As GM (Volt) Goes... so goes the nation

Check out this article regarding the Prius PHV. They are claiming annual net gas savings of possibly only $110. Whether that's generally true, i don't know.

But GM has dove in head first with a plug-in hybrid when every other mfr. is taking a very cautious approach to this technology.

Prius plug-in hybrid put to the test - Vehicle Electrification - SAE

"The PHV edition is likely to provide a maximum of 3500-4000 mi (5600-6400 km) per year of EV operation, equal to 70-80 U.S. gal (265-303 L) of Prius hybrid gasoline use. Annual net gasoline expense saving over the Prius NiMH hybrid, minus cost of electricity, is perhaps US$110. What additional price premium PHV buyers would pay largely for the convenience of short-trip EV operation is a concern, a Toyota spokesman conceded, noting that the company must proceed cautiously"

 

Yep. I saw that article and the assertion a little while ago.

If so, or even if the savings were in that ballpark, it definitely means that Toyota needs to be cautious about sales of PHV Prius and proves it's quite a balancing act between:
- providing sufficient battery range for people to not say "that's it?"
- warranty costs
- charge times (esp. if one only has or dosen't want to get a 220 volt charger installed)
- battery/car cost
- savings/"payback period" (if any) - You can be sure if it's minimal or there is no "payback period", the press will be all over it.

 

70-80 gallons doesn't sound like much, but if a Prius did 15,000 miles in a year, it would only use 300 gallons of gas(assuming 50 mpg avg.). Saving 75 gallons would be reducing your fuel usage 25%. That's more than the improvement you would get moving from Prius 1G to 3G.

 

I got to thinking about the 'rational' function of gasoline used vs. MPGs, y = 1/x, so I put together an argument that greater amounts of fuel can be saved improving the 'lower registers' of gas guzzlers: Large SUVs/trucks.

http://priuschat.com/forums/environ...ons-fuel-vs-miles-per-gallon.html#post1287325

Basically, if you get a family to migrate from a 15 MPG Tahoe to a 25 MPG Highlander Hybrid (or equivalent 25 MPG American SUV), they can ....

save 10.6 gallons on every 400 mile fillup. That's 400 gallons saved over 15k miles, or easily $1,200 per year saved, likely the cost of their insurance.

In other words, those are big fuel savings without asking the family to give up very much in terms of size and cost. They would just lose 3,000 lbs towing capability.

In terms of diminishing returns on ultra high mileage vehicles, you could save 4 gallons per 400 mile fillup improving a 20 MPG SUV to just 25 MPG, same as a 50 MPG Prius to a 100 MPG PHV (if you were averaging that and not even including electric usage)

 

So, in defense of the Volt, only in terms of fuel used in CS mode, you're only talking about pumping in 2.8 more gallons per 400 miles than regular Prius (10.8 gal @ 37 MPG vs. 8 gal / 50 MPG for Prius). This is not a huge difference.

Bigger downside is the increased expense and emissions of Volt.

Like said above, will save 4 gallons at pump per 400 miles just getting people from a 20 MPG CUV (and there are truckloads of those running around) into a 25 MPG equivalent. I think this is where we can save more fuel as a nation. Of course, the more over 25 MPG, the better. But families of 5 still need to get around.

 

Hmm... these were types of arguments GM made for doing their two-mode SUVs. Per Side-by-Side Comparison, a 2011 Tahoe 2WD is EPA rated 15/21, 17 combined vs. a 2WD Hybrid at 20/23, 21 combined.

Too bad they're still bloated, costly pigs and a menace to others on the road.

Now you're onto something. Perhaps this was the philosophy behind the Volt and how they seemingly fell so short in terms of CS mpg. Yeah yeah, they kept claiming they were targeting 50 mpg, but obviously they fell well short.