The only difference between the Prius and the Volt is the size of the primary electric motor. They both rely on a secondary electric motor and a planetary gear system and an ICE generator to recharge the batteries. The Prius can and does run on batteries only but does not have the HP that the volt has for highway speeds.
Does the Prius recharge it’s batteries with the ICE? I am under the impression that it does not.
Still, one vehicle, the Volt, plugs in. The Prius doesn’t -though that’ll change in the coming years. But the Prius will still be an ICE vehicle getting a boost from an electric motor. So despite the design similarities, there is a major difference in function. Your argument seems to be, “if you change what the two cars are, eventually they overlap.” I can live with that, but it doesn’t apply to what you’ll find in showrooms in 2011. Which brings me to one of your other comments:
Sure there is. Once oil supply starts to drop, Somebody is going to have to do without, as more oil simply won’t be available at any price. Developing cars that run without gasoline now, before the drop occurs, is the most sensible possible reaction. Yes, even if the first generation is too expensive and doesn’t instantly achieve millions of units of production per year.
I think our disagreement on this last bit is that I accept the Volt as not being a mass-market vehicle. I think that will come later, but for now it is extremely important that GM’s ev not be another POS. You want the mass model to come first and condemn it for not doing so.
All the same, sorry if I got too testy with you.
:dubious: And how does the battery in your car get recharged? You’ve got to start reading up on the 2 cars to appreciate how they work. It’s really interesting to see how much they’re the same and what is different.
No that’s not correct. If Toyota upgrades the primary electric motor at the same time they add more batteries it will be identical to the Volt. It will use the same combination of 2 electric motors and planetary gear set. That’s what you don’t seem to understand. They are operating in the same configuration now. The Prius can and does operate on batteries only and it does it the same way the Volt does. The difference is that even if you add more batteries to the Prius it doesn’t have the electric hp to accelerate comfortably to speeds of 70 mph. You could easily cruise at 70 mph but the overall electric hp is not there. People who convert them are not going to get the full range of performance. There is no technological leap for Toyota to make in this regard. Swap in a bigger electric motor and add batteries. I suspect the inverter will have to increase in size as well. Toyota is already on their 3rd generation of Prius’s.
Given GM’s recent failure with the Malibu hybrid I’m not happy at all that they have jumped feet first into a tax-funded money-losing venture that relies on the very technology they failed to make work. They reinvented the Prius without demonstrating a working model to begin with.
Nah, this has been a civil debate. I’ve been following alternative energy and engine technology for 30 years. There were engines I was sure would break through the haze of corporate stagnation but alas, they died on the table for lack of sponsorship.
Ok, look. Forget that comment. An alternator and regenerative braking? All well and good. But for the zillionth time, it does not plug in, therefore as a future car it gets an F.
When they do that, please pm me as I’ll want to be the first to know. But they don’t do that. The Volt does. That puts GM in the (very rare for the last couple decades) position of being in the lead. They deliver what Toyota cannot or will not deliver at this time.
I think I do understand. What’s different is that one plugs in. One does not. I don’t know how else I can rephrase this.
No it doesn’t. The Volt gets its power from the grid. The Prius gets all its power from gasoline. This could change in future models, but in 2011 the Prius is a loser compared to the Volt (because it doesn’t plug in), even admitting that the Volt isn’t entirely satisfactory either.
Correct. That is part of the reason the Prius falls short and gets an F. Maybe they’ll catch up in the future, but we’ll have to wait and see.
3 generations and it doesn’t plug in. This repetition is starting to make me feel like an internet ranter.
I’ll have to brush up on the Malibu hybrid- if you have a good link I’d appreciate it, as a lot of the links I find on these topics tend to be dodgy and talk about air quality or various changings-of-the-subject. But again: The Volt Plugs In. That is not a re-invention of the Prius, because the Prius does not go there, despite other design similarities.
You can drive the Volt every day if you worked relatively close to work and use almost zero gas. That is a huge difference. The Prius gets pretty good mileage but it does not approach zero gas use. The Volt is a new and exciting car according to all kinds of experts , car magazines and car afficianados. On the other side Magiver.
Just remember, if you upgrade the Prius’s electric motor and batteries, add a plug, and get rid of the ICE, you have an EV. Therefore the Leaf and the Prius are technically the same car. 
Honestly it is a silly aside. IMHO.
How to monetize the carbon is another thing, and gets mixed in with how to provide funds for infrastructure in an era of better gas milage and cars that pay no gas tax at all. The gas tax is currently insufficient to pay for infrastructure upkeep and will become less adequate as time goes on without a change to the system.
