Volkswagen prepping a plug-in "Twin Drive" hybrid for 2010

You know how we love plug-in hybrids around these parts, particularly if they're actually going to get built -- crazy, we know. Now it looks like Volkswagen is going to get into the game, with a "Twin Drive" Golf powered by a 122 horsepower diesel engine and 82 horsies of electric motor. The car should debut around 2010, and VW plans on spending $769 million on the project, helped along by a $23.5 million program put in place by the German government to help along such development. The car, which uses the electric motor for primary power, supplemented by the diesel motor and regenerative braking for extra juice, should be able to squeeze about 31 miles out of its Sanyo-developed lithium-ion batteries in all-electric mode.

[EMoShunz @ Jun 27th 2008 8:53AM]

here's a question. all these 2010 release dates for plug in hybrids (toyota, vw, chev, etc.), are they 2010 model year (q3 2009 release), or 2010 actual year (likely q3 2010)?

[Eric @ Jun 27th 2008 9:43AM]

Well, there are more and more wind turbines going up, and 19% of the power in the US is generated by nuclear (higher percentage in the northeast and AZ), 7% hydroelectric, and the likelihood of you plugging in is greater at night (when most energy produced is from base load plants, such as nuclear and hydroelectric), so you should be producing less pollution than an ICE (26% renewable/non-CO2 producing -vs- 0%). And don't forget the large-scale solar plants that are proposed for the south west US. And please don't look at everything from a CO2 standpoint, either. There's a lot of compelling reasons to go with electric, even without considering the environmental impacts.

And since you can take your time charging the battery (8 hours or more, if you sleep), you won't be putting much of a strain on the power grid, if the charging system is properly designed. And you can charge at home, instead of having to drive to a gas station to refuel. Think about that the next time you're waiting in line on a Friday afternoon.

Now if we can get rid of the ICE when we're sure we don't need it (maybe mount it on a small trailer or something), we'll see even greater efficiency, and that space can be used for a larger battery pack, or just increased range through weight savings.

[Eric @ Jun 27th 2008 9:44AM]

Hmmm. Meant to reply to JZT.

[EMoShunz @ Jun 27th 2008 9:46AM]

excellent points!
but i think you meant to post below.

[CraigJ @ Jun 27th 2008 9:57AM]

...is to be tried out till 2012, Volkswagen chief executive Martin Winterkorn said in the German capital Berlin.

The company is to build 20 of the test cars, which are planned to have an electric-only range of 50 kilometres before the internal-combustion engine must be started up.

Looks to me like the test cars are 2010, and the production starts in 2012, just in time for the end of the world.

[fanman @ Jun 27th 2008 10:00AM]

@Andrew:

"Volkswagen said it would only use power generated from renewable sources such as sunshine, wind and hydro dams." So shut your mouth.

How are they going to do that? A sort of electrical DRM? Will it only connect to electrical sockets that are supplied by nuclear power or those daft windmills?

[Andrew Tanasescu @ Jun 27th 2008 12:27PM]

@Fanman

Exactly how I dont know. I do know that such a thing exists though. Ive heard of people who have made homemade ev's ordering only renewable energy from their power companys (at an increase of price). Tried doing a quick google search and i found a company in UK that offers 100% renewable power (http://www.good-energy.co.uk/).

Also, if your going to bring up the mining required for for the nickle and what not, why not include platinum mining up (for catalytic converters). ill let you do a google search on that cause im in a rush. Just looking up "platinum mining pollution" and see what you get.

[Bill @ Jun 27th 2008 1:17PM]

Volt is 2011 model year, so Q3 2010 calendar year.

[fanman @ Jun 27th 2008 4:41PM]

@Andrew:

You still haven't told me what will stop me (and everyone who buys this) plugging it straight into a coal fired power station.

How exactly does a catalytic converter also being apparently self defeating make this any less of a daft idea that will harm the environment. Of course I'm going to count ALL emissions and not live in some feel good coko land.

[ricky @ Jun 28th 2008 8:43AM]

they keep talking about all these electric cars and how they will be here soon. Im tired of hearing about it until they are actually here in mass availability. These companies should stop teasing us and just tell us when they are actually going to be available to the GENERAL PUBLIC. Not just a few people. I dont belive any normal person will be able to buy any of these cars by waling in to a dealership until at least 2012

[jzt @ Jun 27th 2008 8:53AM]

Cool! A car that uses gas and electricity! And since electricity comes from coal, drivers can double their polluting excitement!

