Sign In Join 



Will the Chevy Volt Succeed?

545 messages,  Last post on Dec 02, 2009 at 12:57 PM

You are in the Chevrolet Volt Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Volt, Automotive News, Hybrid Cars, Coupe, Hatchback, Truck, Sedan, SUV


Messages Page 49 of 55
1
...
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
...
55
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#476 of 545
Semantics by pf_flyer HOST
Jul 22, 2009 (1:28 am)
Reply
It's still ONLY the electric motors that move the vehicle. Put it this way, the electric motors don't know and don't care where the electricity is coming from, they either have power to run or they don't.
 
I have no idea what the efficiency of running the ICE to supply electricity for the propulsion system is. THAT would be an interesting number to see instead of talking about the range of a tank of gas which includes miles that are 100% battery driven.
 
Would burning 5 gallons of fuel to create electricity move the Volt as far as if those same 5 gallons were used by the ICE to directly propel the car? Essentially what you have is a portable gas-powered generator on board with the Volt. That doesn't seem like the most intuitively-efficient idea I've ever heard of.
#477 of 545
Re: Semantics [pf_flyer] by buyamerican2
Jul 22, 2009 (10:06 am)
Reply

Replying to: pf_flyer (Jul 22, 2009 1:28 am)

Using the ICE to drive the wheels through a motor/generator is very efficient. This powertrain design has been around for a long time in diesel locomotives and large ore hauling trucks.
 
The efficiency is gained by running the engine at its most fuel efficient RPM and not having the speed excursions that you would get with a conventional automatic transmission.
 
Basically, the Volt becomes a Prius when the batteries are discharged. So it still benefits from regenerative braking and engine off at a stop.
 
All that said, you would never design a car to use only the motor /generator with no battery on board. It is efficient , but not as efficient as say a manual transmission equipped vehicle chugging down the interstate in high gear.
 
Remember, the primary mission of the Volt is to get you to work and back or to the shopping mall, not for Indianapolis to Denver runs.
 
I just checked my electric bill and my cost for a KW-Hr is 7.2 cents. So a "fill-up" for me would be about 58 pennies. (My driving is always less than 40 miles per day unless I am on vacation) If gas is at $3.50/ gal, the $1500 I save on gas every year starts to look very interesting.
#478 of 545
Re: Semantics [buyamerican2] by stephen987
Jul 22, 2009 (11:13 am)
Reply

Replying to: buyamerican2 (Jul 22, 2009 10:06 am)

OK, refresh me--will the Volt also have the capability to recharge off 110V household current?
#479 of 545
Re: Semantics [stephen987] by dmathews3
Jul 22, 2009 (11:22 am)
Reply

Replying to: stephen987 (Jul 22, 2009 11:13 am)

110 is the ONLY way it will recharge the batteries. The gas engine just puts out enough power to power the electric motor and no extra to charge the batteries. I'm guessing this will change in the 2nd generation cars.
#480 of 545
Re: Semantics [dmathews3] by corvette
Jul 22, 2009 (11:36 am)
Reply

Replying to: dmathews3 (Jul 22, 2009 11:22 am)

I think that it will also recharge on 220/240v, at a higher amperage for faster charging.
#481 of 545
There's the other point by pf_flyer HOST
Jul 22, 2009 (12:54 pm)
Reply
If we waved a magic wand and all cars were EV's, those electric rates are NOT going to stay the same and there's no way is it going to cost 58 cents to "fill up" a Volt. Since you say your normal driving is less than 30 miles a day, you honestly think a Volt would only cost you less than $18/month to run??
 
That's a patently ridiculous number. Electric vehicles will not be "free" to operate and the introduction of EV's will definitely increase electric rates as the increased load and demand caused by charging of EV's is something that is not on the grid now. And it really doesn't matter if you say, "Oh we can charge them during off peak hours". Those hours will no longer be "off peak" once we add a "car charging" peak will they?
 
Robert Heinlein said it in his 1966 novel, "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress", although the phrase apparently originated in the 1930's...
 
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch
#482 of 545
Re: There's the other point [pf_flyer] by larsb
Jul 22, 2009 (1:14 pm)
Reply

Replying to: pf_flyer (Jul 22, 2009 12:54 pm)

Every estimate I see says about 8 kwh to recharge the battery.
 
That's about 80 cents for most people.
 
For commuters like myself who drive about 22 miles a day round-trip, and maybe 100 miles on a weekend, the electric cost would be about $25 a month, and the gasoline costs might be $40 a month, for a total of about $65 monthly
 
That's not TOO much different than what I pay for gasoline per month for my Camry hybrid, from Dec-Jun this year was about $47 a month.
 
Would I trade for a much higher car payment just to save $18 a month? Not likely.
 
The economics don't look to be there for people already driving a mid-size fuel-efficient car.
 
And the comment about how electricity will go up because of EVs hitting the market? PSHAW !!!
 
All that charging ( or most of it ) will occur at night when the grid is flowing and unchallenged.
 
And how many EVs will sell per year? 60,000? 80,000? 100,000? Not the Volt, not at $40K.
 
If would take a LOT of years, a LOT of car sales, and a LOT of progress before the EVs made a dent in the grid to the point that the utility companies could claim higher demand and raise prices merely because of EVs.
#483 of 545
Re: There's the other point [larsb] by dmathews3
Jul 22, 2009 (1:42 pm)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jul 22, 2009 1:14 pm)

I don't think we will ever see enough electric cars to change the off peak times to peak before we ever get that many cars we will have something else like hydrogen fuel cells.
#484 of 545
Re: Semantics [buyamerican2] by gfr1
Jul 22, 2009 (7:52 pm)
Reply

Replying to: buyamerican2 (Jul 22, 2009 10:06 am)

I disagree! Lomotives & very large trucks, in the sense of small vehicles, aren't efficient. No batteries for energy storage exists, so where's the comparison? Locomotives need lots of weight. That's not energy efficiency. The Prius' efficiency is largely due to the battery helping the ICE during acelleration and climbing grades. Therefore it can have a smaller, more efficient, engine and one that doesn't require low rpm torque due to the battery assist. Going down the other side of a hill, or long grade, the Prius regenerates the battery for further use whereas the Volt wastes that excess energy, once the propulsion battery is low and off-line. Then think about the cold country, such as Fargo, Duluth, etc. What is going to heat the cabin, defrost the front and rear windows, keep the catalytic warm, and such? Where's the 40 mile EV only range potential now? In such a scenario, maybe 5 miles, or 0, if the ICE provides the heat? And if that is the case, it appears that the operating ICE wouldn't even be able to use the excess power to charge the battery! There's a lot of detail that hasn't yet been disclosed, but it seems a little disconcerning to me. GR
#485 of 545
Re: Should GM take note? [larsb] by michael2003
Jul 26, 2009 (3:55 am)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jul 21, 2009 10:32 am)

Nice post, and thanks. It does a very good job of explaining what I understand is the current motive plan.

Messages Page 49 of 55
1
...
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
...
55
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement