Now Obama wants to funnel your next car purchase into GM

[PeshakJang]

Lol!

Wait, you were crying about the Volt having a range of 35 miles. Now, it's 20-50 miles on electric and 344 extended with gas. Please explain to me how the Volt uses $2.65 in fuel on a 25 mile drive when in all electric mode, the Volt averages 93 mpg.

Now, looking at the Volt with the average American daily work commute of 30-32 miles the need for the Volt to use gas would be exception and not the rule.

If you are doing nothing but commuting 25 miles a day, and never use the gas engine, great. You are paying a $20,000 premium to save $1.50 in gas per trip. If you make 13,000 trips, you'll break even (excluding discounting future value of your investment, and ignoring the huge subsidies from taxpayers).

If, like most Americans, you drive more than 25-30 miles in a day, you paid $40,000 for a car that burns premium, and gets average mileage.

Based on 15,000 miles using EPA combined mpg average - Prius uses $1,119 of regular gas and Volt uses $1,000 in premium gas(note this amount will be lower due to the number of miles in EV mode).

Uhh, no, that's not what the EPA says.

Volt costs $.99 for the first 25 miles, and $2.65 for every 25 miles after that, based on .68 gallon usage, and premium fuel prices of $3.92/gal. For 50 miles, this comes out to $3.64.

The Prius costs $1.84 for every 25 miles, based on .5 gallon usage at $3.68/gal. For 50 miles, this equals $3.68.

So the Volt costs less to drive if you keep it under 50 miles in any one trip, and completely recharge the battery (4 hours) before driving again. After that, the Prius has a significant advantage in terms of cost and range (about an additional 150 miles+)

If you take the base cost of each vehicle, without tax incentives, you will wind up paying about $23-25,000 for a Prius, and About $40-42,000 for a Volt. Even with a Prius at $25,000 and a Volt at $40,000, you're paying a $15,000 premium to shave less than a dollar off of your daily commute... and that savings would be negated anyway by driving exceeding 50 miles. A trip to visit the family a few hundred miles away would destroy your accumulated savings in one fell swoop.

So yeah, it helps if you actually look at the numbers.

Surprised you didn't cry about the US Gov't providing a tax credit for a foreign auto company. You do also know that this is a first generation vehicle. The first generation Prius sold 300 vehicles in it's first year.

It also sold them exclusively in Japan, in which a hybrid is exponentially more viable. Once brought to the US, it had an MSRP of around $20,000. The tax credit from the federal government didn't start until 2005, and was less than half of what we are subsidizing the Volt for. The Prius was already economically feasible in the US and world markets, had proven technology, and was desired, because the Japanese made a good product that PEOPLE WANTED. What the government is doing now is artificially creating demand by providing a massive subsidy for an unproven product that would not otherwise be economically feasible.

If the Japanese were losing money on the Prius, they wouldn't have brought it to the US. The tax credit was implemented as a way of influencing people to buy more efficient cars, not to help the Prius succeed. The opposite is the case with the Volt subsidy.

Chevy is predicting sales of 10k vehicles in it's first year.

And so far they have sold about 600 this year.

So, yes a domestic first generation vehicle that reduces the need for foreign oil that hasn't even been nationally released with a 50k waiting list is a failure. Nice logic.

Again, do your homework. It's tiring.

edit - seeing your sig, a double lol!!!

I've provided plenty of numbers straight from the EPA, most of which you've ignored.

Your infatuation with this failure is akin to why we have this product in the first place. Damn the numbers, damn the money, this is about social engineering.

Edit: And yes, my sig applies here quite aptly.

 

[K1052]

Now, looking at the Volt with the average American daily work commute of 30-32 miles the need for the Volt to use gas would be exception and not the rule.

This is precisely the point on why the Volt isn't comparable to the Prius. The vast majority of people would rarely use the Volt's engine to go about their daily business, even more so when charging stations become commonplace.

 

[PeshakJang]

This is precisely the point on why the Volt isn't comparable to the Prius. The vast majority of people would rarely use the Volt's engine to go about their daily business, even more so when charging stations become commonplace.

