Chevy Volt plug-in hybrid priced at $40,000

Chevy's Bob Lutz crushed some dreams this morning when he announced that the Volt hybrid electric vehicle will run closer to $40,000 as opposed to the $30,000 he originally implied. To make us feel a little better about that extra $10k, he offered the fact that Chevrolet would be losing money on the first-generation Volt and Congress may offer up at $7,000 tax credit for plug-in hybrids anyway. So, in other words, we should be happy that it's as cheap as $40,000, right? As for the car's release date, 2010 is still looking solid.

[Via Autoblog]

[Turcu Ciprian @ Jun 19th 2008 1:38PM]

What to chose..... what to chose... .this car.. or the Sony Projector presented earlyer? they both got the same price... hmm.. what to choose...

[Mehdi Cheddadi @ Jun 19th 2008 1:46PM]

I choose you pikachu!

[TomTom2007 @ Jun 19th 2008 1:48PM]

pika... pika... piiiikkkkaaaccchuuuu...!

[Jason @ Jun 19th 2008 3:40PM]

I will buy this car.

[jason51873 @ Jun 19th 2008 3:56PM]

This car is a FAIL @ $40k

You can buy a Honda Fit for $12k and save $400 a month in car payment. So, any gas money you save with this car is a moot point.

A $40k hybrid is not the answer. We need a sub $20k all electric or plugin hybrid.

I was really excited about this car until now. With this car all your doing is moving your gas expense to you car payment - unless your already driving a $40 - $50k car in which case you prolly could give 2 sh@@s about gas prices.

[darkstar @ Jun 19th 2008 5:42PM]

hahah
you are so right!
40,000 is an atrocity! people driving lexus and caddy could care less if gas hits 7bux, unless they are phonies...
20,000 for a plugin/high mileage car would make a whole lot of sense for the average joes

[Jon Doe. @ Jun 19th 2008 5:44PM]

*sighs* And once again people don't get it. Jason. Grow a clue. These cars are designed to remove our dependency on foreign fuel and to transfer carbon emissions from the pipe to a centralized location like a plant that can with time be cleaned up. Its a hell of a lot easier to upgrade the tech at a single point like a nuke plant or whatnot vs. 1 million cars.
this isn't about saving you money...yes it ISN'T ABOUT YOU....Sorry I know the American occupation is ME ME ME ME ME....but sorry in this case it isn't.

[Wicker24 @ Jun 19th 2008 5:58PM]

I don't think the point is spending the same amount on fuel versus car payment, It's more of a were running out of resources so we need a option other then gas.

[Oleg @ Jun 19th 2008 7:06PM]

jason51873, there is $25,000 all-electric car. Google "Think electric car" and click the first link on search results' list. They are expanding to North America too.

[Turcu Ciprian @ Jun 19th 2008 1:38PM]

What to chose..... what to chose... .this car.. or the Sony Projector presented earlyer? they both got the same price... hmm.. what to choose...

[94 taurus owner @ Jun 19th 2008 2:43PM]

How bout this save your money and buy a Fisker Karma.

[riggs @ Jun 19th 2008 3:16PM]

Choose one of your comments, the one you dont choose....will die.

[Shinigami @ Jun 19th 2008 8:21PM]

How about donating money to charity? They'll find a better way to use it rather than buying 10k-40k overpriced stuff.

[whowhatme @ Jun 19th 2008 1:40PM]

sign me up!

[naz @ Jun 19th 2008 1:41PM]

will it really look like that when it come's out?

[User @ Jun 19th 2008 2:01PM]

Who cares?

NO ABSURD GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES!!! WHOOOOHOOOOO!!!

[Andir3.0 @ Jun 19th 2008 2:38PM]

I'm guessing it will look like the cobalt...

[iEye @ Jun 19th 2008 9:20PM]

Cavalier -> Cobalt -> Volt....

end the end it is the same crap.... a Cavalier...

[Samus Aran @ Jun 19th 2008 1:42PM]

Fail.

GM = t3h sux0rz.

Toyota, will you just Buy General Motors already? Please?

