PDA

View Full Version : Volt Fraud At Government Motors



Gingersnap
10-21-2010, 11:16 AM
Volt Fraud At Government Motors

Posted 10/19/2010 06:55 PM ET

Green Technology: Government Motors' all-electric car isn't all-electric and doesn't get near the touted hundreds of miles per gallon. Like "shovel-ready" jobs, maybe there's no such thing as "plug-ready" cars either.

The Chevy Volt, hailed by the Obama administration as the electric savior of the auto industry and the planet, makes its debut in showrooms next month, but it's already being rolled out for test drives by journalists. It appears we're all being taken for a ride.

When President Obama visited a GM plant in Hamtramck near Detroit a few months ago to drive a Chevy Volt 10 feet off an assembly line, we called the car an "electric Edsel." Now that it's about to hit the road, nothing revealed has changed our mind.

Advertised as an all-electric car that could drive 50 miles on its lithium battery, GM addressed concerns about where you plug the thing in en route to grandma's house by adding a small gasoline engine to help maintain the charge on the battery as it starts to run down. It was still an electric car, we were told, and not a hybrid on steroids.

That's not quite true. The gasoline engine has been found to be more than a range-extender for the battery. Volt engineers are now admitting that when the vehicle's lithium-ion battery pack runs down and at speeds near or above 70 mph, the Volt's gasoline engine will directly drive the front wheels along with the electric motors. That's not charging the battery — that's driving the car.

So it's not an all-electric car, but rather a pricey $41,000 hybrid that requires a taxpayer-funded $7,500 subsidy to get car shoppers to look at it. But gee, even despite the false advertising about the powertrain, isn't a car that gets 230 miles per gallon of gas worth it?

We heard GM's then-CEO Fritz Henderson claim the Volt would get 230 miles per gallon in city conditions. Popular Mechanics found the Volt to get about 37.5 mpg in city driving, and Motor Trend reports: "Without any plugging in, (a weeklong trip to Grandma's house) should return fuel economy in the high 30s to low 40s."

Shocking. :rolleyes:

Investors (http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/550957/201010191855/Volt-Fraud-At-Government-Motors.htm)

djones520
10-21-2010, 11:21 AM
My 4 year old Toyota Corolla was getting the same mileage, and it only cost me $9,000.

Arroyo_Doble
10-21-2010, 11:27 AM
Damn. Some people just loathe American manufacturing.

djones520
10-21-2010, 11:34 AM
Damn. Some people just loathe American manufacturing.

Not at all. I just loathe being brow beaten about not buying American, when it's an inferior product.

Gingersnap
10-21-2010, 11:36 AM
Damn. Some people just loathe American manufacturing.

So, it's okay to lie to consumers about your product claims as long as it's made in America? :confused:

FlaGator
10-21-2010, 11:40 AM
Damn. Some people just loathe American manufacturing.

I perfer German made cars myself.

NJCardFan
10-21-2010, 12:33 PM
Damn. Some people just loathe American manufacturing.

You buy one big mouth. Personally, I drive Fords. I have an '89 Ford F-150 that appears to be finally breathing it's last breaths...after over 260,000 miles. That, and Ford didn't take any handouts from the gubment.

Odysseus
10-21-2010, 12:53 PM
Damn. Some people just loathe American manufacturing.
So, now you're shilling for corporate America? Or don't you find false advertising to be something worth complaining about?

So, it's okay to lie to consumers about your product claims as long as it's made in America? :confused:
It's certainly okay to lie to taxpayers, as long as you're in this administration. ;)

Arroyo_Doble
10-21-2010, 01:00 PM
So, it's okay to lie to consumers about your product claims as long as it's made in America? :confused:

Don't believe every factish thing you read. Especially from an American manufacturing hating publication trying to stroke the outsourcing douchebags.

djones520
10-21-2010, 01:03 PM
Don't believe every factish thing you read. Especially from an American manufacturing hating publication trying to stroke the outsourcing douchebags.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/11/autos/volt_mpg/


Chevy Volt to get 230 mpg rating

And... EVERY story I could find about the Volt now shows 50mpg top.

