# Chevrolet Volt **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 19, 2010, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643 "2010-10-19T11:12:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/461 "2010-11-26T14:43:35Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > It will ALWAYS be more expensive then a regular hybrid. ALWAYS. However, when prices come down with batteries it won’t be a tax-payer funded waste of space. Since they really didn’t invent anything new with this car it was a pointless exercise. I’d like to return to these points. Will Volt-platform cars always cost more than a regular hybrid? Perhaps so, but again, you get more ev for your buck than with a regular hybrid. Everyone doesn’t calculate the value of that exclusively in terms of recouping the premium in gas savings, FWIW. There is more to that equation, as I have already pointed out. And they didn’t invent anything new, and therefore it is a pointless exercise? C’mon. The wheel was invented in prehistory, so you could make this argument for just about everything built on ‘the wheel’ platform ever since. $400,000 sports cars don’t really invent anything either. They satisfy a specialized bit of demand, and that’s the point. Same with the Volt, only the Volt actually does have future hope of lowered costs. And, nothing new? Um, there is now a manufacturing process whereby thousands and thousands of (almost), (range-extended) evs will roll off American production lines and into the hands of consumers. Presumably Ford and Chrysler will be compelled to produce something similar to compete- there is something new in this. And again, you repeatedly rail against the costs of the batteries and blame them exclusively for the high cost of this car. _Please_ do the math. $8000 for the battery. $40,000+ plus for the car. You see, $32,000+ of the sticker price is \*not \*due to the batteries. It’s that simple. I am with you all the way that the Volt is not priced in a way that it pays for itself in fuel savings or is practical for your average consumer. Also, I don’t much like GM in the first place. But I am willing to at least give GM the benefit of the doubt for a few generations with the vehicle, as all of economic history suggests prices will fall with volume/refinement. I still don’t understand your stance. Yah, battery costs would fall without the Volt, but nothing will drive the market like, you know, producing evs. What’s wrong with that view? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/462 "2010-11-26T16:39:24Z")
Batteries will get cheaper as time goes by. There is talk of solar panels on the roof of the Volt. I am not sure if that would assist the battery or extend the range. This is just the opening salvo in a war against gas powered dirty cars. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/463 "2010-11-26T18:04:45Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Batteries will get cheaper as time goes by. There is talk of solar panels on the roof of the Volt. I am not sure if that would assist the battery or extend the range. This is just the opening salvo in a war against gas powered dirty cars. So will a million other technologies. But they aren’t cheap NOW which makes the car unaffordable. GM is obligated to tax payers to pay back the loan money. Politicians have a fiduciary responsibility to spend tax money efficiently. The end result is that the Federal government is backing a car that is financially not viable at this time. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/464 "2010-11-26T18:26:39Z")
Actually GM has paid back the loan money. The remainder of what we invested in GM is in stock, a large portion of which we sold off on the IPO, which went much better than had been expected. Our likely cost of saving GM and the jobs and the supply chain ended up costing us very little, if anything. The role of the Federal government in terms of emerging technologies is never to support that which does not need the support to become viable as it already is, but to help emerging technologies, uh, emerge. You do understand that as that is the basis of your belief that the Federal government should be supporting biodiesel research (especially algal) even though it is not “cheap NOW.” ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/465 "2010-11-26T19:13:22Z")
> [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > I’d like to return to these points. Will Volt-platform cars always cost more than a regular hybrid? Perhaps so, but again, you get more ev for your buck than with a regular hybrid. Everyone doesn’t calculate the value of that exclusively in terms of recouping the premium in gas savings, FWIW. There is more to that equation, as I have already pointed out. You’re just repeating exactly what I said. When the price of the batteries comes down the return on investment will be realized for the consumer. > [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > And they didn’t invent anything new, and therefore it is a pointless exercise? C’mon. The wheel was invented in prehistory, so you could make this argument for just about everything built on ‘the wheel’ platform ever since. $400,000 sports cars don’t really invent anything either. They satisfy a specialized bit of demand, and that’s the point. Same with the Volt, only the Volt actually does have future hope of lowered costs. I’m assuming you meant $40,000 sports car. Ford built a $21,000 sports car that has 305 hp, gets 30 mpg on the highway and does 0 to 60 in 5.1 seconds with a quarter mile time of 13.7 at 