[EMoShunz @ Jun 27th 2008 8:57AM]

it'd be nice if people looked for solutions instead of problems. there are dozens of ways to get clean power, just takes people doing it...mainly the (admittedly unreliable) government mandating companies to do it.

better to have an electric vehicle that can become clean (or already is if your area allows you to choose to buy clean power only) then to have a gas car that can not use clean power.

[Rik @ Jun 27th 2008 9:33AM]

Ah yes, let's call all transitional technology bad because it isn't ideal at once... in the end we keep doing the same we are doing because the perfect solution just doesn't come up!

It's a very dumb way of reasoning which I see way to often on weblogs... THINK before you say something please!

[Jon @ Jun 27th 2008 9:43AM]

The problem is that internal combustion engines are horribly inefficient. Even if every car was a plug in and all the electricity came from coal power plants there would still be a dramatic reduction in CO2 release overall.

[Twitchy @ Jun 27th 2008 9:41AM]

1. The pollution created by generating electricity for cars can be more efficiently managed as the pollution is created in one spot, not at the end of every car.

2. Electricity is increasingly being generated by environmentally friendly methods.

3. Any increase in demand in electricity should (if the regulating authorities have their thinking caps on) be met with solar and wind generation facilities.

4. Ethanol/Methanol as a fuel is causing stress on the agriculture sector and is directly responsible for part of the shocking surge in food prices.

What do you suggest instead? That all efforts be concentrated in solving one problem at a time? I doubt that such an approach would be an effective and efficient use of resources.

[Andrew Tanasescu @ Jun 27th 2008 9:46AM]

@ JZT

Do a little more research before bashing. I hate how all the electric car hates say, oh, the power is coming from coal plants and thats bad for the environment.

1st off - http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/215184,volkswagen-unveils-hybrid-car-prototype-that-comes-with-plug.html "Volkswagen said it would only use power generated from renewable sources such as sunshine, wind and hydro dams." So shut your mouth.

2nd off- Its been pointed out plenty of times before thats ICE's are pretty inefficient. Coal plants are about 40% efficient while cars are about 15%. that number may vary, but its about right. http://www.electroauto.com/info/pollmyth.shtml

[BobTurbo @ Jun 27th 2008 9:55AM]

Transitional technology sucks - look at all those hybrid HDDs in use. Hybrid cars are just as stupid. You need two freakin motors instead of one, weighing down the car.

[fanman @ Jun 27th 2008 9:55AM]

Because clearly, mining nickel out of the ground in Canada and then sending it to the ends of the earth to be processed before it can then be added to the battery which can then be added to car (in separate factories, often in separate countries) so that the car can then be sent to you is the green way forward. A recent study showed that a Toyota Pirus has a greater long term impact than a Land Rover Discovery. Why on earth did you low rank him for pointing out that this car will have greater overall CO2 emissions than the standard petrol car?

But at least it's economical... -.-

[EMoShunz @ Jun 27th 2008 10:09AM]

@fanman:
since we are quoting studies...that mining of nickle is a factor (or beryllium, or lithium, or whatever the future holds) but, lets now talk i.c.e. fuel...that 15% efficiency (vs 40% of a coal plant also near sudbury where that nickle comes from) drops down to

[EMoShunz @ Jun 27th 2008 10:14AM]

sorry...
drops down to less than 2%

again, why look for problems, try to find solutions.

[EMoShunz @ Jun 27th 2008 10:21AM]

wow, my posting on this comment is 4$$, need to proof read before i hit send.

that 2% efficiency is a factor if including the footprint of drilling the oil, shipping it, refining it, transporting it, and the many litlle and some big spills that happen along the way. google it, it's a real study, honest...

[wonkdonkydotnet @ Jun 27th 2008 1:54PM]

Ok, as an interim to the DARPA-sourced 100% efficient multi-wavelength solar panels, I vote for Porn-Power!

They should mount some sort of device to the stars, that somehow captures the energy expended in their reciprocating movements. I mean, cripes! -That Jenna Jameson's like a human pogo stick!!!


