Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Earth Power

Chevrolet Volt In a Gasoline-Only Scenario 594

s122604 sends in a performance review of the Chevy Volt, paying particular attention to what happens after the initial plug-in capacity has been depleted. This reader adds, "The review indicates that the performance is adequate, and perhaps better than anticipated. If the Volt can deliver technically, especially with the possibility that it could retail for less than expected (WSJ subscription may be required), does GM have a potential hit on its hands?" "How well will General Motors' Chevrolet Volt drive once it gets past its 40 mile all-electric driving range and starts to rely on power generated by its gasoline engine? That's been a question for both critics and fans of the Volt, and with just 11 months to go before this car hits the market, I got the answer."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chevrolet Volt In a Gasoline-Only Scenario

Comments Filter:
  • by WaywardGeek ( 1480513 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @06:57AM (#30735104) Journal

    New technologies almost always target the high-end first, and later move down to the middle and low-end products. That's because initially there are no economies of scale from high-volume manufacturing. As the high-end ramps to reasonable volume, technolologies, like the batteries, will drop in price, allowing cost effective medium-end offerings. Take a look at the Tesla cars. Their first (the Roadster), is > $100K. Their second is expected to be around $57K. They plan a third in the $35K range, but first, their Model S has to succeed.

    Anyway, the government is trying to help you get into a Chevey Volt, to the tune of about $7,000. Your price wont be $40K, you'll pay $33K. Given the performance and specs, it's not unreasonable, though if they could drop a few K, it'd sell a lot better. They'll also have a Cadillac version, but they plan cheaper versions in the future.

  • by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @07:20AM (#30735218)

    The problem is that a Diesel engine is very heavy and expensive. Most hybrids are made for short trips so it would be a great waste of resources to carry around a heavy engine. Hybrid gasoline engines have a somewhat different cycle (Atkinson cycle) than normal gasoline engines (traditional Otto cycle) and thus are more economical. Add the weight savings compared to the heavier Diesel engines (especially with a particle filter) and you'll see why there are no Diesel hybrid cars - it just isn't worth it. Lorries, trains and ships are made for very long range and there a Diesel hybrid is much more practical, especially in the case of ships and trains where the Diesel engine is often only connected to the generator so it can be in its most efficient revolution speed the whole time and (because of the constant speed) have a very long life.

  • by Calinous ( 985536 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @07:35AM (#30735324)

    Diesel gives you better low end torque (but electric motors have much more of it anyway)
    Diesel engines are more expensive, and getting power from them forces you to turbo them (which increases costs too)
    On the other hand, gasoline engines are quieter (in both noise and rumbling), and can reach higher power without turbo (typical gasoline engines have higher power than similar displacement turbo diesel engines, and lower cost)
    Gasoline engines don't have low end torque, but that doesn't matter at all.

    Now, Mercedes is preparing some diesel-hybrid model (the class E with a 2.2 liter diesel).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @07:35AM (#30735326)

    even the longest range vehicles

    tesla model S : range 300 miles.

    And no, you can't quick charge

    how about swapping batteries at what now are petrol-stations ?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @07:40AM (#30735362)
    Use firefox with the RefControl plugin and add a rule for site "online.wsj.com" which sets the referer to the custom option "http://news.google.com/". Voila, you can read the article.
  • by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @07:50AM (#30735430) Journal

    The problem is that a Diesel engine is very heavy and expensive.

    Heavier and more expensive than a 375 LB battery pack [wikipedia.org] + electric motor + gasoline engine ?
    I think not.

    Modern turbo-diesels are outstanding pieces of work, but the US market is prejudiced against them because of their noisy, smelly, polluting predecessors.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @07:53AM (#30735440)

    Generally, the economics of scale (large scale fossil burning at a power plant) make even hydrocarbon electricity cheaper than gasoline. That's even taking into account transmission losses.

  • by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @07:54AM (#30735442)

    I am from Germany and don't really care about the US market. And anyway, the question was, why there aren't any Diesel hybrids so the battery pack and electric motor are there in both cases.

  • by amaiman ( 103647 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @08:06AM (#30735518) Homepage
    You can read the full WSJ article without subscribing by using the "Email" link at the bottom of the preview. The link you'll get in your mailbox will lead to the full article (this works for all WSJ "subscriber only" articles.)
  • More Like An Ad (Score:2, Informative)

    by RABarnes ( 1610305 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @08:27AM (#30735624)
    The CNN story is more like an ad than a fact-based article. A few more facts would be helpful - as presented the car is not that impressive.
  • by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @08:49AM (#30735750)

    I don't. Even European Diesel fuel doesn't burn that clean. I rather hope for HCCI engines (a fuel-gasoline mix compressed and preheated to the point of auto-ignition). Those engines combine the fuel economy of a Diesel engine with the gasoline engine like emissions.

