The Chevy Volt was worth a billion dollars, seriously
Can the 'new' GM parlay their Volt investment?
The Volt’s price tag is shocking, but the Volt could still be electrifying
Is there a more cost-effective battery-powered, or assisted, power train out there compared to the Chevy Volt?
Absolutely.
Is there a cost-effective battery-powered, or assisted, power train out there compared to a conventional gasoline vehicle?
Absolutely not. And that’s exactly why the Chevy Volt puts GM right smack in the middle of the battery-powered game.
“I’m not advertising the Leaf to sell Leafs,” Brian Carolin, Nissan North America’s sales and marketing boss, recently told the AutomotiveNews regarding the upcoming Nissan Leaf electric car. “We’re sold out. I’m doing it to build the brand.”
And the Volt is no different, nor was the Toyota Prius many years ago.
While I don’t believe the Volt to be revolutionary, I do believe developing the Volt was a revolutionary act. Moreover, I do believe the Volt has potential. It might take significant tweaking, or not. It might mean forgetting concepts like, ‘range extended’ or ‘40 miles of EV power’, but the knowledge gleaned from the Volt will be invaluable.
Inevitably, GM has all the pieces it needs to become a major player in the battery powered game. In fact, GM has more pieces than most automakers, except maybe Toyota. Mild hybrids, dual mode hybrids, dual mode plug-in hybrids, Voltecs. Believe it or not, GM is very much in this game. They just have to figure out how to put it all together.
The real big question is, does GM really want to be in this game?
Or, is GM using the Volt purely for marketing and a PR driven R&D platform, as well as, of course, a CAFE hedge to keep selling as many pickup trucks, SUVs and Cadillacs as possible – like some electrified flex-fuel CAFE credit? God, I hope not. Please let that not be the truth.
I don’t know, but the ‘old’ GM seemed more interested in marketing than reality.
Regardless, let’s be clear. The Volt was developed primarily as a marketing response to the success of the Toyota Prius. Sure, throwing down a billion on a marketing exercise seems silly, but when you have a multi-billion dollar yearly marketing budget, it’s not nearly as outlandish as it seems, especially when it also helps build a significant platform for R&D.
Bob Lutz – the father of the Volt – often admitted that was exactly what GM should have done about a decade before and beat Toyota to the Prius.
But, that was the ‘old’ GM.
The new GM might have been a little more careful developing the Volt, nevertheless, something like the Volt was absolutely needed by GM, despite the fact the Volt is still more about marketing than reality. Besides, the Toyota Prius is still more about marketing than reality, although the Prius, via HSD, is more about reality than marketing compared to the Volt.
Nevertheless, today’s hybrid cars, led 50 percent by the Prius alone, still account for less than 3 percent of total US auto sales – basically hybrid sales are just shy of completely irrelevant. Today, when it comes to hybrids, plug-ins and batteries, anything is still possible. Anyone can still be king.
When the crap hits the fan
The Chevy Volt versus the Toyota Prius versus the Nissan Leaf. It’s all bull crap.
America isn’t ready for some revolutionary change. We the people, the consumers, aren’t that progressive as a whole.
Sure, some of use are willing to do some crazy things to reduce our personal oil dependence or CO2 emissions – those of us with the means to do so at least. Most of us, unfortunately, have no such means. It just isn’t cost-effective, and won’t be for decades.
Marketing.
The Chevy Volt is not going to revolutionize America, nor are any plug-in vehicles built upon today’s lithium-ion technologies. That should be one of the primary lessons we take away from the Volt, as well as from Prius sales – after a decade on the market.
Revolution isn’t easy, but there is a lot of potential at hand. The Prius offers a lot of potential. The Volt offers a lot of potential. GM offers a lot of potential.
Thus, the biggest question isn’t whether the new GM wants to be in the battery game, it’s whether we, the people, even want to play.
The new Lotus trying to become more mainstream is an interesting development. I love their focus on weight reduction. Hopefully, if they are successful in becoming at least a little bit more mainstream, their focus on weight will influence other carmakers as well.
Yes, it would have to be the whole package, performance and savings. Hopefully it won’t be long until then. Lotus is looking very ambitious in that frontier, they only issue is that it’s not for everyone due to the pricing.
From what i have read in Topspeed.com about the Chevy Volt, its really billion dollars worth compare to the Toyota Prius.. so i have to agree with this one..
So, then Tim, is it just about “savings” or will it have to be the whole package before you’d go hybrid or EV?