102.0 mph. The damn thing is a practically a hybrid when compared to the Malibu. > [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > And, nothing new? Um, there is now a manufacturing process whereby thousands and thousands of (almost), (range-extended) evs will roll off American production lines and into the hands of consumers. Presumably Ford and Chrysler will be compelled to produce something similar to compete- there is something new in this. Ford is way ahead of GM in marketing hybrids that pay for themselves. When EV hybrids are viable you will see more of them since it’s just a reconfiguration of the cars they are making now. It would be no different than the process of introducing any other new model. There is no wheel to reinvent with the Volt. Ford is already running atkinson cycled ICE hybrid electric vehicles. All they have to change is the size of the electric motor and add more batteries. GM is still fishing for a decent ICE motor and their Malibu hybrid was a discontinued joke (26/34 mileage versus 22/33). > [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > And again, you repeatedly rail against the costs of the batteries and blame them exclusively for the high cost of this car. _Please_ do the math. $8000 for the battery. $40,000+ plus for the car. You see, $32,000+ of the sticker price is \*not \*due to the batteries. It’s that simple. Um what? Subtract the cost of the batteries and you have the cost of Ford’s new Lincoln hybrid. Ford made a luxury hybrid people can afford. Does GM even have a small hybrid car for sale? > [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > I am with you all the way that the Volt is not priced in a way that it pays for itself in fuel savings or is practical for your average consumer. Also, I don’t much like GM in the first place. But I am willing to at least give GM the benefit of the doubt for a few generations with the vehicle, as all of economic history suggests prices will fall with volume/refinement. I still don’t understand your stance. Yah, battery costs would fall without the Volt, but nothing will drive the market like, you know, producing evs. What’s wrong with that view? The Volt is a ticking time bomb for GM. They failed miserably with the Malibu hybrid and now they’re introducing an everything-new car as their corporate flagship. It is not financially viable for the consumer and if it turns into another (insert your favorite GM failure here) it will not just set GM’s ev program behind but it will poison the well for other companies. Their Olds diesel legacy made the word “diesel” synonymous with crap in this country. The car sucked from day one before the mechanical failures. Maybe you’re not old enough to remember the “quad 4” engine. They were so proud of it that they [advertised it separately](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a14tWGJj2Q) as the greatest thing since sliced bread. The engine was designed for up to 200 hp in naturally aspirated form. It was self destructing at much lower hp ratings. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/466 "2010-11-26T19:31:11Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Actually GM has paid back the loan money. The remainder of what we invested in GM is in stock, a large portion of which we sold off on the IPO, which went much better than had been expected. Our likely cost of saving GM and the jobs and the supply chain ended up costing us very little, if anything. GM hasn’t paid us a dime. The repayment was money taken from the escrow-ed TARP money. They repaid us with our own money. Of the 50 billion pumped into GM we’ve gotten almost 12 billion back on the stock sale. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/467 "2010-11-26T22:47:07Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You’re just repeating exactly what I said. When the price of the batteries comes down the return on investment will be realized for the consumer. I think you misunderstood me. You calculate the return on investment solely in terms of fuel savings. I’ve pointed out that owning a plug-in vehicle in an area with a smart grid = $$, a factor I am not sure you acknowledge. For other people there is the gee-whiz! factor, or snob appeal or what-have-you for people for whom ev ownership is more important than saving money. Our disagreement comes down to the definition of ‘value’. > [@](#): > > I’m assuming you meant $40,000 sports car. Ford built a $21,000 sports car that has 305 hp, gets 30 mpg on the highway and does 0 to 60 in 5.1 seconds with a quarter mile time of 13.7 at 102.0 mph. The damn thing is a practically a hybrid when compared to the Malibu. No, I meant $400,000. The latest Car & Driver (which, this is a funny story, right after I read your post about the fact that the Volts ICE actually does provide momentum, it was time for me to take my late model Corolla to the shop for an engine flush, tranny fluid replacement and oil change where grokked 'em. FWIW I personally am maintaining my current car and not buying a new one at all) has an interesting article about them. You’re kind of making my point here by demonstrating that, for you, a low price on a sports car is important. But for people whose internal dialogue is, “Honey, we’ve got $60,000 in the budget for a car. What should we get? _Ohh Dahhling, let’s do get the Volt_. _Gasoline is for proles!