And if that were the case, as I pointed out, you'd be paying a $15,000 premium to save less than a dollar on your commute, and then be required to charge your vehicle for 4 hours before heading back out. This is optimal conditions, also, with no additional stops/trips along the way, and with 4 hours downtime after you've completed the commute.

 

[K1052]

And if that were the case, as I pointed out, you'd be paying a $15,000 premium to save less than a dollar on your commute, and then be required to charge your vehicle for 4 hours before heading back out. This is optimal conditions, also, with no additional stops/trips along the way, and with 4 hours downtime after you've completed the commute.

Which is a more than adequate interval if say you're going to work, where you presumably spend about double the 4 hour charge time working.

For most people's daily commute electrical range on the Volt platform is quite usable. I only expect this to increase in capacity and fall in cost as the technology becomes more mature. Am I first in line for a Volt? No. Do I want the cars that will come after this based on the same concept? Yes.

 

[PeshakJang]

Here's some additional real-world input from Edmund's:

http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/volt/2011/#fullreview

And in an Edmunds fuel economy test of a Volt with its battery depleted, the car returned only 31.4 mpg in mixed driving. That's far below the typical fuel economy provided by regular hybrid vehicles.

Even with a $7,500 federal tax credit, a base Volt will still cost $33,500 -- and that's without the home charging station that's essentially mandatory for a plug-in hybrid like the Volt.

So I didn't include the additional cost of the at-home charging station, which looks like it runs at least a few thousand dollars. You can get up to 30% in a tax credit toward that purchase, up to $1000.

 

[K1052]

Here's some additional real-world input from Edmund's:

http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/volt/2011/#fullreview

So I didn't include the additional cost of the at-home charging station, which looks like it runs at least a few thousand dollars. You can get up to 30% in a tax credit toward that purchase, up to $1000.

ooo...look, I can selectively quote too

Obviously, how far you routinely drive will play a key role in how thrifty the Volt will be. We think most potential owners will be able to take advantage of its electric range. And electricity costs for recharging are but a fraction for the equivalent amount of gasoline.

And they hate the Prius compared to the Volt for a whole list of other reasons:

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2011/04/2011-chevy-volt--toyota-prius.html

 

[PeshakJang]

Which is a more than adequate interval if say you're going to work, where you presumably spend about double the 4 hour charge time working.

You seem to be counting on businesses adopting Chevy Volt charging stations en-masse... I don't think many would see any economic value in doing that. In the chance that it did happen, it would be heavilty subsidized (again), and would create large strain on local power grids (which are already toward the upper limits of capacity nationwide), and wouldn't really benefit anybody, except in terms of convenience for the few that purchase electric cars.

For most people's daily commute electrical range on the Volt platform is quite usable. I only expect this to increase in capacity and fall in cost as the technology becomes more mature. Am I first in line for a Volt? No. Do I want the cars that will come after this based on the same concept? Yes.

Sure, I can agree to that. It's technology that I too would like to see mature to the point that it provides a benefit. Right now though, as my point has been, we're subsidizing it based on a misguided premise, with no regard for the economic reality of the matter. Like I pointed out, the EPA figures show that it pollutes MORE and uses MORE oil than a Prius... notwithstanding the 25 extra "free" miles you get.

When you create artificial demand for a product through confiscation and redistribution of wealth, you will never realize the true economic value of that product. Nobody will pay GM what it costs to produce a Volt, so the government takes taxpayer money and gives it to GM to guarantee a profit.

 

[PeshakJang]

ooo...look, I can selectively quote too

I was "selectively quoting" the price and mileage figures, neither of which were opinion. I also agreed, that yes... you will save money on short commutes... but you are paying upwards of $15,000 to achieve that savings... plus your charging station costs. This does not equal value creation.

And they hate the Prius compared to the Volt for a whole list of other reasons:

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2011/04/2011-chevy-volt--toyota-prius.html

And all the aesthetic benefits only cost $15,000+ more. If the Volt is worth the premium, then people would pay it to achieve those benefits.

As it is, GM cannot produce the Volt at a price that people are willing to pay, so tax payers are essentially ensuring that GM can sell them well below cost and still make a profit. There isn't anything more to it than that.

