230 Miles per gallon, 1000KM range, 0-60 mph in 9 seconds

zod

GM CEO Fritz Henderson announced this week that the company's much anticipated Chevy Volt (half electric, half fossil fuel) is the undisputed winner in the miles-per-gallon race, claiming that under new EPA guidelines the Volt will hit 230 miles per gallon (city), the first car to ever earn triple-digit fuel efficiency.

..Volt's potential range to be as much as 640 miles (1,030 km) on a single tank of gasoline...

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1916568,00.html

GM's latest figures peg the Volt's 0-60 mph performance time in the 8 to 9 second range, with a top speed of 100 mph. The electric drive unit will deliver 111 kW of power that translates to 150 horsepower, and importantly an impressive 370 lbs-ft of torque. Since electric motors can deliver maximum torque from 0 rpm, overall performance should be quite good.

http://www.greencar.com/articles/preview-2011-chevy-volt-electric.php

drunkmonkey

Should be great for the environment but it's going to be crap for the government, road tax will be on the lowest band and vat revenues on fuel will be cut by 300%
I wouldn't fancy being finance minister when this one starts rolling off the production line...

Cookie_Monster

zod wrote: »

Volt will hit 230 miles per gallon (city), the first car to ever earn triple-digit fuel efficiency.

..Volt's potential range to be as much as 640 miles (1,030 km) on a single tank of gasoline...

only a 2 gallon tank?

Cuddlesworth

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Should be great for the environment but it's going to be crap for the government, road tax will be on the lowest band and vat revenues on fuel will be cut by 300%
I wouldn't fancy being finance minister when this one starts rolling off the production line...

Americans get cheap fuel because the government subsidises it. It would save them money.

biko

And it looks like a normal car, not a futuristic space wagon.

Mayshine

Did you guys even read the linked articles. Drive this on the open road an you will see much lower mpg

Here's the breakdown: The 230-m.p.g. number, according to GM's Frank Weber, global-vehicle-line executive for the Volt, is a measurement of the car's "city-driving cycle" — that's the 40 miles it can go without gas, plus one daily electric recharge, plus a little extra help from the gasoline it might need to continue to charge its batteries when they get low during driving in the city. It's basically measuring the Volt's electric-only-mode (with some help) mileage capacity. If the Volt got out on the highway — where it's powered largely by gasoline — and traveled 200 miles, the m.p.g. would drop like a stone and most likely be more in line with other hybrids.

Fizman

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

only a 2 gallon tank?

Well closer to 2.78.

zod

Mayshine wrote: »

Did you guys even read the linked articles. Drive this on the open road an you will see much lower mpg

yes after the first 40 miles the MPG sinks to that of a normal car, its a good job that :

But with nearly eight out of ten Americans commuting fewer than 40 miles a day, according to U.S. Department of Transportation data, the majority of drivers should be able to get away with the Electric mode most of the time.

In Ireland we have an average commute of 18KM ? ( source ) so it's even less of an issue.

The engine is just to extend range.. when batteries are better the engine will be thrown out as unneccessary, dirty and expensive.

gillo_100

Whats interesting about the Volt is that it is the first commercially available series hybrid drive as opposed to parallel drive. ie.. In previous hybrids the petrol engine was attached to the drive and kicked in when needed, however with this the petrol engine is connected to a generator which charges the batteries, all the drive comes from the electric motor.

This is the same system as is used in lots of trains except with diesel engines instead. From what I've heard diesel is much better at this sort of thing, ie. just running at it most efficient speed to drive the generator.

And while the quoted mpg has to be taken with a good handful of salt its still a nice development to see.

zod

gillo_100 wrote: »

Whats interesting about the Volt is that it is the first commercially available series hybrid drive as opposed to parallel drive. ie.. In previous hybrids the petrol engine was attached to the drive and kicked in when needed, however with this the petrol engine is connected to a generator which charges the batteries, all the drive comes from the electric motor.