[Ashwin Narasimhan @ Jun 19th 2008 1:45PM]

Not happening. If GM and Toyota merge, they would have half the car market. Also, Toyota wouldn't want to deal with the train wreck known as the UAW, that GM has to deal with.

[IT-Accountant @ Jun 19th 2008 1:46PM]

If you really want the US economy to take another serious hit.

[IT-Accountant @ Jun 19th 2008 1:46PM]

If you really want the US economy to take another serious hit.

[TVGenius @ Jun 19th 2008 2:23PM]

Exactly. The reason Toyota can actually sell cars for a decent price is the fact they didn't dig themselves into a hole by getting locked into bad deals with the worthless unions.

[MBS @ Jun 19th 2008 2:35PM]

I know, Toyota are genius. First they don't deal with the UAW. Second, they sell the prius giving themselves a reputation of being green and responsible. Third, they make all their profits on gas-guzzling SUVs and pickup trucks without anyone thinking of it since only American car makers are dumb and evil enough to make gas-guzzling SUVs.

[0megapart!cle @ Jun 19th 2008 2:37PM]

Yea, it would be so much better if those worthless unions weren't around so GM could bully its workers into accepting a barely living wage. Who do those workers think they are, expecting to work 60 hours a week and live a comfortable, middle-class lifestyle. They should be forced to work three jobs to support a family, and never see their kids, that'll show em. That's the American way!

[J @ Jun 19th 2008 2:55PM]

First of all, the American car companies are not in the position they're in because of unions, it is largely because they have to pay healthcare costs for everyone and their brothers retired brother. Toyota is in a country that has nationalized medicine, and therefore does not have to provide healthcare for the vast majority of their employees. This puts them at a major advantage when building their costs into the price of cars.

And the other commenter is absolutely correct, Toyota makes most of their money off of their own gas guzzling SUVs. While I do own a Prius, I am not naive enough to think that Toyota gives any more a crap about the Planet than GM et al. do. Toyota saw a trend towards environmentalism and took advantage of it. Had they not seen this opportunity, you would never have heard of the Prius.

Toyota sends just as many lobbyists to DC to argue AGAINST environmental regulation as GM does. That is fact.

[MBS @ Jun 19th 2008 2:55PM]

@0megapart!cle - Right, like those poor suckers that work at the Toyota plants in the US.

Like a lot of the unions the airlines are dealing with the UAW are shooting themselves in the foot by asking for so much that the companies can't afford to do business and have to lay their employees off.

[phanbouy @ Jun 19th 2008 6:01PM]

@J

damn... now how can i rail against nationalized health care with an argument like that? hmm... what does my ideology tell me to hate more: unions or state health care?

[kev @ Jun 19th 2008 8:58PM]

Japan is a special case--the immediate greater good of society is understood, hence major urban service projects, nationalized healthcare, above average waste management and recycling programs, and all sorts of other nationwide services. They are a budding example of the benefits of socialism mixed in with the hard realities of a semi-free global market.

We, on the other hand, don't give a crap about our fellow man and it's all about me me me.

[BobTurbo @ Jun 20th 2008 5:27AM]

^^^^ garbage. Japan is what it is because the people are intelligent by nature. God it has nothing to do with that awful socialism religion. In fact Japanese people are so smart that the liberal conservative party currently in power has been in this position almost constantly since 1955.

Major urban projects have nothing to do with socialism, and while their health system is administered by the government, you still actually have to pay via your employer's mandatory health insurance scheme or some other method, and the hospitals are mainly private. In fact, the Japanese government spends 7.6% of GDP on healthcare, while the USA spends 13.1%.

Get your facts straight and find a better religion.

[Ashwin Narasimhan @ Jun 19th 2008 1:43PM]

Losing money. That's so typical of GM. Its even worse when they lose money on a $40,000 car.

[Danakin @ Jun 19th 2008 1:45PM]

If a company is going to lose money producing something...they will NOT produce it.


"...Chevrolet would be losing money on the first-generation Volt..."
^^That statement is 100% BS.^^

[SSC @ Jun 19th 2008 5:35PM]

You fail at business.

