Just rode in a VOLT!

[robchalmers]

[robchalmers]

I watched this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofG9UyDKxh0

and was mildly alarmed

then I watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6HCJo8hxiU

and didn't feel that vunerable in comparison!

oh and if you drive a civic DON'T watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y4yIjT83kA

[MN Driver]

Not all of these crashes looked equal, from the first video the Polo was doing what looked like a 1/3 frontal which is more severe than the cars doing the 1/2 frontal which allows less room to crush which means that the occupant receives more force in the crash. I'll have to agree that I'd rather not be in the older model civic (is it 92-95?) but there are many cars that can do better than a Civic. Cabin intrusion is what we all want to avoid while having the impacted part of the vehicle crush as much as possible. It's a delicate balance for sure. It's why our cars are getting heavier, mostly to allow more metal to slow down the car during the crush to protect us in collisions and rollovers.

[MN Driver]

Originally Posted by robchalmers

to answer my own question

$22000 / 2.876gal (gasbuddy.com)
=7649.513 gals

Urban MPG, where the Volt would be on electric say 20MPG for joe public?

=7649.513*20
= 152,990.3 miles :O

Next step is to compare a comparable MPG vehicle for under $20k such as the Chevy Cruze at 40MPG or even something with slightly less fuel performance that the price difference is coming from and you are driving even more to make it up. Of course the cost of electricity stretches it out a tad. It depends on how far you can get on the 13.2kwh from the wall(slightly more power pulled from the wall than the 10.4kwh more or less that is supposed to go into the pack). Where I live 13.2kwh is about $13 between June-September and about $11 in the winter. I figure with my driving I'll have better than 40, especially after seeing the hypermiling results above 50 miles and having plenty of range left I think I'd do better than 40 miles no problem and my commute would be cheap.

It wouldn't be worth it though buying new, however buying one used for a cheaper price down the road might make more sense. GM says they are planning to make the 2012 CARB EAT-PZEV compliant and provide a 10/150k warranty that is required for that standard. If so, getting the 2012 used would be a better idea and even more so if you can find the unfortunate(or fortunate if under warranty) person who has had a battery replacement on their car. Still not sure what the warranty covers on the battery from any of the auto manufacturers, be it Chevy, Nissan, or Ford. Unless I had those details, I wouldn't plan on buying any of these cars. What if Nissan told you 7 years and 78k miles down the road that your 45 mile range on a bad day was in spec but you needed to go 50 miles to get to work and back, what now? I have a hard time with not seeing these answers visible.

Making a used car buying decision will be easier or much more difficult depending on how these LG Chem cells perform at high mileage. Chevy, Hyundai/Kia, and Ford are all using these cells. They each have their own specifications they are made to such as the Hyundai/Kia cells are put together with less internal resistance to provide more power but less energy density and the Chevy and Ford cells with be geared for energy density. I wish I knew how much they are paying for the cells, it could be close to $300/kwh. Better than the $350-$400 or so for these lower volume stuff from China without massive bulk discounts. They must be getting massive volume discounts and the machines assembling them in such massive quantity must have them at a low cost for these manufacturers. It seems that Toyota(under Tesla's help) and Tesla have gone the Panasonic route and Honda is up in the air so far. Hopefully we can find out soon who Honda is using, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't LG Chem considering it seems to be the current go-to. Chevy did lots of testing to end up with LG Chem, I'd be interested to see the performance characteristics I'm surprised with how the lithium world has taken off and A123 and pretty much every other LiFePO4 manufacturer other than SAFT has been hanging without significant improvements in performance lately. It seems that LiMn might just be the way to go although in the past LiMn has been known with having a low cycle life of around 500-1000 cycles, putting into consideration that the Leaf will pull deep cycles I'm curious how well it will fare because 1000 cycles at 100 miles is 100,000 miles, puts you right outside the warranty. Time will tell. -Your prospective used electric vehicle buyer.

[MN Driver]

More info including stuff that was previously told to some people I know on the hush hush during test drives has been discussed in this video about the Opel Ampera. Programmed to allow Autobahn cruising and allows more manual control allowing the gas engine to be controlled a bit more for efficiency for people driving longer distances and then ending up somewhere where battery use would be better such as a highway commute ending in a city.

Also discusses Chevy Cruze Eco and its freshly released 42mpg EPA Highway rating
Nissan Leaf driving range 70ish with climate control maxxed or 140 hypothetical hypermiles

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUJAbQmUm0c

[gone-ot]

...Zetsche says: "...in the long run, there's no alternative to electric driving."

[cfg83]

MN Driver -

This adds a wrinkle to the Volt engineering strategy. The design is flexible so that the software can be tweaked to favor the battery or the ICE.

Wait until the calcars.org people get their hands on one!

CarloSW2

[robchalmers]

42 for the cruze eco???? Erm our cruze base model 1.6 NA gets 42!! ffs didn't get much value on that overtime then General!

[cfg83]

robchalmers -

Originally Posted by robchalmers

42 for the cruze eco???? Erm our cruze base model 1.6 NA gets 42!! ffs didn't get much value on that overtime then General!

What's interesting is that the Cruze Eco is "new EPA MPG" figures. Here is the 2003 Honda Civic HX manual :



When I "back extrapolate" the new MPG to the old MPG (yellow background numbers), the Cruze compares favorably to the Honda Civic HX :



The Cruze Eco is about 3000 lbs and was put on a diet to get there :

Mass optimization
More than 42 changes were made on the Eco to reduce weight. It weighs in at 3,009 pounds (1,365 kg), compared to the 3,223 pounds (1,462 kg) of the Cruze 1LT. The diet program for the Cruze challenged engineers to look at all aspects of the vehicle's construction, including hundreds of weld flanges on the vehicle. They were reduced 1 mm to 2 mm in length, which saved several pounds, while the sheet metal gauge thickness was reduced by about 0.1 mm in select components. This saved weight while preserving structural integrity.
Lighter wheels and tires are used on the Eco. They're stylish, polished 17-inch alloy units with Goodyear tires that weigh only 36.5 pounds (16.6 kg) apiece. That's 5.3 pounds (2.4 kg) less than the 16-inch wheel/tires of the Cruze 1LT for a complete savings to the vehicle of 21.2 pounds (9.6 kg).

The 7th generation Honda Civic was anywhere from 2400 to 2700 lbs. I *think* the HX manual was also on a diet and came in at 2436 lbs :

2003 Honda Civic - UsedCars.com

CarloSW2

[Frank Lee]

Hilarious that it took so much "dieting" and engineering effort to "reduce" to that portly 3000 lbs! Just about everything I own from the '60s, '70s, and '80s comes in well under that. We can thank NHTSA for that.