This is the same system as is used in lots of trains except with diesel engines instead. From what I've heard diesel is much better at this sort of thing, ie. just running at it most efficient speed to drive the generator.

And while the quoted mpg has to be taken with a good handful of salt its still a nice development to see.

agreed, I think there will be a diesel variant for Europe eventually .. but yanks only know "gas"!

Alun

gillo_100 wrote: »

Whats interesting about the Volt is that it is the first commercially available series hybrid drive as opposed to parallel drive.

What's more interesting to me is why other hybrids didn't do it this way in the first place, since to my mind it's an easier task, engineering-wise, to implement. I'm also sure that since the petrol / diesel engine is only being used to power the generator, presumably at constant revs and constant-ish load, then some optimization could be done that would render it more efficient than one used to directly power the wheels as well.

JHMEG

Alun wrote: »

What's more interesting to me is why other hybrids didn't do it this way in the first place,

Using petrol to power a generator which in turn powers an electric motor which in turn drives the wheels, is not as efficient as using petrol to power an engine which drives the wheels, for obvious reasons.

It's also the reason why the Volt only uses the petrol engine when all else has fails.

BTW trains only use the diesel-electric setup because of the sheer torque required to get such a massive load moving.

Alun

JHMEG wrote: »

Using petrol to power a generator which in turn powers an electric motor which in turn drives the wheels, is not as efficient as using petrol to power an engine which drives the wheels, for obvious reasons.

I'm not convinced it's necessarily as simple and obvious as that.

OK, adding in an extra conversion into the process will lower the overall efficiency of the whole chain, but (and I'm no engineer, at least, not an automotive/ traction one) I'd have thought that having the IC engine run in a more optimal mode, i.e. more constant revs / load combined with the different characteristics (low down torque) and lack of gearing (also a source of loss) of an electric motor, might go at least part way to compensating for that extra loss.

There's probably a good reason why diesel electric locomotives were developed as a superior alternative to pure diesel ones after all. It's the same principle, and they wouldn't have done it if there were no advantage.

JHMEG

Alun wrote: »

I'm not convinced it's necessarily as simple and obvious as that.

OK, adding in an extra conversion into the process will lower the overall efficiency of the whole chain, but (and I'm no engineer, at least, not an automotive/ traction one) I'd have thought that having the IC engine run in a more optimal mode, i.e. more constant revs / load combined with the different characteristics (low down torque) and lack of gearing (also a source of loss) of an electric motor, might go at least part way to compensating for that extra loss.

It is as simple. Toyota don't even allow the Prius to run in EV mode (ie electric) in the US as it affects overall ratings in a negative way.

Alun wrote:

There's probably a good reason why diesel electric locomotives were developed as a superior alternative to pure diesel ones after all. It's the same principle, and they wouldn't have done it if there were no advantage.

As I said above: huge torque required to get a huge load moving from a standing start. Electic motor is perfect, or rather 6 of them, as in a typical GM 201 Class CoCo as used by Irish Rail (the first of which was rather lavishly flown in to Ireland using another beast, the Antonov 124)

L1011

1,030km range is worth shouting about? In a car with an internal combustion engine?

If it was a pure electric car it might be, but its *not*. However, its an acceptable range anyway, just not sure why they need to boast about it.

AugustusMaximus

230 is a pointless figure.

The price of electricity needs to be set against the price of petrol and a figure of petrol used and electrity costs added together to form a true mpg figure.

That is one of the most stupid and misleading figures I've ever seen.


Its like throwing a gallon of petrol into a can into the boot of an electric car and then claiming that the car has infinite fuel economy.

DaMonk

I wonder what they remap to!! :pac::D

zod

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

The price of electricity needs to be set against the price of petrol and a figure of petrol used and electrity costs added together to form a true mpg figure.

I think the mpg rating will eventually disappear ( although there are some equivalency ratings )

Most of the manufacturers are moving toward pure electric only so the per gallon metric will be moot (source)

Nissan has stated that they are not surprised by the findings of Aerovironment. According to Mark Perry, director of product planning for North America, "The automaker is focused on immediately providing the zero emissions benefit of battery only EVs. Any solution short of this goal are bridge technologies."