 

[K1052]

You seem to be counting on businesses adopting Chevy Volt charging stations en-masse... I don't think many would see any economic value in doing that. In the chance that it did happen, it would be heavilty subsidized (again), and would create large strain on local power grids (which are already toward the upper limits of capacity nationwide), and wouldn't really benefit anybody, except in terms of convenience for the few that purchase electric cars.



Sure, I can agree to that. It's technology that I too would like to see mature to the point that it provides a benefit. Right now though, as my point has been, we're subsidizing it based on a misguided premise, with no regard for the economic reality of the matter. Like I pointed out, the EPA figures show that it pollutes MORE and uses MORE oil than a Prius... notwithstanding the 25 extra "free" miles you get.

When you create artificial demand for a product through confiscation and redistribution of wealth, you will never realize the true economic value of that product. Nobody will pay GM what it costs to produce a Volt, so the government takes taxpayer money and gives it to GM to guarantee a profit.

The costs will be spread over many years so you'll never really see a huge dent, as a business. The users will also be more than willing to pay the charge fee. The tech will also become cheaper since you don't have to fully equip at the get go.

Your assumption seems to be that people are going to drive these things until the gas tank says "E" on a daily basis as part of their regular schedule. That isn't the case and all the research done backs up the 30-40 mile area as the sweet spot of daily use for the vast majority.

 

[Zebo]

Maybe so, but the Prius is a pretty nice car even for the price. They bought it used, for like 10 grand I think. Honestly the generator design is retarded with a gasoline generator. But with the stranglehold gasoline has on our society no one will make a diesel generator hybrid for the USA.

It's good they bought it used and saved over half it's ridiculous retail , non negotiable price - makes sense then, hopefully they can find a totaled Prius to salvage and DIY because Batteries run about $4000 to replace between 100-150K miles.

 

[K1052]

As it is, GM cannot produce the Volt at a price that people are willing to pay, so tax payers are essentially ensuring that GM can sell them well below cost and still make a profit. There isn't anything more to it than that.

As far as tax subsidies are concerned I'd consider the various wars we've fought in the ME to ensure a steady supply of oil products to be a significant financial and political cost to taxpayers.

 

[PeshakJang]

The costs will be spread over many years so you'll never really see a huge dent, as a business.

Large corporations may find it more feasible, especially those in urban areas, but it will still require significant investment in terms of infrastructure. Why should I, as a business, invest significant capital to provide infrastructure to a tiny, tiny, fraction of my employees? What about those that don't work downtown?

The users will also be more than willing to pay the charge fee. The tech will also become cheaper since you don't have to fully equip at the get go.

Will become cheaper when? 10 years from now? 15? What if the government all but abandons the effort to push electric cars, like they basically have with ethanol, leaving all these private entities out in the wind? That's the problem here. The government is creating artificial demand. We don't know what the actual underlying demand is, or what economic benefit it serves. Especially now, when our government is so completely out of money, how long with that artificial demand last? What if subsidies end?

Your assumption seems to be that people are going to drive these things until the gas tank says "E" on a daily basis as part of their regular schedule. That isn't the case and all the research done backs up the 30-40 mile area as the sweet spot of daily use for the vast majority.

And for those that restrict themselves to that range, great. Again, they'll save maybe a dollar, in exchange for a $15,000 premium. Meanwhile, GM will get a $7,500 check from the taxpayers.

 

[PeshakJang]

As far as tax subsidies are concerned I'd consider the various wars we've fought in the ME to ensure a steady supply of oil products to be a significant financial and political cost to taxpayers.

Ok, great. Does that make the Volt better?

 

[Attic]

As it is, GM cannot produce the Volt at a price that people are willing to pay, so tax payers are essentially ensuring that GM can sell them well below cost and still make a profit. There isn't anything more to it than that.

This.

You either get it or you don't.

Liberals don't see what's wrong with subsidising failures... it's the idea that initiated the failure that really matters in their world and they will cry and kick and scream and fudge numbers and lie if their idea doesn't pan out as they thought it would. Unfortunately for the rest of us, their temper tantrum with being unable to measure up in the real world is only soothed by immense tax payer funding. It's pathetic.

The rest of us just work harder, make better, or move on.

 

[PeshakJang]

I'll make a proposition to anybody that thinks the Volt will save them money in the long-run.