Arroyo_Doble
10-21-2010, 01:10 PM
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/11/autos/volt_mpg/



Even that story explains it.

But yea ... let's bash "government" motors with the rest of the China crotch sniffers.

Odysseus
10-21-2010, 02:15 PM
Even that story explains it.

But yea ... let's bash "government" motors with the rest of the China crotch sniffers.

If Ford had made similarly fraudulent claims, do you think for one second that the Justice Dept. wouldn't be on them like hypocrisy on Obama?

noonwitch
10-21-2010, 02:49 PM
I'm a Ford buyer, always have been, always will be. When Ford makes an electric car, it'll be a good car worth buying. Until then, I'll drive a Focus, since they get very good mileage.

JB
10-21-2010, 04:21 PM
Don't believe every factish thing you read. Especially from an American manufacturing hating publication trying to stroke the outsourcing douchebags.What faults do you find with the article?

malloc
10-21-2010, 04:29 PM
I've always been a Mopar fan. I've never bought a car that wasn't a Dodge or Chrysler (except my Vette) though I had a Pontiac given to me by my dad once.

My next car will be a Ford. I'm eyeballing picking up their 7 searter crossover, the Flex. It looks like it gets worse mileage than my Nitro R/T though, and probably isn't anywhere near as fast.

Arroyo_Doble
10-21-2010, 04:53 PM
What faults do you find with the article?

Aside from the hater-rhetoric, the use of figures from after the battery runs out to make their point (such as it is ...).

malloc
10-21-2010, 05:04 PM
Aside from the hater-rhetoric, the use of figures from after the battery runs out to make their point (such as it is ...).

I'm not sure what you mean by hater-rhetoric, but I think the use of figures after the battery runs out is acceptable. From what I read, and I'm no Volt expert, the battery is supposed to last a range of 50 miles in city driving. By city driving I'm assuming they mean stop and go, as well as 35 MPH speed limits. Freeway driving, on the other hand, at 70 MPH would require more than double the same amount of energy. To move the same mass at double the speed, plus the wind resistance would mean the battery would last less than 25 miles. In many cities that's not very much. Where I live, that wouldn't get me to a wal-mart. Furthermore, for at least 6 months out of the year, A/C would be required, and that can't treat the battery well either.

I think the problem the article author has with the Volt is that it was billed as some sort of end all be all electric vehicle, and the reality is disappointing. Over stating the hype and then under-delivering in the product is a sure fire way to piss off consumers and critics alike.

Arroyo_Doble
10-21-2010, 05:06 PM
The piece quotes Car and Driver. Here's the context with the most important part in bold:


Here’s what we do know: GM’s recently revised electric-range claim is 25 to 50 miles, and we ended up in the low to middle of that band. Getting on the nearest highway and commuting with the 80-mph flow of traffic—basically the worst-case scenario—yielded 26 miles; a fairly spirited back-road loop netted 31; and a carefully modulated cruise below 60 mph pushed the figure into the upper 30s.

Following the EPA’s proposed direction for its 2012 fuel-economy labels [pictured below], we computed an energy-equivalent efficiency of the Volt during our 152 miles of EV operation. Even with a lot of aggressive driving, the result is still impressive: 74 MPGe.

But this number, too, requires a couple of caveats. First, we’re counting (as does the EPA) all the electricity used in the charging process—which has a fair amount of inefficiencies—not just what the vehicle deploys to the wheels. In our experience, using only standard-household 120-volt power, it took about 13.4 kWh of electricity to replenish the Volt’s 9 kWh of usable energy. Using a 240-volt setup instead is more efficient and would have boosted the mileage figure.

And these numbers also differ from the Volt’s fairly optimistic fuel-economy readout, which leaves the electrically driven miles out of the calculation entirely. Technically, the displayed number is accurate in that it is the “miles per gallon of gas,” but should electric miles really  be counted as infinite mpg?

Either way, one thing’s for sure: Operating an EV can be exceptionally cheap. Assuming 35 miles of electric range for the Volt yields a cost per mile of just 4.6 cents. That’s almost 40 percent less than that of a Volkswagen Golf TDI diesel getting 40 mpg and 24 percent cheaper than a Prius getting 45 mpg.