GM has a different take on the subject. Vehicle line director for the Chevy Volt EREV Tony Posawatz said, "For it's part, GM is unfazed. We think, in the future, battery only will have a place. But we are convinced consumers will want to avoid range anxiety."

As automakers try to decide what Americans want, the research numbers suggest that most have determined that we want the zero emissions, no gas usage EVs and are willing to attempt to overcome the range anxiety associated with them to drive a vehicle that free us from gasoline forever.

.Longshanks.

MYOB wrote: »

1,030km range is worth shouting about? In a car with an internal combustion engine?

If it was a pure electric car it might be, but its *not*. However, its an acceptable range anyway, just not sure why they need to boast about it.

Not quiet the same but I could squeeze 850 KM out of my last car - a 1.3 CDTi 3 door astra. It took approx 45 litres to fill....

L1011

Longshanks100 wrote: »

Not quiet the same but I could squeeze 850 KM out of my last car - a 1.3 CDTi 3 door astra. It took approx 45 litres to fill....

I can get 1200km out of my van if I drove it like a Green Party member, 1000 if I drive it like me. 1000KM range for an apparently economical car is very low!

C.D.

I see the marketing team have as usual butchered and mutilated another technical specification beyond meaning. Following their line of thought, a fully electric cars get infinite miles per gallon and will never need the tank refilled.

.Longshanks.

MYOB wrote: »

I can get 1200km out of my van if I drove it like a Green Party member, 1000 if I drive it like me. 1000KM range for an apparently economical car is very low!

Exactly

zod

MYOB wrote:

I can get 1200km out of my van if I drove it like a Green Party member, 1000 if I drive it like me. 1000KM range for an apparently economical car is very low!

Longshanks100 wrote: »

Exactly

eh .. they mention range because its an electric car (albeit that has had its range extended by a legacy petrol engine)

The reason for this is simple, not to boast that its long ..but simply because the mere mention of an electric car will immediately cause those affected by "range anxiety" to come running.

It has a range similar to most cars. Tick.

AugustusMaximus

C.D. wrote: »

I see the marketing team have as usual butchered and mutilated another technical specification beyond meaning. Following their line of thought, a fully electric cars get infinite miles per gallon and will never need the tank refilled.

The stat is completely and utterly meaningless.

zod

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI3sv0tiqSc

Clare_Guy

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Americans get cheap fuel because the government subsidises it. It would save them money.

The american government do not subsidise fuel. They simply choose to tax it differently then our government does.

The average tax on petrol in the united states is around 12 american cents per litre as opposed to around 75 european cents per litre over here.
yes, that's right, out of a litre of petrol that costs €1.15, the government take .75c in tax...

source wikipaedia;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_tax

L1011

zod wrote: »

eh .. they mention range because its an electric car (albeit that has had its range extended by a legacy petrol engine)

Its an internal combustion engine car with its fuel efficiency for city driving improved by an electric engine, not the other way around.

zod

MYOB wrote: »

Its an internal combustion engine car with its fuel efficiency for city driving improved by an electric engine, not the other way around.

The internal combustion engine is not connected to the drive train, an electric motor is .. ergo it's an electric car. But don't take it from me :


The Chevrolet Volt is a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle to be produced by General Motors .. Unlike most current commercially available electric hybrids, the actual propulsion of the Volt is accomplished exclusively by the electric motor... After 40 miles (64 km), a small 4-cylinder gasoline internal combustion engine drives a 53 kW (71 hp) generator effectively extending the Volt's potential range to as much as 640 miles (1,030 km) on a single tank of gasoline. source

....