_”, different aspects of a car’s design may be weighted by concerns other than absolute purchase price. > [@](#): > > Ford is way ahead of GM in marketing hybrids that pay for themselves. When EV hybrids are viable you will see more of them since it’s just a reconfiguration of the cars they are making now. It would be no different than the process of introducing any other new model. There is no wheel to reinvent with the Volt. Ford is already running atkinson cycled ICE hybrid electric vehicles. All they have to change is the size of the electric motor and add more batteries. GM is still fishing for a decent ICE motor and their Malibu hybrid was a discontinued joke (26/34 mileage versus 22/33). I suppose you’re right about all of this. I don’t think it is invalid to prefer to approach this problem from the hybrid direction. But if you want to get that $8000 from the government, you need to produce a vehicle with a minimum 16kwh battery today. > [@](#): > > Um what? Subtract the cost of the batteries and you have the cost of Ford’s new Lincoln hybrid. Ford made a luxury hybrid people can afford. Does GM even have a small hybrid car for sale? I think you misunderstand me again. Why does the rest of the Volt cost $32k??? Don’t you think there is any chance at all to trim some fat from that part of the car? Consider a brand new Focus can be had for $13,000 or less. If Ford decided to drop an $8000 battery into a $13000 Focus, what would it cost? > [@](#): > > The Volt is a ticking time bomb for GM. They failed miserably with the Malibu hybrid and now they’re introducing an everything-new car as their corporate flagship. It is not financially viable for the consumer and if it turns into another (insert your favorite GM failure here) it will not just set GM’s ev program behind but it will poison the well for other companies. Their Olds diesel legacy made the word “diesel” synonymous with crap in this country. The car sucked from day one before the mechanical failures. Maybe you’re not old enough to remember the “quad 4” engine. They were so proud of it that they [advertised it separately](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a14tWGJj2Q) as the greatest thing since sliced bread. The engine was designed for up to 200 hp in naturally aspirated form. It was self destructing at much lower hp ratings. It remains to be seen if it helps or hurts GM. One of the things that bugs me about the Volt is that it spreads misinformation about evs the same way the quad 4 spread misinformation about diesels. Evs don’t have to burn any gas and don’t have to cost double a ‘regular’ car. They don’t have to be made of all-recycled parts, feature computer screens depicting leaves and shit that would irritate a Texan, etc. And diesel engines don’t have to suck. Sometimes GM seems to intend to obstruct efficiency. Consider that the commercial doesn’t specify _for whom_ their ‘vision’ is ‘paying off’. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2010, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/468 "2010-11-27T00:26:53Z")
> [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > One of the things that bugs me about the Volt is that it spreads misinformation about evs the same way the quad 4 spread misinformation about diesels. Evs don’t have to burn any gas and don’t have to cost double a ‘regular’ car. They don’t have to be made of all-recycled parts, feature computer screens depicting leaves and shit that would irritate a Texan, etc. And diesel engines don’t have to suck. Sometimes GM seems to intend to obstruct efficiency. Consider that the commercial doesn’t specify _for whom_ their ‘vision’ is ‘paying off’. Of this we are in total agreement. The 'flying car" we were all promised will be a $15,000 EV and we will see it. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2010, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/469 "2010-11-27T05:00:59Z")
FYI, there is a theoretical [Atkinson cycle rotary engine](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle#Rotary_Atkinson_cycle_engine). I keep looking for this to show up on someone’s research radar. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2010, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/470 "2010-11-27T13:30:55Z")
Use LNG to power a turbine. LNG lacks the omph to power a car engine itself. Turbines work well at one speed, but do not like being sped up or down. The LNG turbine drives a generator, the generator tops up the battery. An electric engine drives the car. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/471 "2010-11-28T03:13:56Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > Use LNG to power a turbine. LNG lacks the omph to power a car engine itself. Turbines work well at one speed, but do not like being sped up or down. The LNG turbine drives a generator, the generator tops up the battery. An electric engine drives the car. I suspect such an engine would cost more than a diesel although they are making smaller jet engines with case turbine sections. Not sure how the care and feeding of one of these will fit into the drive-it-until-it-drops mentality of car owners. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/472 "2010-11-28T05:09:25Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Some rag called Motor Trend [seems to think highly of the Volt](http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/car/1101_2011_motor_trend_car_of_the_year_chevrolet_volt/index.html). > [@Magiver](#): > > Crystal ball car of the year. They haven’t sold a single one and it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread. Outstanding. I think they should also give it the Nobel Peace Prize. Rush Limbaugh dissed the Motor Trend award on his show. Their response, titled [A Rush to Judgment](http://blogs.motortrend.com/rush-judgment-5957.html) is a classic. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/473 "2010-11-28T05:53:17Z")