The economic picture is dimmer when operating the Volt using its gas engine. We averaged 35 mpg for our gas-powered miles and saw 33–34 mpg at a steady, near-80-mph cruise—not exactly spectacular compared with today’s hybrids. Then again, no one should buy a Volt if they plan to run it extensively in extended-range mode.

The Link (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/10q4/2011_chevrolet_volt_full_test-road_test)

Odysseus
10-21-2010, 06:08 PM
Okay, they averaged 33–34 mpg at a steady, near-80-mph cruise. My Honda Civic gets 30 MPG (more after a tune-up) under the same circumstances. A 2011 Honda Civic Sedan has a base MSRP of $15,805 - $24,405 and an invoice price of $14,571 - $22,459. The Chevy Volt goes for an MSRP of $41,000, although there's a tax savings of up to $7,500, which brings the price down for the consumer, but we end up paying for it. So, for roughly twice the money, you get much less car, and you get to impose increased taxes on everyone else.

The question isn't whether we're "haters" of this car, the question is why aren't you hating that the government is taxing people to subsidize the rides of affluent environmentalists?

malloc
10-21-2010, 06:54 PM
The question isn't whether we're "haters" of this car, the question is why aren't you hating that the government is taxing people to subsidize the rides of affluent environmentalists?


Just as importantly, if Arroyo is an eco-warrior of some sort, why doesn't he hate the government that is keeping greener cars from taking root in the market.

Each new enviro-friendly regulation add cost to the car, so does each new safety regulation, etc. These increased costs make for higher prices at the dealership. This makes it more economically feasible for people to keep their older, dirtier cars on the roads longer. Without unfunded, deficit raising, taxpayer incentives like cash for clunkers or tax credits with the volt to offset the raise in price, people will run their dirtier cars for as long as they can. What the government going to do? Subsidize every single car manufactured under the new regulations?

Odysseus
10-21-2010, 08:04 PM
Just as importantly, if Arroyo is an eco-warrior of some sort, why doesn't he hate the government that is keeping greener cars from taking root in the market.

Each new enviro-friendly regulation add cost to the car, so does each new safety regulation, etc. These increased costs make for higher prices at the dealership. This makes it more economically feasible for people to keep their older, dirtier cars on the roads longer. Without unfunded, deficit raising, taxpayer incentives like cash for clunkers or tax credits with the volt to offset the raise in price, people will run their dirtier cars for as long as they can. What the government going to do? Subsidize every single car manufactured under the new regulations?

See, that's your problem right there. You're using logic. Eco-proglodytes don't care about making cars affordable or cleaner emissions, they just want to feel good about doing something, even if it doesn't work, and punishing big business.

lacarnut
10-21-2010, 11:58 PM
Damn. Some people just loathe American manufacturing.

Does being lied to ring a bell, dipshit?

KhrushchevsShoe
10-22-2010, 03:37 AM
I'm not trying to shill for GM here, but let's get real.

Supposedly this thing gets about 30-40 miles out of its battery before it starts guzzling down some gasoline, depending on what kind of driver you are and how fast you like to go. May not seem like a lot if you're driving across the state or going on a trip, but think about how many short back-and-forth kind of trips are now almost completely gas-free. Going to the grocery store and running other various errands typically require traversing distances less than 30 miles. Huge savings already as long as you always plug the car in when you're not using it. Then you have commutes. Millions of people on the interstate going from the suburbs to city 5 days a week. Average one-way commute, according to Google, is roughly 32 miles round trip. So right there 50% (give or take) of the gasoline consumed on a daily basis on commuting is pretty much eliminated. Give it a few years where parking garages start installing outlets next to spots and that number skyrockets, up to a 60 mile commute burns minimal gas and every mile thereafter isn't terrible either.

Sure the machine isn't terrific for cross country travel but that's not how a majority of gasoline put into cars is used. People drive short distances typically in their car, especially in urban and suburban areas. Obviously the Volt is not going to as effective in rural America but this still a step in the right direction.

Politicizing sanity so the Saudi's can get rich is what I'm reading in this thread.

Rockntractor
10-22-2010, 09:25 AM
Politicizing sanity so the Saudi's can get rich is what I'm reading in this thread.

