule" with existing batteries. They built the first EV-1 with lead-acid batteries and it went 50 miles. They then used NiMH and it went 120 (???) miles. ACP developed a battery pack using Li-ion that gave the tzero 200 miles of range, and the Tesla Roadster get 245 miles on a similar pack. While the "ideal" Volt battery may not be ready, they could build a mule to prove the concept, as they promised to do by Easter, if they really wanted to.

My conclusion is they don't want to.

I want them to build the Volt and I want them to succeed. But as long as they are flooding the market with gas-guzzling SUVs while American boys and girls are fighting and dying over oil, then they are part of the problem, and part of what's worst about this country. And whether I want them to or not, they will go down the tubes if they shackle their success to SUVs while the price of gas heads to $5 a gallon and ever upwards.

Aren't, uh, batteries like the most important thing here? Why would they want to put in old batteries, which probably weigh a hell of a lot more, which would probably cause all sorts of issues when figuring out range, power needed to propel the car when it's in a generator mode, etc?

To demonstrate the serial hybrid concept. And they would not have to use lead. They could use existing lithium batteries. They would not demonstrate actual range, but they would show that the car can figure out when to start the generator, and they could show that with the batteries depleted the generator was strong enough to maintain acceptable performance. After all, the concept is that this car could drive long distances on the highway after the battery's original charge is depleted and gas becomes the sole energy source.

GM is making it sound like the battery is the only issue, so that as long as they can make a plausible argument that a suitable battery is not available at an acceptable price, they don't have to actually build the car. I believe (though I truly hope I'm wrong!) that this whole exercise is about pretending they're "trying" while actually avoiding having to offer an alternative to gasoline.