  • Re:Duh (Score:5, Informative)

    by Cyberax ( 705495 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @08:52AM (#30735790)

    "What is its fuel-performance when batteries are depleted?"

    About 50 mpg. YMMV.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @08:55AM (#30735814)

    If you are referring to the Clinton years. The deficits were high until the Republican takeover of Congress. Your statement is not true. The President can only pass or veto legislation he cannot line-item veto it.

    Both parties have sucked $100B - $350B deficits under total (leg. and exec.)Republican Govt. Mind you the first time in over 70 years. Is nothing compared to the $1.42T this year ($3T if you look at the debt FY08 - 09). The President is limited w/o Congress the Dems. have both. Things have gone from bad to worse the more power they have gotten.

  • by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @09:17AM (#30735974) Homepage

    The top 1% pays less than 42% of the taxes. They can afford to pay for tax experst to find tax havens and find ways to get through the loopholes that save them from paying some of the taxes.

    It's why any talk of a flat tax is violently fought against. it would require the rich to actually pay their taxes, and that just wont do.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @09:20AM (#30735988)

    The Aptera [aptera.com] hybrid is better.
    How does 130mpg without plugging in sound?
    How does a $30,000 non-subsidized cost sound?
    The electric-only version is supposed to cost $27,000.

  • by lorenlal ( 164133 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @09:26AM (#30736062)

    If AC is giving you the curb weight, doesn't that mean the particle filter is already in there?

    For the Cooper S vs D:
    Gas: 28/37 - EPA [fueleconomy.gov]
    Diesel:42/63 - I can't find American numbers, but I did find this [timesonline.co.uk], and multiplied by .83 to convert from imperial MPG.

    So, you're right, 30% isn't true... It appears that it may be better in terms of efficiency. It has less horses, but the same torque. I don't know if the numbers are really that much better.

  • by kamochan ( 883582 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @09:38AM (#30736182)

    Safety and predictability. Make things boring and people, in the average, are happy :)

  • by WCguru42 ( 1268530 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @10:13AM (#30736506)

    Excuse me? Low end torque doesn't matter at all? What do you think gets a car moving from a dead stop? And accelerates it to cruising speed? It's called low end torque. Obviously you have never seen HP/torque curves for gasoline and diesel engines before.

    Apparently you've never seen the T-curve of an electric motor. Let me give you a hint, it's highest point is a band of revs beginning at zero. Torque, especially low end, is not something an electric motor lacks.

  • by Beezlebub33 ( 1220368 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @10:27AM (#30736662)

    If you are referring to the Clinton years. The deficits were high until the Republican takeover of Congress.

    This is simply wrong. Under Clinton the deficit got consistently smaller and smaller, starting in 1992. The Republican takeover occurred in 1994. See the CBO [cbo.gov] data. Or take a look at the following graph [cbo.gov].

    And I would agree with those that think the gigantic spike in 2009 is really, really scary.

  • by Calinous ( 985536 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @10:47AM (#30736952)

    I've had fuel in my car for more than 4 weeks in winter, without starting it. I had no problems with this.

  • by tronbradia ( 961235 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @10:50AM (#30737000)
    What's that sonny? Don't know anything about economics but love taking random facts out of context? Have a self-righteous tone? Sound vaguely like Ron Paul? Post it over on slashdot they love that there! Mod parent up!
  • by GooberToo ( 74388 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @10:54AM (#30737064)

    There is a reason diesel train engines have been replaced by diesel-electric hybrids or electric-only train engines - that diesel engines do not have enough low-end torque.

    Actually its because the transmissions were becoming massive, adding huge amounts of weight and requiring yet another series of parts to be maintained. The solution was to replace the transmission with a series of electric motors and use the diesel as a generator. Electric motors have excellent low end torque and in doing so, they've increased the longevity of the diesel engine while saving considerable weight and maintenance.

  • by pnewhook ( 788591 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @11:01AM (#30737198)

    The biggest budget deficits ever were under Bush and Regan. Republicans claim a platform of low spending and low taxes, then turn around and invoke the biggest spending and tax hikes to cover it. The Republican media spin army is LYING to you.