Coming from one of the half wits that wants oil exploration and drilling shut down, with the exception of Soros's oil investment in south America that our traiter and chief is also investing in.

Arroyo_Doble
10-22-2010, 09:30 AM
Just as importantly, if Arroyo is an eco-warrior of some sort,

What do you mean by that? This is an extreme place where anyone on the rational side of John Galt is a "moonbat" so I need to know if liking clean air and water is considered being an "eco-warrior."

AmPat
10-22-2010, 09:43 AM
Don't believe every factish thing you read. Especially from an American manufacturing hating publication trying to stroke the outsourcing douchebags.

Have you picked yours up yet?:rolleyes:

lacarnut
10-22-2010, 01:10 PM
What do you mean by that? This is an extreme place where anyone on the rational side of John Galt is a "moonbat" so I need to know if liking clean air and water is considered being an "eco-warrior."

Instead of pissing money down the drain, our government should be promoting natural gas vehicles. Electic cars are expensive and are NOT Env. friendly in the manuf. process. Evidently you are ignorant on the mining process for batteries which cause water, air and land problems.

The Volt will turn out to be another lemon by GM just like the Caddy diesel. Too expensive and a whole bunch of recalls which is SOP on new models.

Odysseus
10-22-2010, 02:08 PM
I'm not trying to shill for GM here, but let's get real.

Supposedly this thing gets about 30-40 miles out of its battery before it starts guzzling down some gasoline, depending on what kind of driver you are and how fast you like to go. May not seem like a lot if you're driving across the state or going on a trip, but think about how many short back-and-forth kind of trips are now almost completely gas-free. Going to the grocery store and running other various errands typically require traversing distances less than 30 miles. Huge savings already as long as you always plug the car in when you're not using it. Then you have commutes. Millions of people on the interstate going from the suburbs to city 5 days a week. Average one-way commute, according to Google, is roughly 32 miles round trip. So right there 50% (give or take) of the gasoline consumed on a daily basis on commuting is pretty much eliminated. Give it a few years where parking garages start installing outlets next to spots and that number skyrockets, up to a 60 mile commute burns minimal gas and every mile thereafter isn't terrible either.

Sure the machine isn't terrific for cross country travel but that's not how a majority of gasoline put into cars is used. People drive short distances typically in their car, especially in urban and suburban areas. Obviously the Volt is not going to as effective in rural America but this still a step in the right direction.

Politicizing sanity so the Saudi's can get rich is what I'm reading in this thread.
You'd be absolutely correct except for one thing: Where does electricity come from? You see, that magic socket in the wall doesn't generate electricity, it just provides an outlet, hence the term. It takes a generator to create electricity, and currently, we generate electricity with oil, gas, coal, nuclear power, with a miniscule amount coming from windmills, solar and Ed Begley's stationary bicycle. So, unless Ed is willling to spend a lot more time on the bike, that electricity is going to come from fossil fuels and a few marginal sources that make liberals feel good but doesn't do much to fuel cars.

Now, that's not to say that electic motors don't have their uses. In a city like Los Angeles, where smog is a real problem because of the unique geography of the basin, electronic vehicles can certainly alleviate the problem, especially in buses or other vehicles that travel fixed routes and can be stopped at a depot to replace the power pack. Sadly, mass transit in LA is limited by the fact that they can't get a right of way from the City of Beverly Hills, which sits smack dab in the middle of everything, and which refuses to allow rail or subway to even go through, much less have stops in their area. Bummer about that, but you know how committed progressives are to the environment. I'm sure that they've bought some carbon credits or something to assuage their guilt.


What do you mean by that? This is an extreme place where anyone on the rational side of John Galt is a "moonbat" so I need to know if liking clean air and water is considered being an "eco-warrior."

What makes you assume that you're on the rational side of the argument? None of us have a problem with electric vehicles. In fact, as I've said above, I think that they make tremendous sense in certain areas. What we have a problem with is false advertising that inflates expectations and ultimately ends up with failed products that reduce the incentive for future innovations. But, if you can only argue from a position of moral superiority to straw men who neither breathe air or drink water, more power to you.

malloc
10-22-2010, 02:45 PM
What do you mean by that? This is an extreme place where anyone on the rational side of John Galt is a "moonbat" so I need to know if liking clean air and water is considered being an "eco-warrior."

