Tesla Model S

[Justin.b]

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Yup.

CEO is about on par with the old head of DeLorean.

The DEA is setting him up too?

-Justin

[Justin.b]

Originally Posted by rice_classic

I was incorrect to say the Volt doesn't have a drivetrain. It doesn't have a drivetrain in the traditional sense would have been more accurate. The ICE isn't bolted to a tranny with multiple gears to propel the car. But instead the Electric motor(s) feed the rotational force through a planetary gearset through the driveshafts. I really have to be more careful with my words. Also, thanks for the link!

It looks like the real myth is that the ICE doesn't propel the vehicle. I had fallen for it too (obviously, look what I've been posting) but this paragraph here exposes that while that myth is true 90% of the time, there is a situation in which it is not true and GM clears it up with careful wording:

From that link

I didn't know that about the Volt. Of course, I've never been interested enough to look that deeply into it. The Volt was a marketing exercise. Ridiculous promises were made about a car that was in very early development stages, and the technology wasn't really new or interesting (I think locomotives have been doing this for a very long time minus coupling the genset motor to driven wheels).

I feel bad for the engineers on the Volt project that were handed a daydream and a deadline and were expected to create a miracle.

-Justin

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by rice_classic

...
It looks like the real myth is that the ICE doesn't propel the vehicle. I had fallen for it too (obviously, look what I've been posting) but this paragraph here exposes that while that myth is true 90% of the time, there is a situation in which it is not true and GM clears it up with careful wording:

From that link

I was fully aware of this, as I was looking seriously at the Volt when I was looking at the FR-S (I am always all over the map when I look for a new car).

Based on the explanation (efficiency) the Volt works exactly like I would expect it to, using the technology that gets you the best power and most efficient extended range, so it didn't surprise me when I found this. I don't really consider it a "myth" either that it was an extended range electric as opposed to a electrically assisted gasoline car (which is what I consider the Prius and its ilk). I have to wonder if they had selected larger electric motors (ie, Tesla) if they could have avoided this piece altogether.

In the end, the Volt tech isn't really new either. It's basically the same technology that drives modern locomotives from my understanding.

Had the cost of the Volt been closer to the FR-S, I may have ended up with one. It will be interesting to see how they hold value in the used market down the road.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by einzlr

Same here, but what I'd like to see is faster progress in the charging-infrastructure department. If I could plug the car in at work (and at my apartment complex :P), something like a Volt or a Leaf would be a great commuter daily.

I'm still more a fan of hydrogen. Also, at least to me, "electric is more green" is the real myth in all this. Just producing the batteries and shipping their raw materials all around the world probably produces more greenhouse gases than the FR-S (or maybe even my Suburban) ever will (just my opinion). We haven't even started talking about what the production of electricity itself (whether coal/NG/hydro/nuclear) produces as by products. I'm not a global warming advocate, just saying, I'm not sure I see where electric cars are "saving the planet".

[Justin.b]

Isn't hydrogen produced with electricity as well?

There really is no 'green' free ride, unless you're using solar, wind or water to generate the electricity and then you still have to consider the environmental impact of producing and operating those devices.

The truth in regards to environmentally friendly transport is that we would need to shorten our routes to reduce the impact. If we're not going to be more local, then we're really just trading emissions between smokestacks and exhaust pipes.

Don't bother arguing with me on this. I'm not an environmental crusader.

-Justin

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I was fully aware of this, as I was looking seriously at the Volt when I was looking at the FR-S (I am always all over the map when I look for a new car).

Based on the explanation (efficiency) the Volt works exactly like I would expect it to, using the technology that gets you the best power and most efficient extended range, so it didn't surprise me when I found this. I don't really consider it a "myth" either that it was an extended range electric as opposed to a electrically assisted gasoline car (which is what I consider the Prius and its ilk). I have to wonder if they had selected larger electric motors (ie, Tesla) if they could have avoided this piece altogether.

In the end, the Volt tech isn't really new either. It's basically the same technology that drives modern locomotives from my understanding.

Had the cost of the Volt been closer to the FR-S, I may have ended up with one. It will be interesting to see how they hold value in the used market down the road.

Their advertising (the radio ads I hear anyways) sure make it sound like an all electric with a helpful generator that occasionally turns on.

So looking into it, it is basically a Prius with a bigger battery pack.

[Justin.b]

It's a Prius with a bigger pricetag, that's for sure.

-Justin

[ZDan]

You can't commute 40 miles in a Prius without consuming any gasoline. With the plug-in Prius, 13 miles max, and if you try to accelerate anything like reasonably, the gas engine comes on.

The Volt is quite different from the Prius.

[Justin.b]

You're right. I see a lot of Priuses on the road. That makes it very different from the volt.

I realize the volt is new, but I see more of each the Prius V and Prius C models than I do volts, and those modesl are both newer than the volt. They don't seem to be gaining much traction even with people shopping for hybrids.

-Justin

[ZDan]

The Volt is a higher-market, more expensive car. Of course the cheaper Prius sells a lot better.

IMO, it's a good R&D investment on GM's part at the very least.

[Justin.b]

Not sure about that. As has been mentioned, they essentially brought old locomotive tech to automobiles (although coupling the genset motor is new).

In any case, I'm glad they spent the effort on this instead of another SUV. I just hope they don't take poor sales as a sign that they should go back to gas guzzlers.

-Justin

[White Shadow]

That Tesla is badass. Faster than an M5, yet doesn't use a drop of gas.

Of course the downside is the high price tag. Not many people are going to pay that price to own a car that doesn't use gas. Just doesn't make financial sense. That's why I wonder if Tesla will survive as a company. To really become viable, they need to build cars that will sell to the masses, and when you're in the electric car market, that means an affordable car with a decent range per battery charge.

[Giccin]

With all of this volt talk.. I had always thought GM lost money to the gov. when a volt is sold.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by ZDan

The Volt is a higher-market, more expensive car. Of course the cheaper Prius sells a lot better.

IMO, it's a good R&D investment on GM's part at the very least.

Their EV1 was actually pretty impressive, especially given the era. Volt is just a fancy Prius.