-Otherwise, the people arguing for the plusses of COAL are tools. -There Is NO such thing as clean coal. Anyone who's been anywhere near a smokestack of any kind can tell you the scrubbers never operate well, despite the quasi-fraudulent certificate of functionality the kickbacked-inspectors routinely slap on them.

yeahyeahyeah, CO2-whatever, but Coal Pollutes in MANY other ways other than this vaporous tradeoff you're concocting of ICE vs. coal-powered electrics.

Solar and Wind are much better ideas.

[robmora @ Jun 27th 2008 3:59PM]

Fanman has been watching Top Gear apparently.... You DO know that while entertaining, Jeremy Clarkson constantly makes stuff up and isn't exactly a reliable source of information, right?

[stalkythefish @ Jun 27th 2008 8:56AM]

Sweet. Unfortunately, if VW sticks to business as usual, as with all of their really fuel-efficient cars, they won't sell it in the US, because VWOA "won't see a market" for it here.

[Dr. Evil @ Jun 27th 2008 10:08PM]

VWOA SUCKS (for a variety of reasons).

[Ian @ Jun 27th 2008 8:57AM]

Makes no sense...

[Jamie @ Jun 27th 2008 9:04AM]

@stalkythefish

I hope that's not the case because I would love one of these. Especially if it WAS a diesel.

Hopefully, by 2010 efforts here in the US to boost production and availability of biodiesel will drive the price for it down enough to make this a worthy option for auto-buyers and maybe VWOA will consider this an option.

I would like to see the new Tiguan have this Twin Drive drivetrain too.

[stalkythefish @ Jun 27th 2008 4:10PM]

> I hope that's not the case because I would love one of these. Especially if it WAS a diesel.

Hells yes. But then they could give us diesel Polos next year if they wanted to, but that won't happen. I'm not so sure a regular diesel car is even worth it anymore, given the price premium of both the car and fuel. Just for kicks I looked at the price of a gallon of cooking oil at a local (expensive-ish) grocery store. About $8. Only $3 more to go until it's cheaper to fill up your diesel car at Safeway. Probably less at Sam's Club
or Costco.

[muddyh2o @ Jun 27th 2008 9:07AM]

am i supposed to be happy about 31mpg in 3 years?

i'm already hitting ebay looking for CRX HFs. that's 50mph on a 20year old car

[bakesale @ Jun 27th 2008 9:13AM]

That's 31 miles on all-electric, not mpg.

[V Langs @ Jun 27th 2008 9:16AM]

it's actually 31 miles pure electric.

the mpg on this thing must be somewhere north of 50mpg. lets not forget the diesel engine is only to recharge the electric battery

[deslock @ Jun 27th 2008 9:18AM]

It's not 31 MPG, but 31 miles out of the batteries before the diesel engine is needed.

According to the original article, there will be a test fleet of 20 vehicles in 2010. There are no plans for production yet.

[EMoShunz @ Jun 27th 2008 9:37AM]

@V Langs:
if this really is a series diesel electric hybrid then you are right, it should be north of 50mpg...after that initial 31 miles of all electric runs out. not too shabby (but still too low if it really hits $7.50/gal by the time this is released like i heard this morning on the radio).

[robmora @ Jun 27th 2008 4:03PM]

The diesel engine on it's own will be something 50mpg. VW has been using them in those cars and getting that forever.

[Cainiaol @ Jun 27th 2008 9:18AM]

Maybe it's goog idea,if the car is cheap enough!

[Josh @ Jun 27th 2008 9:20AM]

I guess this could be double edged;

1. Now there are twice as many reasons for your VW to leave you stranded on the side of the road; or, in the alternative;
2. At least it has a backup power plant in there when one of them tries to leave you stranded.

I've owned 3 VW's since 2000 (Jetta & 2 Passats), all of them had electrical problems, engine problems, rubber rot, random mechanical failures, door handles falling off, etc. They were a blast to drive but a nightmare to keep on the road. I've heard the new Jetta has been much improved, but VW has still left a sour taste in my mouth. Combine that with horrible dealers (brought in a car for an oil change and they got into an accident with my car) and I'm staying away.

I'm all for new technology to help with fuel economy, but I just don't trust VW to implement it well.

