You are here: Forums Hybrid Vehicles Chevrolet Volt Is the Volt really a "Hybrid" or not?

Is the Volt really a "Hybrid" or not?

15 messages,  Last post on Oct 27, 2009 at 7:01 AM

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

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Volt, Electric Cars, Sedan

Messages Page 2 of 2 1 2 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#6 of 15 Re: another definition [pf_flyer] by larsb Aug 20, 2009 (12:30 pm)
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 20, 2009 12:22 pm) It's a big deal because it's just wrong to call an Apple and Orange.   The gas never keeps the car moving - it just charges the battery.   I don't think it should be called a hybrid because it's an Extended Range Electric Vehicle.   Just like hybrid cars don't want to be put into some other classification than they are in.   It's an electric vehicle which uses a gas engine to provide extended range to the electric batteries.   The gas generator is just a bonus. The car does not need it running to move.   I could own a Volt with my commute and NEVER use any gasoline at ALL.   Every hybrid car on the road needs an internal combustion engine which powers the wheels at some point.   The Volt will NEVER have the "gas generator" powering the wheels. Replies to this message: gagrice (Aug 21, 2009 7:46 pm)
#7 of 15 Re: another definition [pf_flyer] by larsb Aug 20, 2009 (12:31 pm)
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 20, 2009 12:22 pm) A-HA !!!   pf_flyer says, "An electric motor or ICE is not a "fuel source" "   In the Volt, the gasoline generator is JUST EXACTLY THAT !!! It's only a fuel source for the batteries !!!
#8 of 15 Re: another definition [larsb] by gagrice Aug 21, 2009 (7:46 pm)
Replying to: larsb (Aug 20, 2009 12:30 pm) How about if we just call the Volt an overpriced piece of crap from a bankrupt auto manufacturer?   I am sure you have heard the term series hybrid. The electric motors turn the wheels of trains, buses and earth moving equipment. Some have batteries which get charged by diesel engines that never take part in moving the vehicle. They were around as hybrids long before a Prius hybrid was even thought of. The Volt could very well be considered a SERIES HYBRID. Same basic concept that drives a lot of equipment. Most of those series hybrids do not waste a lot of money on batteries that are really not useful in saving money.   The parallel hybrid is a fairly recent concept to hit the market. No more or less a hybrid than a series hybrid which the Volt is. Unless you are bound and determined to listen to a bunch of goofballs from Government Motors.
#10 of 15 Direct verses indirect power sources by mark_c Oct 17, 2009 (5:18 am)
Unlike a typical hybrid vehicle that uses two direct sources of energy/fuel to move a vehicle, the Volt uses one.   An example of direct sources of power would be gasoline for the gasoline engine (which moves the vehicle) and electricity to power the electric motor (which moves the vehicle).   The Volt uses one source of direct energy to power/move the car, electricity.   The volt does use gasoline as an indirect power source (charge the batteries), but gasoline is not used to move the car (only electricity as it uses an electric motor to move the car). This means that if there is a plug-in for the Volt, that besides gasoline other indirect power sources could be nuclear, hydro, coal, thermal, solar, wind, etc. pending on where the electricity comes from that is delivered to the socket the Volt is plugged into. Replies to this message: gfr1 (Oct 17, 2009 8:18 pm) pf_flyer (Oct 18, 2009 5:11 am) gfr1 (Oct 18, 2009 7:41 pm) and 2 more...
#11 of 15 Re: Direct verses indirect power sources [mark_c] by gfr1 Oct 17, 2009 (8:18 pm)
Replying to: mark_c (Oct 17, 2009 5:18 am) One correction (as I understand it). Several months ago, GM changed their plans about the gas driven generator recharging the battery. Supposedly, it does not. When the battery depletes to its allowed minimun charge, the ICE cranks up and takes over the propulsion by providing electricity to the drive motor. From that time on (until its plugged in), the only recharge the battery gets is a little decelleration and braking energy recovery. I guess the idea is to use plug-in to get max EPA credits for not running the gas engine except as needed to complete a journey to a plugin site. (The article used an expression of it having its own built-in "tow truck"). Pretty much a deal killer, from my point of view, unless it fills your bill (in range) for a daily commuter. -- GFR Replies to this message: pf_flyer (Oct 18, 2009 5:11 am) gfr1 (Oct 18, 2009 7:41 pm) pf_flyer (Oct 19, 2009 2:45 am) and 1 more...
#12 of 15 Re: Direct verses indirect power sources [gfr1] by pf_flyer HOST Oct 18, 2009 (5:11 am)
Replying to: gfr1 (Oct 17, 2009 8:18 pm) Interesting. If the ICE doesn't provide ANY recharging of the battery at all, then what's the point? And you'd think they could claim SOME recharging while the ICE is running when the car would be stopped at a traffic light for example... unless they shut down the ICE when the car isn't moving.   You're right. "Built in tow truck" isn't going to sell this thing to anyone. Replies to this message: gfr1 (Oct 18, 2009 7:41 pm) pf_flyer (Oct 19, 2009 2:45 am) gagrice (Oct 27, 2009 7:01 am)
#13 of 15 Re: Direct verses indirect power sources [pf_flyer] by gfr1 Oct 18, 2009 (7:41 pm)
Replying to: pf_flyer (Oct 18, 2009 5:11 am) Well, as to "What's the Point?" It does keep you from being stranded and allows you to reach a destination beyond the range limits of the battery, which would be very comforting, I'd say. Their 40 mile electric range claim certainly won't hold up in all situations and batteries will deteriorate in time, as to taking & holding a charge. Eventually, drivers are going to count on a 40 mile round trip and run out of energy at say, 25 miles! So, the generator system does have great merit. I'd just prefer an ongoing recharge to make the vehicle more accomodating and give up a little of their outlandish EPA mileage claims. I'd prefer for even a commuter car to be able to travel interstate, if needed, since it has an ICE anyway. I have no idea how the government will eventuall evaluate and document the EPA values and assign the Corporate credits for hybrid and electric vehicles. Then there are other non-petroleum propulsion systems, also. I fear that eventually we will have to settle for less than desired vehicles due to how the government decides to establish those competitive numbers. We may get inferior mileage, fuel costs and driveability at the alter of EPA numbers bragging rights for sales purposes! -- GFR Replies to this message: pf_flyer (Oct 19, 2009 2:45 am) gagrice (Oct 27, 2009 7:01 am)
#14 of 15 Re: Direct verses indirect power sources [gfr1] by pf_flyer HOST Oct 19, 2009 (2:45 am)
Replying to: gfr1 (Oct 18, 2009 7:41 pm) Another good point. That 40 mile range is under ideal conditions, something like temperatures in the mid 60's, etc. Anything outside those parameters degrades battery performance and cuts down range.   I get the feeling this isn't a good basket for GM to put a whole lot of their eggs into. Replies to this message: gagrice (Oct 27, 2009 7:01 am)
#15 of 15 Re: Direct verses indirect power sources [pf_flyer] by gagrice Oct 27, 2009 (7:01 am)
Replying to: pf_flyer (Oct 19, 2009 2:45 am) I think that GM is banking on the Feds to subsidize their lame attempt at a high mileage car. The $7500k tax credit will give a few fat cats the incentive to put one in the garage. The ideal candidate makes lots of money and pays lots in taxes. They have a relatively short commute under 15 miles each way. They cannot live in an apartment without a garage and AC access.

Messages Page 2 of 2 1 2 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Hybrid Vehicles Chevrolet Volt Is the Volt really a "Hybrid" or not?