Obviously, it’s hard to justify spending extra money for better fuel economy when that better fuel economy doesn’t recover its costs in fuel savings. But, let’s say costs are recovered. Is that enough, or do you also expect the same performance, etc?
Talk about Volt advertising campaign. I remember that car being advertised years ago. They really threw alot of resources in that direction, but like you said they can afford it. They can’t just let the Prius get away with starting the revolution, like you said they will not revolutionize American auto industry, but I think it is definitely a good start in that direction. We are just not ready, I would seriously not consider getting a hybrid car. The “savings” are not worth it compared to the satisfaction i get when i drive a nice performance and luxury oriented vehicle.
Waste of money…. I don’t think so because in the end will need it more badly than ever. I think now days oil is causing more problems from costs to availability and to environment also. So it is worthy to spend on R&D to build hybrid or electric cars while the things are in hand.
40 MPG? what do you mean, Noz? The Volt doesn’t get 40 MPG. It gets 40 miles of zero gas driving after a full charge. So, MPG depends upon how often you charge.
interesting comparison, alcatholic. and truthfully, i think for sure, apple wouldn’t have been so heavy-handed on the early marketing. i think they would have nailed their concept more before even announcing anything public. i think that’s where GM really screwed up. they made it pretty obvious the volt was much more about marketing than sales.
but that was old GM and a new sheriff is in town.
the volt and voltecs aren’t the solution, but they could have forged a nice path forward if GM is smart, open-minded, creative and serious – they must commit to doing whatever it takes to achieve competitive cost-effectiveness as quickly as possible.
if not, it might be bankruptcy court in a few years or so.
according to the press that follows such issues, the management at GM has changed drastically. i can’t say that I’ve yet seen proof. i think Volt marketing under new GM has been sloppy, minimally. and the ‘we paid back the government in full’ PR was disgraceful. still, some of that marketing was created by the marketing firms that worked for the old GM, so……..
no matter what, this is going to be an interesting story to follow.
WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY…and only 40 MPG to boot.
The lesson from Apple, is that if you just about kill yourself building the best products, supply chains, and operations
If you avoid becoming a big bureaucracy by keeping small teams in charge of DESIGNING your most important products and keeping a core group of executives directly involved in ensuring product PERFECTION and operational excellence in all aspects of the company
If you are willing to say NO to a hundred large opportunities so that you are free to jump on the once in a lifetime HUGE opportunities, and trash products two months from launch and START OVER because they weren’t perfect
If you are ruthless in controlling and patenting the key ENABLING technologies of any product you design, and have the discipline to walk away from a market if you don’t own or control the key technologies
and Apple does all of the above…
THEN you will own a brand worth 100’s of billions and be on your way to becoming the largest market capitalization company in the world, just like Microsoft before it, but not through a monopoly position but by inventing and innovating products.
What we saw in the Volt, and GM allowed us to see almost everything over the past two years, had a taste of the type of focus and perfectionism that inspires confidence, that will lead to success.
Now, would Apple have killed the Volt because of the lack of cost effectiveness of the drive train? Probably! But if GM takes the next step with Volt Gen2 and ruthlessly designs out the “bad” parts or even better “starts over” with something that can dominate its market (and yes I’m talking about a low cost, small battery, hybrid) that blows away the Prius, then there is hope. If Volt Gen2 is more of the same, I’ll move on and stop paying attention to them.
some great points in there larry.
i don’t think GM is betting that heavily on plug-in technology. like nissan they know there is marketing value, CAFE balancing capabilities and a number of other angles. today, you just have to be in the game. $1 billion really isn’t that big a deal.
still, i don’t think we expect nearly enough.
“They are more about taking the current leading edge science and implementing it – engineering it into cost-effective consumer-grade products.”
Is the focus really on cost-effective products derived from leading edge science?
Or, products engineered to be as profitable as possible?
Are engineers or profiteers leading the design process?
how much money can any company put into R&D before it gets embedded as a cost into their current product offerings and affects their competitiveness?
And along with this aspect, – how far should these companies try to “reach” to the future?
If they try to reach too far – they may well go broke trying.
Who does or should do R&D?
Car companies don’t really work on fundamental science.
They are more about taking the current leading edge science and implementing it – engineering it into cost-effective consumer-grade products.
I think something we expect too much of car companies in general and GM in particular.
If GM bets too heavily on plug-in technology – it may affect their own longevity as a viable car company.
Let the Telsa’s make the breakthroughs.