    Responsible government seem to only lie with the Democrats (unfortunately for the overall democracy). And I believe this is a recent phenomenon, probably since Regan.

  • Diesel hybrids (Score:3, Informative)

    by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @11:25AM (#30737534)

    The problem is that a Diesel engine is very heavy and expensive. Most hybrids are made for short trips so it would be a great waste of resources to carry around a heavy engine.

    Hybrids are made for the same purposes as every other cars and are driven no differently. I don't know why you think a hybrid is somehow driven any different than a car with just an internal combustion engine. Diesels are fine for even typical commuting distances. It doesn't have to be a 1000 mile journey to get benefits from a diesel.

    As for cost, that has FAR more to do with economies of scale than it does any additional material and engineering costs. In Europe the majority of vehicles are diesel and the manufacturers produce diesel engines that are economically competitive with gasoline engines. They are not competitive here in the US because for various reasons only a small percentage of cars use diesel so there are no economies of scale to take advantage of.

    Hybrid gasoline engines have a somewhat different cycle (Atkinson cycle) than normal gasoline engines (traditional Otto cycle) and thus are more economical.

    That depends on the specific hybrid. Some hybrids use Otto cycle engines because they are tuned more for power than just fuel economy. Not all hybrids are Toyota Prius's. It's an engineering choice. You can tune a hybrid for power or for fuel economy - and there are gains to be made even without maximizing either. There are plenty of potential applications where a diesel would be a better choice in a hybrid vehicle than an Atkinson cycle gas engine. Conversely, sometimes a gasoline engine is the right choice. It's not as simple as you are making it out to be.

    where the Diesel engine is often only connected to the generator so it can be in its most efficient revolution speed the whole time and (because of the constant speed) have a very long life.

    You do know that the Chevy Volt has the engine only connected to the generator right? Very similar to a locomotive or a ship. The engine only kicks on when the batteries are drained and then only to recharge the batteries. There is NO mechanical linkage between the gas engine and the electric motors that propel the Volt. There is no reason a diesel could not be used instead.

  • by afidel ( 530433 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @11:28AM (#30737574)
    Actually I live in NE Ohio, none of my vehicles has rusted out, but I do drive ~20k miles per year so I've never had a car more than 11 years old. I little bit of rust on the underside of a door does not make it unsafe or unusable for transportation.
  • by MobyDisk ( 75490 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @11:31AM (#30737622) Homepage

    FTFA:

    The biggest difference between a gas-power versus an electric-power car is that there's no transmission. Electric motors don't need gears or gear shifts.

    While the Volt may not have a transmission in the same sense that most gasoline vehicles do, it is not correct to say that "electric motors don't need gears or gear shifts." The author of the article seems to be confusing three terms: gear, gear shift, and transmission. They are 3 different things.

  • Diesel fuel (Score:3, Informative)

    by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @11:33AM (#30737658)

    That's because they ARE noisy, smelly and polluting..

    Go straight to your local VW or BMW dealer and ask to see their diesels. I have so I know you are quite wrong. Heck VW diesels keep winning the green vehicle awards over the hybrids.

    Besides, diesel is more inconvenient as I'd have to hunt to find a station that dispenses it. Not all do and they would be mainly on the big truck transport routes.

    Just over half of all filling stations in the US have diesel. It's not even remotely hard to find.

  • by maxume ( 22995 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @11:49AM (#30737894)

    Never mind that the flat tax rate would have to be less than 17% to benefit most people at lower incomes (people that usually don't have much wealth):

    http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/88xx/doc8885/EffectiveTaxRates.shtml#1011537 [cbo.gov]

    Note that the 17% comes from the average effective rate paid by the 4th quintile, so by definition, at least 60% of households pay less than 17% taxes (and, on average, 80% of households pay much less than that).

    There is a reason Steve Forbes loves the fair tax, and it isn't because he thinks he needs to contribute more.

  • by Loki_1929 ( 550940 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @11:58AM (#30738046) Journal

    Not sure whether it's your math or their's, but Popular Mechanics' numbers have a huge price difference driving even a Prius vs a Volt or Tesla Roadster. When you're outside the range of the Volt's battery, things look similar to driving a Prius. Inside the 30-mile range, the Volt is less than half the cost of the Prius.

    On the other hand, the Tesla Roadster (the high end sporty car from Tesla) will do a 200 mile trip for less than half the cost of a Prius OR a Volt. Just $4.40 to go 200 miles in a ridiculously fast car. The Model S should have even better numbers.