I'll be generous and say that the Volt will save you $4.00 per day in fuel costs. Assuming that a Volt costs $.99 for 25 miles, and a Prius costs $1.84, you're looking at an 85 cent savings per 25-mile commute... but like I said, I am feeling generous, and will assume that you save a lot more than that

I'll be extra generous and say that you'll keep your Volt for 10 years, and keep saving that $4 a day for 10 years.

What would this savings be worth to you?

The Volt wants a premium of $15,000 to give you 1/4 of the savings I am offering.

One-time special right now... you send me $14,000 (that's $1,000 off!) cash, and I'll send you $4 per day for the next 10 years.

That's a deal that not even the Volt can beat!

 

[1prophet]

It's good they bought it used and saved over half it's ridiculous retail , non negotiable price - makes sense then, hopefully they can find a totaled Prius to salvage and DIY because Batteries run about $4000 to replace between 100-150K miles.

The DIY crowd is going to be far and few on these vehicles, even most non dealer shops are afraid or don't know how to work on them outside of the most basic maintenance.

 

[K1052]

Ok, great. Does that make the Volt better?

It concerns the true cost of driving only petroleum fueled vehicles. One that is hidden in our increasingly vast national debt but we owe all the same.

 

[K1052]

This.

You either get it or you don't.

Liberals don't see what's wrong with subsidising failures... it's the idea that initiated the failure that really matters in their world and they will cry and kick and scream and fudge numbers and lie if their idea doesn't pan out as they thought it would. Unfortunately for the rest of us, their temper tantrum with being unable to measure up in the real world is only soothed by immense tax payer funding. It's pathetic.

The rest of us just work harder, make better, or move on.

Like the billions given in annual farm/ethanol subsides that neither party wants to touch?

 

[JD50]

I'll make a proposition to anybody that thinks the Volt will save them money in the long-run.

I'll be generous and say that the Volt will save you $4.00 per day in fuel costs. Assuming that a Volt costs $.99 for 25 miles, and a Prius costs $1.84, you're looking at an 85 cent savings per 25-mile commute... but like I said, I am feeling generous, and will assume that you save a lot more than that

I'll be extra generous and say that you'll keep your Volt for 10 years, and keep saving that $4 a day for 10 years.

What would this savings be worth to you?

The Volt wants a premium of $15,000 to give you 1/4 of the savings I am offering.

One-time special right now... you send me $14,000 (that's $1,000 off!) cash, and I'll send you $4 per day for the next 10 years.

That's a deal that not even the Volt can beat!

Deal, but only if you pay me back with these.

 

[dmcowen674]

High food prices, high gas prices are the price to pay to get off foreign oil.

If you can't afford it in this country you have to leave.

Its for rich Republicans only.

Everyone knows this.

 

[piasabird]

Quit bailing out companies that dont know how to make money. Just break up GM and sell it to the highest bidder. Ford and Toyota are still selling cars.

 

[Texashiker]

The more corn we use for fuel, the less corn have for food.

The less corn we have for food, the higher prices will go.

Its simple supply and demand economics. If you "think" the price of food is high now, just wait.

 

[PokerGuy]

Its simple supply and demand economics.

You must be part of the silly unwashed masses. Supply and demand is such a simplistic concept, we elite liberals and people in government are far beyond such things, we're at a level you clearly can't comprehend.

 

[Texashiker]

we're at a level you clearly can't comprehend.

Your right, I can not comprehend how much food is going to cost when thousands of tons,,, maybe even millions of tons of corn is pulled out of the food supply.

Ethonal can only make the world food and fuel situation worse.

 

[desy]

The OP article was full of so much BS I wouldn't know where to start. . . .

On cars
All can make E85 capable vehicles, this isn't a costly 'about $300' or hard thing to do

On Corn Ethanol
Corn isn't the best but there is no food argument and its energy positive, a stepping stone to further ethanol technologies, have some patience people.

On money to farmers
So the money going out as a trade imbalance as an energy importer doesn't bother you?
Heres a clue about the reciprocity of money, if it stays in the system it goes around more benefiting our economy not the palaces in Dubai

NOW I see why that article is so factually incorrect its from 2008, well even in 3 short years a lot of the arguments have proven faulty.