I believe in a milage tax to fund infrastructure as EVs use that infrastructure too. I believe that carbon should be paid for at its consumption, in the price of gasoline and in the cost of the electricity. If the source is nuclear or all renewable the cost does include extra for the carbon; if the source is dirty coal it does. These may need to be figured out on a regional basis. The milage tax is a user fee; the carbon tax is paying for the true cost of the product you are using.
It doesn’t plug in because it’s not economical to do so.
It’s only silly if you don’t grasp the fact that Toyota has had the same hybrid engine/drive-train on the road for over a decade. Throwing extra batteries into the mix does not represent a technical challenge to them and they will assuredly add them when it makes sense. GM has yet to put a serious hybrid on the road.
If you were serious about reducing co2 then you would admit the Volt is a low production flagship car that will have no effect and therefore undeserving of taxpayer underwriting.
Now now. You asked a question:
and I answered. There should be a milage tax to fund infrastructure that EVs share, and a carbon tax on the coal. Will any one listen to me? I don’t think so.
As for the place of subsidizing vehicles that move some cars off of gas and into having grid derived power, no I do not think that that strategy will have no long term effect, and I do think it is worthy of governmental support similar to the support that other emerging energy technologies receive.
I know that you are unimpressed by Motor Trend but how about Ward’s Ten Best Engines list?
FWIW.
I forgot you use 120 Volts in the USA. Most of Europe uses 220-240 Volts. I guess that means we get the faster recharge time. Why not put two chargers on the car batteries, that could be plugged in two outlets? Would that double the recharge time?
Actually, all modern USA houses get 240/120 delivered to the home. Outlets intended for large appliances (range, dryer) have 240v sockets; most rooms have 120v outlets only. It wouldn’t be a major project to install a 240 in the garage if necessary.
Note: The 4th link is war images and is likely not safe for work.
Yes, it doubles the charging time to use a 220 circuit and that means a 4 hr charge. As I’ve pointed out earlier, battery technology will catch up to the point where charge time will be reduced significantly as will the price.
When that happens then hybrid cars will naturally switch over to extended range EV’s.
100 Eagles electrocuted a year plus all the cute little squirrels. Won’t somebody thing of the cute little squirrels? If they’re not getting electrocuted they’ll be getting squashed by electric cars that don’t make any noise. It’s going to be a bloodbath.
Seriously, if you want to reduce gas consumption then a car people can afford would make more sense.
Magiver I know it is beating my head up against the wall, but the issue of cost is less technologic improvements than it is economies of scale.
Seriously, any path to decreased energy dependence and decreased CO2 production will require either monetizing the cost of the CO2 and the benefit of the energy independence and putting those dollars into the cost equation at the consumer level by means like, but not limited to, carbon taxes, or subsidizing technologies that have the potential to become cost effective means to get there with economies of scale and further incentive to develop. I’d prefer the former, whether it be carbon tax, cap and trade, or other alternatives. But that is not going to happen in this country in the near term anyway. So we are left with the remaining choice. We will continue to subsidize new nuclear, renewables, and emerging technologies like EVs. And maybe we can finally totally stop subsidizing oil.
There is no economies of scales with the batteries. We live in a world that is swimming in them. They’re expensive.
.
Wrong. Laptop batteries are actually fairly cheap, precisely because of economies of scale. Enough so that it becomes tempting to use them for EVs even though they are more of an overheating risk and have to be packaged in a more expensive manner. Such has been Tesla’s approach, and in fact today there was an article on Bloomberg specifically discussing how Toyota and others may try that approach as well.
I think the approach is a poor one as the EV specific format has a far superior safety profile and is cheaper to package. But there is no reason that the larger format cannot get to that price level once the same economies of scale are achieved in their production.
You cannot be serious.
I can totally dig it. I don’t think I have hidden the fact that GM is not my favorite corporation. I agree that the Volt costs too much. But you can’t get a car like this from the other guys in 2011, so GM has the opportunity to pull this.
The article is a little dated, but look at what Ford is doing:
There may be some minor economies of scale for a line of batteries but the current technology is expensive. You can see it in the difference between the hybrid Lincoln and the Volt. This is not up for debate. Companies like Toyota and Ford are already producing viable hybrids and will add more batteries when they make sense.
GM was bailed out of bankruptcy at public expense and in return is deliberately fronting a low production money-losing car for nothing but image. They didn’t take any of their hybrid vehicles seriously and their current efforts are $50,000 and up tanks that do little to improve fuel economy.