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4215681.html [popularmechanics.com]

  • by SenseiLeNoir ( 699164 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @12:04PM (#30738148)

    Wrong, that is not the reason why pure diesels are being replaced by Diesel Electrics, or pure electrics.

    A plain diesel engine needs a transmission gearbox, clutch, and various other drive train features to deliver the power of the diesel engine to the wheels.

    With locomotives being a lot more complex than cars already there are more losses due to the conventional drivetrain. Here are some issues:

    - Diesels have a narrow band of high torque/power, hence a loco would need multiple gear ratios to keep in band, requiring complex transmissions.

    - greater number of driving wheels, require more complex drive shafts, couplers, and differentials to ensure all wheels get equal power, and consistent speeds. In the case of a DMU (diesel multiple unit) its harder to synchronize the engines on each unit to run at the same speed/rpm, and each engine on each unit would need a transmission/torqueconverter/drive train, etc.

    - Bogies, Large locomotives have bogies (trucks in American usage) instead of fixed wheels. Bogies revolve freely on their axis, making the drivetrain even more complex.

    - complex controls to cater for all this.

    Diesel Electric Locos/DMUs avoid these problems.

    - The engine is replaced by a prime mover built to run at a certain optimum bands, which are simpler/powerful than ones that have to work across different bands around different.

    - The prime mover generates electricity, which can be piped around via much more flexible wires (even across units)

    - Electric drive direct motors mounted within each bogie.

    - Electric motors can provide very high torque at zero mph, needing no transmittions, or complex drivetrains.

    - Trains can "cruise" efficiently, once at a speed, little power is needed to maintain that speed, and the prime mover can be appropriately throttled down, so no need to run at high RPMs for long periods at high speed (notice how a DE locos engine throttles down as it reaches speed, but runs "hard" at the start and when accelerating).

    - Electric motors can provider reostatic braking, which is more efficient, and cost effective than friction brakes (and can possibly be used to GENERATE power when braking, returning power to the line when braking on pure electric trains)

    - Easy to do DMUs, by putting a sequence of smaller diesel generators across the units, than one large heavy loco at front.

    - Simpler controls (just a notched throttle and reverser)

    - Trains can run off plain electricity where available.

    - High Speed Operation (The UK have diesels operating at 125mph in regular use, some DMUs and some loco based)

  • Green diesel (Score:4, Informative)

    by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @01:21PM (#30739522)

    No. 2009 was the FIRST year a VW diesel won

    Are you sure about that? [wired.com] Because I'm pretty sure you are wrong.

    So there is ONE 2009 model out there with descent emissions.

    If you bothered to actually look you'd find the diesels from Mercedes and BMW as well as Audi and VW all are quite clean these days. Seriously. Go look before you spout of unresearched nonsense.

    What does that have to say about all the other soot and sulfur belching monstrosities?

    Nothing whatsoever. There are lots of smog producing gasoline engines too. Has nothing to do with the ability to produce clean diesels. The technology exists and is in production.

  • by ubergeek65536 ( 862868 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @01:56PM (#30740098)

    Let me type even slower.. They are promoting the uptake of environmentally friendly transportation (a good thing).
    I am happy that the government is using some of our money to help the planet instead of just having fun blowing shit up in Iraq.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @03:17PM (#30741340)

    When looking at that graph keep in mind that 2009 is the first year that the presidential budget includes the funding of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We spent the money in 2001-2008 but it wasn't in the president's budget - instead the money came from supplemental spending bills.

  • by haruchai ( 17472 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @03:41PM (#30741704)

    As someone who lived in Quebec from the mid-70s to the mid-90s, I can tell you that the only was to prevent
    a car from rusting out in regular winter driving would be to do weekly salt / rust removal or multiple oil sprays on the entire undercarriage.
    A friend of mine who moved to Vancouver found that, in terms of body rust, 10 year old cars in BC were in better shape
    than 5 year old ones in QC.

  • by mattack2 ( 1165421 ) on Tuesday January 12, 2010 @04:23PM (#30742218)

    The real reason has nothing to do with engineering.

    A few years ago there was a high-level automotive industry meeting which involved
    executives from Europe, the US, and Japan.

    At that meeting it was agreed that diesel-electric hybrids would not be embraced by the
    car makers.

    [citation needed]

    Otherwise, it's just conspiracy theories from an AC.

With your bare hands?!?

Working...