This is an extreme place? You can't be serious. We talk about personal responsibility, individual liberty, free markets, American exceptionalism, and the intent of our founding fathers who placed the individual above the collective, and we are the extremists? Meanwhile the DU and other left wing outlets are celebrating the fact that our government is not only talking about, but actually forcing people to buy products they may not want. The left is celebrating that the stooges in power are actively seeking to destroy our fossil fuel based economy, and replace it with one that will run primarily on poverty because that's what we'll have left over. The left in the White House and their cheerleaders are just peachy with the idea that equal application of the law is somehow variable and should take skin color, sex, sexuality and whether or not you happen to be muslim into account. Yeah, you are right, the left wing agenda must be the rational one, and the positions most of us take here must be the extreme.

Yeah, this is a scary extreme site alright. Full of outright anarchists and totalitarians aren't we! :rolleyes:


By eco-warrior I mean someone who buys into the global warming hoax so vehemently that they would wreck the economy, and lower the standard of living of all Americans in order to save their non-existent gaia. That's what I meant by eco-warrior.

Odysseus
10-22-2010, 02:54 PM
This is an extreme place? You can't be serious. We talk about personal responsibility, individual liberty, free markets, American exceptionalism, and the intent of our founding fathers who placed the individual above the collective, and we are the extremists?

To the average proglodyte, that is extreme. :rolleyes:

KhrushchevsShoe
10-23-2010, 02:38 AM
You'd be absolutely correct except for one thing: Where does electricity come from? You see, that magic socket in the wall doesn't generate electricity, it just provides an outlet, hence the term. It takes a generator to create electricity, and currently, we generate electricity with oil, gas, coal, nuclear power, with a miniscule amount coming from windmills, solar and Ed Begley's stationary bicycle. So, unless Ed is willling to spend a lot more time on the bike, that electricity is going to come from fossil fuels and a few marginal sources that make liberals feel good but doesn't do much to fuel cars.

No that's very true and for a long time has been my gripe about electric cars being a magic fix. Nuclear power is obviously the sane option but people are still scared of it. That and the awesome place we built to store the spent rods apparently cannot be used.


What makes you assume that you're on the rational side of the argument? None of us have a problem with electric vehicles. In fact, as I've said above, I think that they make tremendous sense in certain areas. What we have a problem with is false advertising that inflates expectations and ultimately ends up with failed products that reduce the incentive for future innovations. But, if you can only argue from a position of moral superiority to straw men who neither breathe air or drink water, more power to you.

You're only calling this a failed product because its supported by the president. But if we were expecting an electric car to hit the market that accomplished all of our long term fuel economy goals we'd be fools. It's a gradual process that requires proper vehicles from a host of manufacturers and infrastructure to support it.

PoliCon
10-23-2010, 02:50 AM
Damn. Some people just loathe American manufacturing.

Dumbass - most of the Japanese cars are made in America too. :rolleyes:

m00
10-23-2010, 02:57 AM
You're only calling this a failed product because its supported by the president. But if we were expecting an electric car to hit the market that accomplished all of our long term fuel economy goals we'd be fools. It's a gradual process that requires proper vehicles from a host of manufacturers and infrastructure to support it.

Well, I call it a failed product because it doesn't do what it was advertised to do. If we really wanted to be green, we'd go biodiesel and recycle all the excesses grease from fast food restaurants. But this doesn't make the corn lobby very happy, nor whatever back-room deal spawned the Volt subsidy.

PoliCon
10-23-2010, 03:05 AM
Well, I call it a failed product because it doesn't do what it was advertised to do. If we really wanted to be green, we'd go biodiesel and recycle all the excesses grease from fast food restaurants. But this doesn't make the corn lobby very happy, nor whatever back-room deal spawned the Volt subsidy.

But you forget - the Volt has the right progressive appearance. Biodiesel does not. Using biodiesel is tied to fast food. And how progressively acceptable is that??