> [@jasg](#): > > Rush Limbaugh dissed the Motor Trend award on his show. Their response, titled [A Rush to Judgment](http://blogs.motortrend.com/rush-judgment-5957.html) is a classic. Ah yes, Motor Trend’s vaunted car of the year award. A quick review of past winners: 1971 - Chevy Vega 1974 - Ford Mustang II 1978 - Dodge Omni 1980 - Chevy Citation 1986 - Ford Taurus I don’t know what Limbaugh said about the car but I’ve pointed out that it is not price competitive with other cars and will not be sold in any numbers that would create a profit for a company that the tax payer is still on the hook for. This is before a single car has been sold. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/474 "2010-11-28T19:02:04Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Ah yes, Motor Trend’s vaunted car of the year award. A quick review of past winners: > > 1971 - Chevy Vega > 1974 - Ford Mustang II > 1978 - Dodge Omni > 1980 - Chevy Citation > 1986 - Ford Taurus > > I don’t know what Limbaugh said about the car but I’ve pointed out that it is not price competitive with other cars and will not be sold in any numbers that would create a profit for a company that the tax payer is still on the hook for. This is before a single car has been sold. Hmm, you selected 5 out of the last 39 years and one, the Taurus, which has sold 7,519,919 making it the fifth best selling North American nameplate in Ford’s history. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/475 "2010-11-28T20:06:25Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > Hmm, you selected 5 out of the last 39 years and one, the Taurus, which has sold 7,519,919 making it the fifth best selling North American nameplate in Ford’s history. The 86 Taurus was a POS. And yes, I picked 5 cars that stood out as the worst cars ever made which made the “Car of the Year” award list. As a magazine that picks the winner of a contest before it is run they have managed a 13% success rate for picking the loser and handing them a trophy in advance. They then make a pile of advertising dollars for hyping the car during it’s yearlong reign. The magazine can’t lose. If people desire to own this car out of a sense of tree hugging goodly goodness then I encourage them to use their own money and not someone else’s to make the purchase. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/476 "2010-11-28T21:45:35Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The 86 Taurus was a POS. And yes, I picked 5 cars that stood out as the worst cars ever made which made the “Car of the Year” award list. As a magazine that picks the winner of a contest before it is run they have managed a 13% success rate for picking the loser and handing them a trophy in advance. They then make a pile of advertising dollars for hyping the car during it’s yearlong reign. The magazine can’t lose. > > If people desire to own this car out of a sense of tree hugging goodly goodness then I encourage them to use their own money and not someone else’s to make the purchase. I calculated that you owe $0.0023 for the data you just sent over a medium created with my money. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/477 "2010-11-28T21:54:35Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The 86 Taurus was a POS. Just did a little Googling. The 1986 Taurus seems to be regarded as one of the most influential cars of the 80’s. Between 92 and 96 the Taurus was the best selling cars in the US. Seems like a pretty good pick to me, but then again I don’t have to justify yet another anti govt screed by that fat piece of shit Limbaugh. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/478 "2010-11-28T22:24:03Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > Just did a little Googling. The 1986 Taurus seems to be regarded as one of the most influential cars of the 80’s. Between 92 and 96 the Taurus was the best selling cars in the US. Seems like a pretty good pick to me, but then again I don’t have to justify yet another anti govt screed by that fat piece of shit Limbaugh. Take your beef with Limbaugh up with him. The 1986 Taurus was a POS. It was plagued by mechanical problems. It took many years for Ford to work the bugs out of it. Motor Trend picks cars before they’ve been vetted. In case you’re not aware of it, it’s 2010 and they’ve picked the 2011 winner. They might as well pick the 2012 winner while they’re at it. It doesn’t matter to them who they pick. They make money off the announcement with future advertisement. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/479 "2010-11-28T23:31:31Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Take your beef with Limbaugh up with him. The 1986 Taurus was a POS. It was plagued by mechanical problems. It took many years for Ford to work the bugs out of it. > > Motor Trend picks cars before they’ve been vetted. In case you’re not aware of it, it’s 2010 and they’ve picked the 2011 winner. They might as well pick the 2012 winner while they’re at it. It doesn’t matter to them who they pick. They make money off the announcement with future advertisement. Motor Trend picks the Car of the Year based on [published criteria](http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/car/1101_2011_motor_trend_car_of_the_year_contenders_and_finalists/judges_and_criteria.html), evaluated and voted on by those knowledgable in the automotive field - who get to actually drive and evaluate the contestants. I won’t deny the commercial tie-ins, but their selection process is a lot better (and more fact based) than a opinionated radio host or the anonymous opinions in this board. I saw no ‘Commercial success criterion’ in their list. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/480 "2010-11-28T23:39:01Z")
