Based on recent history, you probably know more about optimal market positioning of new cars than GM's marketing department (and I am not being "snide" here). So you may very well be right.
In their defense, GM is trying to make the biggest splash and largest success they can with with what I will again point out is their *INITIAL* offering in this market. If they succeed in this, then it will almost surely not be their *FINAL* EV offering. Clearly their marketing department thought they would be better off positioning it as being "high performance", "long range", and "totally convenient", rather than "pretty good performance", "pretty good range", and "not as convenient as an old fashioned car". (And maybe Bob Lutz wanted it to be an "electric viper" -- whatever...) The downside is that: * They may end up pricing it too high as a result, and losing a large chunk of the market the could have had; * They may end up pricing it too low and losing money on every one they sell as a result (if they do it "right" they can price it too high *and* lose money at the same time); * The delays which result from going for a "perfect" car may be so long they miss the market window, and have to play catch-up to nimble-and-hungry Nissan; * Finally, they may never get another chance; this looks like the bottom of the ninth and two out for GM. Swing and miss, swing and miss, swing and... and so they are trying for a home run. As we all know, home run hitters typically have lousy batting averages, 'cause they strike out a lot. Historically I detest GM but in this case I hope they get their home run. Jones Beene wrote: > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Stephen A. Lawrence > >> I have never seen this mentioned, but in principle the design > could be described as very "de-coupled", or "modular". > > They are not calling it a 'hybrid' for a number of marketing reasons, > preferring to call it an "electric vehicle with a range extender". > > My major point is that they do NOT need a 40 mile range with expensive > lithium batteries! > > The Volt motor specs are: > > 111 kW (150 hp) electric motor > 1.4 L 4-cylinder gasoline engine for 53 kW genset. > > All I am suggesting to do - to make this concept more affordable to the > average Joe, is to: > > 1) dump the lithium in favor of advanced SLA > 2) go for a battery range of 20 miles instead of 40 miles (20 was the > range of the VH-1) which covers most day-to-day errands and short commutes > 3) keep the electric motor the same size > 4) trim the 4-cylinder down in power and weight to about 35 kW and make > it a diesel, possibly a two cylinder diesel. > > I believe this would cut $10,000 off the cost of batteries - making the > vehicle affordable for a much larger segment of drivers. Compared to the > present Prius, the smaller diesel will get significantly better mileage. > > If the driver knows he is needing to go hundered of miles in a day, he > will have to plan ahead - but can set the genset to max power, and > override the normal default setting and keep the batteries topped off as > long as possible. Even so, he might need to stop for an intermediate > range plug-in for a few hours. That would be the trade-off vis-a-vis a > Prius. > > I am not sure who came up with this idea initially - but they were > claiming that it could get to 100 mpg, which of course becomes > meaningless without knowing how much grid power is used, > > Jones