KhrushchevsShoe
10-23-2010, 06:49 AM
Well, I call it a failed product because it doesn't do what it was advertised to do. If we really wanted to be green, we'd go biodiesel and recycle all the excesses grease from fast food restaurants. But this doesn't make the corn lobby very happy, nor whatever back-room deal spawned the Volt subsidy.

Back-room deal? You dont even have to read between the lines to figure out what happened there. Government takes over GM. Government gives tax subsidy on new GM model. It's called helping out your investment.

As for biodiesel, if you thought electric cars would require an infrastructure overhaul...

BadCat
10-23-2010, 09:28 AM
I have never and will never buy a car built by American UNION WORKERS.

That automatically puts the "Dolt" off the list, as well as the fact it seems to be an over priced POS.

lacarnut
10-23-2010, 11:29 AM
You'd be absolutely correct except for one thing: Where does electricity come from? You see, that magic socket in the wall doesn't generate electricity, it just provides an outlet, hence the term. It takes a generator to create electricity, and currently, we generate electricity with oil, gas, coal, nuclear power, with a miniscule amount coming from windmills, solar and Ed Begley's stationary bicycle. So, unless Ed is willling to spend a lot more time on the bike, that electricity is going to come from fossil fuels and a few marginal sources that make liberals feel good but doesn't do much to fuel cars.



The dummies in MA are going to be some pissed when their energy bill triples due to the high of producing electricy by way of windmills. The rate is going up from 9 cents to 27/33 cents per KW. Suck on that greenies.

lacarnut
10-23-2010, 11:39 AM
Back-room deal? You dont even have to read between the lines to figure out what happened there. Government takes over GM. Government gives tax subsidy on new GM model. It's called helping out your investment.
.

And a very bad one for the taxpayers. The Volt will lose money. FYI, the Prius sells for $$10,000 less and Toyota loses money on every one they sell. Even if the two sold for the same price,you would be nuts to choose thhe Volt over the Prius because of build quality and dependabilty between the two.

PoliCon
10-23-2010, 11:54 AM
a Prius? Seriously??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQcSOP2AzXU

Odysseus
10-24-2010, 03:26 PM
Back-room deal? You dont even have to read between the lines to figure out what happened there. Government takes over GM. Government gives tax subsidy on new GM model. It's called helping out your investment.

As for biodiesel, if you thought electric cars would require an infrastructure overhaul...

A tax subsidy paid for by people who bought cars by other manufacturers, including Ford, not to mention Ford's corporate taxes, which are passed onto consumers. In other words, Government takes over GM, then uses the power of government to give GM an advantage over its competitors, which punishes those competitors for not having been so mismanaged that they needed the government to step in. Now do you understand why this is wrong?

KhrushchevsShoe
10-24-2010, 07:13 PM
A tax subsidy paid for by people who bought cars by other manufacturers, including Ford, not to mention Ford's corporate taxes, which are passed onto consumers. In other words, Government takes over GM, then uses the power of government to give GM an advantage over its competitors, which punishes those competitors for not having been so mismanaged that they needed the government to step in. Now do you understand why this is wrong?
I dont think Ford is looking at GM and thinking "Gosh I wish we were those guys."

AmPat
10-24-2010, 08:30 PM
I dont think Ford is looking at GM and thinking "Gosh I wish we were those guys."

The American taxpayers ARE looking at Gov't Motors and wondering why they were forced to fund GM incompetence. Especially when there was a better way to handle it, as in the way Ford handled it.

Rockntractor
10-24-2010, 08:46 PM
Gentleman stop the presses and back up, government motors has made a break through with the help of Barney Frank and Barack Obama, let me introduce to you the first perpetual motion engine.
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/dei.jpg?t=1287967164
It runs off it's own exhuast!

" nevah unna essamate wut tums out duh bat door" say's Barney!

Odysseus
10-24-2010, 08:58 PM
I dont think Ford is looking at GM and thinking "Gosh I wish we were those guys."

No, they're looking at them and thinking, "Damn it, they screw up, and now they get to use our money against us! WTF?" :mad:

PoliCon
10-24-2010, 09:17 PM
I dont think Fixed it for you.