Loss Leading is a common practice in business, many companies will take a loss on one product and make it up later on. In this case, GM hopes to make it up in the second generation of the Volt, and in increased traffic to the GM dealerships if nothing else.

The technology to make this car feasible simply hadn't been invented yet, the batteries to meet their goals is/was the main holding factor in the production time line, and even then they had to push just to meet 2010.

Lastly, how in the hell is the volt a 'luxury sports car"?

Detroit makes plenty of cars to just get around in, that get fantastic millage, you just never bothered looking.

[Bryan @ Jun 19th 2008 1:58PM]

That is not true... you are forget about HALO cars that are produced in small numbers and used as advertising vehicles to project an image over the entire product line...

Dodge uses the VIPER, and then that gets people into the dealership, and then they go well i cant get the viper, but i can get the charger etc...

Dodge did loose $$ on ever viper sold in the first generation cars...

[jason @ Jun 19th 2008 2:25PM]

Wrong. VW Auto Group made the Bugatti Veyron as an engineering "look what we can do" and lost about a million bucks on every one they sold.

I think at $40,000 GM will sell as many Volts as Bugatti sold Veyrons. I don't know a ton of people who would pay $40,000 for a car with a re-hashed Saturn Aura interior, Cavalier steering wheel, and a big gold bow tie on the front. If they load it full of luxury equipment it'll be too heavy to be an economical car, and if they don't (at $40,000) it'll be too economical for a luxury car... knowing GM the later will probably be the case, since I can go spend $40,000 on a Buick and not even get Bluetooth or navigation as an available option.

I think this thing will be an epic fail.

[Liquidretro @ Jun 19th 2008 2:30PM]

Bugatti Veyron anyone? Its estimated they cost about 5M to produce and they are sold for around 1.5m. Its a halo car in limited numbers.

[Danakin @ Jun 19th 2008 2:50PM]

by produce I mean MASS MANUFACTURE...not "show off" cars like the Veyron or the Aero TT...obviously they cost a sh*t-load, but they are not produced in significant numbers, so it doesn't matter if the company losses some extra $$ on them.

My statement is correct when applied in the correct way...sorry I didn't specify more clearly...my bad :)

[benjasmine @ Jun 19th 2008 2:51PM]

well, it depends on what company we are talking about...

when ps3 was released...sony was selling each ps3 at a loss of about $300 each...and that doesn't include marketing cost...

selling a new product/technology at a loss is a marketing strategy often used by many big companies to gain time advantage and market share...

in addition, as a new product is being mass produced, the manufacture cost will go down, so they will benefit in the long run, on the premise that the market and consumers accept it, otherwise you lost everything, like hddvd.

[jar jar @ Jun 19th 2008 3:57PM]

meesa no likey you comment danny!

messa think you only half right. If beep beep car come out and lose money, nobody produce!

BUT, thees car company say "hey, meesa lose money on FIRST production."

Meesa think they make money if first run is success, cheaper cost for them, cheaper cost for jar jar. And cheaper cost for you danny YAY!

Ani lose $5m on C3PO and he broke, so he never makey more! Poor C3PO, so lonely...meesa be his friend.

[rip @ Jun 19th 2008 4:30PM]

Danakin, you are wrong. The old Ford Escort was sold at a loss back in the 80's and 90's. And Ford sold hundreds of thousands of them.

Ford sold them to meet CAFE standards.

In fact, most small economy cars are break even at best.

[Danakin @ Jun 19th 2008 4:55PM]

I would like the sources to back up your claims and I will revoke my statement...but for now


The Veyron isn't mass produced, so it does not apply.

The Dodge Viper (my dream car, btw) was sold for a solid $50k for the first generation RT/10s...manufacturing cost was $43,xxx...so a profit of +$6,xxx is not a loss.

Okay, PS3 is legit if you are talking about the first couple made, (and I literally mean couple, once they started the production lines, this is nolonger true) BD player is what did that, & that is only true for the first few consoles...they still made money after they were all sold!

C3PO was also not mass produced...don't even bring up the action figures ;)

Idk about the Escort...would you care to site your sources? What is CAFE? Again...small economy cars break even sources please.