The Chevrolet Volt concept sedan, powered by the E-flex System – GM’s next-generation electric propulsion system – could nearly eliminate trips to the gas station. The Chevrolet Volt is a battery-powered, four-passenger electric vehicle that uses a gas engine to create additional electricity to extend its range. source

L1011

Is an Irish Rail class 201 an electric locomotive? No, of course its not. But its driven by the same technology - electric traction motors powered by diesel generators.

Its a petrol car.

JHMEG

MYOB wrote: »

Its an internal combustion engine car with its fuel efficiency for city driving improved by an electric engine, not the other way around.

That would be essentially what the current Honda and Toyota hybrids are.

JHMEG

MYOB wrote: »

Is an Irish Rail class 201 an electric locomotive?.

Doesn't have batteries and never runs on electricity from anywhere other than from the diesel engine.

zod

MYOB wrote: »

Is an Irish Rail class 201 an electric locomotive? No, of course its not. But its driven by the same technology - electric traction motors powered by diesel generators.

Its a petrol car.

I assume those trains are not plugged in at night and don't use stored energy for their average day .. I could be wrong though!

It's not a petrol car for the average joe who does the average commute :

Coupled with the car’s expected electric-only range of 40 miles, Henderson said the Volt could all but free consumers from petroleum. According to the Department of Transportation, nearly 80 percent of Americans drive less than 40 miles each day. “From the data we’ve seen, many Chevy Volt drivers may be able to drive in pure electric mode on a daily basis without having to use any gas,” Henderson said. “EPA labels are a yardstick for customers to compare the fuel efficiency of vehicles. So, a vehicle like the Volt that achieves a composite triple-digit fuel economy is a game-changer.”



Unlike the Prius, Honda Insight or any of GM’s hybrids, the Volt is an electric car. source

L1011

Its bulk fuel source is petrol, its a petrol car.

S-Murph

Looks really like a saab

zod

MYOB wrote: »

Its bulk fuel source is petrol, its a petrol car.

its primary source is battery charged by mains electricity, it's emergency fuel for range extension is petrol which is stored in bulk.

Warning! using the emergency fuel is more costly, more damaging to the environment, leverage's a legacy power generation technique and may result in more frequent maintenance :pac:

L1011

zod wrote: »

its primary source is battery charged by mains electricity, it's emergency fuel for range extension is petrol which is stored in bulk.

Warning! using the emergency fuel is more costly, more damaging to the environment, leverage's a legacy power generation technique and may result in more frequent maintenance :pac:

It takes an awful lot of spin to claim 96% of the vehicles range is a "range extension"

Face it, its a petrol car that can use electricity for short hop. Its not an electric car.

zod

MYOB wrote: »

It takes an awful lot of spin to claim 96% of the vehicles range is a "range extension"

Face it, its a petrol car that can use electricity for short hop. Its not an electric car.

If 80% of its journeys are powered by mains electricity, there is no spin involved.

as quoted before "80 percent of Americans drive less than 40 miles each day"

AugustusMaximus

S-Murph wrote: »

Looks really like a saab

Here's the Opel variant of the Volt, the Ampera.

L1011

zod wrote: »

If 80% of its journeys are powered by mains electricity, there is no spin involved.

as quoted before "80 percent of Americans drive less than 40 miles each day"

How many of those 80% don't drive Mon-Fri and do >100 miles each weekend? How many of them don't drive at all? Statistics can be abused for anything.

The car can go a pathetic distance on its batteries and uses petrol as its bulk fuel source. Its a petrol car.

Victor_M

MYOB wrote: »

How many of those 80% don't drive Mon-Fri and do >100 miles each weekend? How many of them don't drive at all? Statistics can be abused for anything.

The car can go a pathetic distance on its batteries and uses petrol as its bulk fuel source. Its a petrol car.

You are missing the point entirely, it's only a pathetic distance if you need to drive more than 40 miles every day, if like the majority of the planet you drive less than 40 miles a day you will never need to tap into the fossil fuel reserve.

Does anyone know how much it costs to charge it every night? that is the pertinent question that will determine whether it's economically viable for Joe punter or not.