[SteveJ @ Jun 27th 2008 9:26AM]

I had a GTI VR6 and, aside from it dying an early death, it developed a problem which turns out to be common on volkswagens - the power windows fail and of course they are expensive to fix. Yeah, you'll fix them once. Maybe even twice. But the third time? Probably not. Next time you see a volkswagen at a toll booth, check to see if they open the door in order to pay the toll. There's a decent chance they will. Oh, and forget about getting manual windows - they haven't offered them for years. VWs look good, and their clean(er) diesel engines are appealing, a hybrid diesel-electric even more so, but they just aren't very good cars. Avoid.

[JackMontana @ Jun 27th 2008 12:31PM]

worst. cars. ever.

i'd rather walk than own another one

[Dr. Evil @ Jun 27th 2008 10:14PM]

ditto. Crappy dual-mass flywheel clutch failure on the 1.8T. Now they want to try their hand at cutting-edge technology? No thank you.

[V Langs @ Jun 27th 2008 9:52AM]

@ Emo

Let's hope diesel doesn't get that high.
i seriously can't stomach a 200 dollar fill up :-(

i cry when i have to pay 90 bucks to fill up my audi (and it's a V6!) and because i live a solid 15 miles from my office, it's about a weekly, week and a half thing.

[EMoShunz @ Jun 27th 2008 10:02AM]

at $3.50/gal we were spending $600/month on gas (4cyl car 600 miles/week, and the minivan locally shuttling around the kids). over $1200 for gas every month makes me want to hurt people...there is no shortage, why, why, why!
anyway...i'm canadian, i'll just bend over and take it like the rest of us do...

[IrishGandalf @ Jun 27th 2008 10:11AM]

how much it costs to fill up ur tank is due to the size of the tank not the size of the engine. How fast the tank drains, therefore how often you have to fill up said tank, now that's due to the engine :P

[Brad B @ Jun 27th 2008 10:26AM]

I'm by no means an environmentalist, I'm a capitalist, and I'm spending waaaaay too much on gas, and I want an alternative.

As far as technology goes, this is a good step to the right direction, however when the Volt comes out that is the car I will by.

Trains have been battery powered using deseil combustion engines as generators since they made to move from steam. I think we all agree that trains pull quite a heavy load so there is no reason this technology couldn't be used to make a more efficient SUV, Airplanes, and/or Cars.

I'm paying over $400 a month in gas, at this point all I want is a more cost effective solution and my biggest wish is they were on the market today vs another 2 years from now.

[Willard J Zerbe @ Jun 27th 2008 10:27AM]

Plugins make about as much sense as bio. All they do is shift the petroleum problem onto the electric power companies. How long do you think they will be able to carry the increased load? I sure as hell don't want to pay the light bill after adding a damn car to it. People are just so plain stupid.

[AlexF @ Jun 27th 2008 10:47AM]

Yeah people are stupid... would you rather pay an extra 40$ a month on your electric bill or 200$ a month on gas?

[Twitchy @ Jun 27th 2008 11:13AM]

If you're so damn smart, then how about you solve the damn problem?!?

[roknfunkapotomus @ Jun 27th 2008 10:40AM]

Finally, a hybrid that doesn't look like crap!

[Brad B @ Jun 27th 2008 10:42AM]

Willard, if it is 150 in electric vs 450 in gass it just make sense, if more power plants are brought online with McCain & Obama seem to be in favor of then there is an increase in supply which we are not getting out of gas.

Again, not an environmentalist just a capitalist, think it through and you will see the price advantages of this.

[Peter Zich @ Jun 27th 2008 11:17AM]

Hybrid-related question: If you don't charge up the battery or if you're driving more than its range, will it just switch over to being an extra-heavy diesel engine?

[Twitchy @ Jun 28th 2008 2:55AM]

Over simplified, yes. However I do believe that the system will be not unlike that in the Volt - the diesel engine (which can be fuelled with bio-diesel) is not physically connected to the drivetrain. Instead, it is connected to a generator which recharges the batteries and powers the electric engine(s). This is, contrary to big-block fan belief, a more efficient use of fuel as the engine can run constantly at its most economical RPM, instead of being revved up and down whilst changing gears - one of the biggest flaws of ICE vehicles.