...it's simply not in the interest to the company to do it.

[rip @ Jun 19th 2008 5:58PM]

Danakin, there is this great product. It's called Google. You should try it. But hey, here you go:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FWH/is_n2_v109/ai_19525580

CAFE is the US federal mandated fuel economy standards. Companies selling cars in the US had to have a certain average fuel economy. The Escort sales offset sales of other cars.

There are many reasons for a company to sell at a loss. Gillette gives razors away. They make it up in blades.

HP practically gives printers away. They make it back in toner.

IBM basically NEVER made money selling PC computers. They sold them to provide a complete line of products for corporate customers. Eventually they sold the division to Lenovo.

Microsoft sells a lot of things at a loss to build market.

And FYI, CAFE standards are coming back. Which means GM needs to move vehicles like the Volt to offset guzzlers like the Camaro, SUVs, etc. Not to mention that the Volt is already being used as a halo vehicle for things like flexfuel engines.

[phanbouy @ Jun 19th 2008 6:13PM]

@jar jar

i never cease to be amazed at how others get off on being total fuckwads.

[Tony @ Jun 19th 2008 11:29PM]

@ Danakin

You are totally wrong about the PS3. Sony continues to lose money on every PS3 sold and is expected to lose money throughout this year until 2009.

The Xbox 360 is in a similair situation, and Microsoft does not expect to profit off the Xbox 360 until this year.

Since you do not know how to use Google, I have provided you with sources. Some are missing, because I am only allowed to post 3 URLs.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/746/746482p1.html
http://uk.reuters.com/article/technology-media-telco-SP/idUKN0737530820080107?feedType=RSS&feedName=technology-media-telco-SP
http://www.joystiq.com/2005/12/28/xbox-360-costs-715-to-make/

[Danakin @ Jun 20th 2008 8:37AM]

Alright, alright, I concede...you got me.

First, @rip...Google is not a product and I use it quite often. Thanks for the article, I did not know that, but it is good to now know. The article did not mention anything about selling vehicles at a loss though, it said that the profit margin of vehicles sold was decreased due to CAFE, but it is still a profit.

Second, @Tony...Thanks for the articles, they prove me wrong. I guess Sony makes their lost PS3 $ up in games and peripherals?

Third, @SSC...I do suck at business...that is why I do not manage, market, or own one.

Fourth, @...wtf, just wtf

Final Thoughts, @everyone...I think everyone will at least agree with me that on the surface, the concept of a company selling a product and losing money on purpose is just an absurd thing to do. But thanks for correcting my misunderstanding, I appreciate it!

[Danakin @ Jun 20th 2008 8:39AM]

...oops, fourth is supposed to be @ jar jar

[DFN @ Jun 19th 2008 1:45PM]

Nice. Plus think of all the petrol money you will save. Hope it hits in the UK shortly after 2010, branded as a Vauxhall

[Dan @ Jun 19th 2008 1:45PM]

BE SURE to read about the "tax credit" which is pretty much a load of crap. You need to earn less them 40K or more then 1 million to even get it.

I bought a hybrid and got zippo for a tax credit even though the car qualified for over $2500.

Just check your taxes from last year...unless they change something this year.

[dosguy @ Jun 19th 2008 4:58PM]

Yes, and a lot of people don't realize that if you do get a tax credit of, say $7000, it doesn't mean you'll pay $7000 less in taxes. If you're in a 30% tax bracket, that amounts to 30% of the $7000, or $2100. They need to lower the price significantly if they want to sell these things. Right now a lot of people are stuck with their SUVs anyway, owing much more than they could trade or sell them for. I predict the price of gas will come down significantly right before the November elections, and people who were contemplating purchasing a small car will go out and buy a big car anyway. Fools.

[peestandingup @ Jun 19th 2008 1:46PM]

Epic fail. This car gets WAY too much press. Leave it to Chevy to produce a damn supped up luxury sports car that no one can afford for their first run at a "mainstream" electric car. God forbid they make something a bit more modest & cost effective for normal people to just get around in.

Detroit, you suck at making cars these days.