Indeed the idea behind Car of the Year (an honorific bestowed on the Volt not only by Motor Trend, but also by [Automotive Magazine\*](http://www.automobilemag.com/features/awards/1101_2011_automobile_of_the_year_chevrolet_volt/index.html)) is not to look backwards at which car has done well over the past year, but to pick the _new_ car that their experts (for whatever they are worth) believe _will_ either be a notably successful, or at least influential, vehicle in the future. It is not a retrospective award made for the benefit of historians. FWIW, while I was not crazy with the Taurus my wife had, that pick met its mark; the Taurus went on to sell amazingly well and was very influential on the cars that followed it. As [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taurus) puts it: > [@](#): > > Originally introduced in the 1986 model year, it has remained in near-continuous production for more than two decades, making it the fourth oldest nameplate that is currently sold in the North American Ford lineup. … was a milestone design for Ford and the entire American automotive industry, as well as a very influential vehicle that brought many new features and innovations to the marketplace.[2] Since its launch in 1986, Ford has built 7,519,919 Tauruses through the 2007 model year,[3] making it the fifth best selling North American nameplate in Ford’s history; only the F-150,[4] Escort,[5] Model T,[6] and Mustang[6] have sold more units. Between 1992 and 1996, the Taurus was the best-selling car in the United States,[7] eventually losing the title to the Toyota Camry in 1997.[8] If the Volt flops that badly GM will be a very happy company. Yes, yes, we know … you think it costs too much “NOW” and somehow think that Federal support for emerging technologies should only go to technology that is not still emerging. Unless its algal based biodiesel that is. You’ve only repeated that same basic point almost every third post in this thread for multiple pages. And despite the opinion of various automotive experts that the technology in the Volt is _not_ just a Prius style parallel hybrid with bigger batteries, (because in [one mode](http://www.automobilemag.com/features/awards/1101_2011_automobile_of_the_year_chevrolet_volt/operating_modes.html) it functions partly in a parallel hybrid manner\*\*), you will keep repeating that it is “nothing new.” Saying the same points over a hundred times does not make them any more or less cogent. Will Americans warm to the PHEV/EREVs, or to BEVs? Will they even understand the differences between them? [Well](http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2010/11/survey-interest-in-electric-cars-is-growing-but-practical-concerns-remain.html), 18% of car owners will at least consider a plug-in hybrid or a BEV as their next vehicle, at a point where most are just hearing about them for the first time. Of course, just about the same would consider a car that runs on natural gas, and both of those segments attract more consideration than do diesels. The devil will be in the details when consideration meets actual purchase decisions. The next five years could be interesting times as we see how this plays out. \* > [@](#): > > Those who argue it shouldn’t exist have yet to drive it. Despite the Volt’s imperfections, it takes only a single mile behind the wheel to realize that you are reveling in the experience. Forty, eighty, and 200 miles later, you’ll still be marveling at the seamless technology. It is not fast nor is it fun in the typical sense, yet it still has all the brainwashing abilities of a Porsche Cayman. The Volt is unique, but more convincingly, it instills an overwhelming sense that you’re driving something significant. > > Complex ideas can’t be revolutionary until they’re accessible enough for mass consumption. There are three separate thermal loops to heat and cool the powertrain components. GM applied for more than 200 patents during the Volt’s development. And the advanced battery pack is believed to cost somewhere around $10,000. Yet the Volt packages the game-changing technology in a manner that’s nothing short of revolutionary. … > > … This is the most sophisticated, most important vehicle on the road today. The Volt model could very well be the standard of the future: a smartly sized battery backed by a frugal range extender, whether that’s a diesel, a turbine, or a gas engine. In fact, several automakers already have plans to develop similar plug-ins with usable electric driving range and supplemental fossil-fuel power. For being an automotive pioneer, the Chevrolet Volt is the 2011 Automobile of the Year … \*\* > [@](#): > > 1. Battery depleted, high-speed cruising: The planetary ring gear is again released, shifting the drive motor to a higher gear ratio. The engine continues providing the power to spin the generator, which in turn supplies the drive motor with electric current. In addition, the engine supplies torque to the planetary ring gear through the smaller electric generator; hence, some of the gas/engine power goes to the wheels. Operating in this regime, the Volt is both a series hybrid and a parallel hybrid. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643.md?page=25)