Fair play to the lads in Chevrolet, if I drove one of those, I would need to use the petrol reserve a handful of times a year.

I think there are a few people on here being argumentative for the sake of it.

Manic Moran

agreed, I think there will be a diesel variant for Europe eventually .. but yanks only know "gas"!

The EuroDiesels have finally shown up in California this year...

You all need to stop thinking of it as a petrol car primarily or an electric car primarily.

It's dual mode. You can select what sort of car it is depending on what you want to do with it. And you don't even need to push a button to do it, just drive it accordingly.

If you fancy hopping down to the shops, or going to work, it's an electric car, you plug it in. Just like every other electric car you've (n)ever driven.

Wake up one morning and fancy driving from California to Florida, it's a conventional petrol car, and you just drive it until the needle hovers over "E", pull into the local gas station, and fill it up, then keep going, just like every other petrol car you've ever driven.

The thing is you have to stop thinking of it as a 'gasoline-electric' or a 'hybrid', or whatever, the mechanics behind what makes it go are pretty much irrelevant. What's relevant is how it is used and how it will affect the consumer.

That said, I won't be buying one any time soon. It's still a little too pricey to be a routine car. Our next purchases in our house are likely to be a VW TDi and a supercharged V8 from Cadillac.

How many of those 80% don't drive Mon-Fri and do >100 miles each weekend? How many of them don't drive at all? Statistics can be abused for anything

The statistic I've usually seen which mentions the 80% is that 80% of commuters are within 40 miles round trip, and 90% are within 40 miles each way. (I'm one of the remaining 10%)

Is an Irish Rail class 201 an electric locomotive?.

No, it's a diesel-electric. Long-standing form of locomotive in North America where it was built (By GM, at the time, coincidently enough, though GM have since sold the Electro-Motive Division). Diesel-hydaulics have traditionally been popular in Europe.

NTM

AugustusMaximus

Victor_M wrote: »

You are missing the point entirely, it's only a pathetic distance if you need to drive more than 40 miles every day, if like the majority of the planet you drive less than 40 miles a day you will never need to tap into the fossil fuel reserve.

Does anyone know how much it costs to charge it every night? that is the pertinent question that will determine whether it's economically viable for Joe punter or not.

Fair play to the lads in Chevrolet, if I drove one of those, I would need to use the petrol reserve a handful of times a year.

I think there are a few people on here being argumentative for the sake of it.

I think the bigger question is how long it takes for a full charge.

zod

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

I think the bigger question is how long it takes for a full charge.

"GM estimates it will need 10 kilowatt hours to recharge the Volt to go 40 miles. That will cost a total of about 40 cents at off-peak electricity rates in Detroit, said GM CEO Fritz Henderson." source

Victor_M

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

I think the bigger question is how long it takes for a full charge.

It seems the Volt will consume approx 25KWh to cover 100 miles, at about 17 cent per KWh that's €4.25 per 100 miles, which seems extremely cheap, we need a diesel driver with a calculator to confirm what the equivalent cost for 100 miles in a diesel would cost.


I Found this (below) after a quick search, seems reasonable enough, between 4 & 8 hours depending on how drained the battery's are and the type of car.

The charging time depends of a lot of things.

1. how big is the battery
2. how big is your AC outlet
3. which type of battery.

I have made som calculations based on input from our members in the Danish Electric Vehicle Comitee, and we have found that an average EV consumes aprox. 120 Wh per km from the battery, which means that a battery of

12 kWh will give a range og 100 km
24 kWh will give 200 km
etc.

In Denmark we normally use an AC outlet of 230 Volts 16 Amps to charge our vehicles, which means that we can get 3,68 kWh every our. If the battery and charging system has an efficincy of say 85%
then you get 3.68 x 0.85 = 3,1 kWh on the battery every hour.

So if your vehicle has 24 kWh of battery capacity i will take aprox. 8 hours to rechange. If you in stead uses a 3 phase AC outlet, you can divide the time by 3 (aprox 2½ hour)

Generally most moderne batteries can be quick-charged in 15 minuttes up to 1 hour depending og the battery. So it is in most cases the size of your AC lines that will limit how fast you can charge an EV.

Also the build-in charger will set the time, because in most cases it has been desiged to use a certain standard AC outlet. e.g. my Citroën EV has 12 kWh of battery capacity, but the manufactor has designed the charger, so it work on 230 volt / 13 Amps, so in my case I can do at complete recharge in aprox. 5 hours.

12 kWh / (0.85 x 230 x 13) = 4.72 hours

Per Praem
member of board
Danish Electric Vehicle Comitee

Manic Moran

Charging the 220 lithium-ion cells housed in the Volt's 'T' shaped battery pack will take eight hours from a 120 volt outlet when fully depleted, and as little as three hours if charged from a 240 volt outlet. Based on a projected cost of 10 cents per kWh, the Volt will cost about 80 cents per day to fully charge. That equates to an energy cost of just 2 cents per mile under electric power.

If gas is about $4 a gallon, that's about 200mpg equivalence right now.

At least the car looks better than the concept did.

NTM

L1011

Victor_M wrote: »

It seems the Volt will consume approx 25KWh to cover 100 miles, at about 17 cent per KWh that's €4.25 per 100 miles, which seems extremely cheap, we need a diesel driver with a calculator to confirm what the equivalent cost for 100 miles in a diesel would cost.

Laden enough carvan gets me ~640 miles out of 58 euros diesel. 9 quid, more or less. Something like a Polo Bluemotion would be lower, and lower again if its 100 miles urban stop/start.

The cost of the Volt on a 100 mile run is going to be higher than 4.25 due to burning petrol to generate power after 40 miles (or whatever the specific range works out as at cruising speeds) and less than 100% efficiency.

Victor_M

MYOB wrote: »

Laden enough carvan gets me ~640 miles out of 58 euros diesel. 9 quid, more or less. Something like a Polo Bluemotion would be lower, and lower again if its 100 miles urban stop/start.

The cost of the Volt on a 100 mile run is going to be higher than 4.25 due to burning petrol to generate power after 40 miles (or whatever the specific range works out as at cruising speeds) and less than 100% efficiency.

Sorry, ok so the €4.25 per 100 miles is equivalent to €1.70 per 40 miles i.e. max electric range without petrol intervention. (sorry brain is slowing down as wine kicks in:))

So can a diesel driver, sober, with a calculator tell us if that's beatable or not with any of today's diesels.

L1011

Polo Bluemotion runs it VERY close, will use ~1.6 litres to cover that distance, but doesn't match it. Works out about 1.95 going off the average pumps.ie price.

Over 100 miles the Polo will be cheaper.

Manic Moran

I'm sure it will be, but that's not the point. How many people travel 100 miles a day?

Even I don't, my commute is about 85 miles a day in total and is in the top 10% in terms of distance in the US.

If you are one of those few who routinely travels 100 miles a day, then please, go buy a Polo Bluemotion, small little thing that it is. For the rest of the population, with a potential market in the tens of millions, the Volt concept is cheaper.

NTM

L1011

Its only cheaper if its efficiency above 40 miles per day is enough that the times you do go above that don't end up costing you far, far more than another car.

Seeing as you're using an indirect drive petrol motor and carrying the weight of the batteries, I don't see its petrol mpg being good at all. Depending on how good they are, your 25c saving could be gone by the time you've done 50 miles in a day.

Manic Moran

Although your point is correct, it's largely irrelevant for the vast majority of users who rarely go far enough to warrant the petrol engine. The morning run from home to school to work that my dad would take us on 200 days in the year would not exceed 20 miles. That's a lot of gas we're not using, even if the annual trip to Cork would turn out to be a little pricier than the same trip run by something like an E-class Diesel.

I don't think the weight of batteries are going to be that much of an issue: If it were, then all those hybrids I see running around on the Interstate are going to have some pretty horrendous mileage rates.

NTM