GM dropping Volt's range from 600 to 360 miles

The gas tank in the Chevy Volt is probably the least interesting thing about GM's hybrid concept, but it's causing some waves today, with reports that GM is trimming it in size, effectively dropping the vehicle's range from 600 miles to some 360. Apparently GM found that consumers rarely travel more than 40 miles a day (the range of the Volt's battery pack) and that longer trips didn't require a 600 mile range because "most bladders can't go 600 miles" -- so cutting down the 12-gallon fuel tank saves weight and cost. Sure, we can see that -- most of our cars can only go 300 or so miles before needing gas -- but it sure seems like the Volt is going from marvel of hybrid technology to just another hybrid in a much cooler skin.

[Via Autoblog]

[user13 @ Jul 9th 2008 6:03AM]

someone needs to increase the voltage

[white_ultras @ Jul 9th 2008 6:49AM]

Good. They are shrinking GAS tank not electric. Maybe they expect some new battery tech in the near future so the electric range may even improve. Who needs bigger gas tank in Volt anyway?

[rlynd3 @ Jul 9th 2008 12:24PM]

BUDACHING!

...360 mile range, no problem. waiting till 2010, problem!

[GhostDoggy @ Jul 9th 2008 6:13AM]

What a joke. They raise the price by 33% from $30K to $40K and now they are halving the range. Sounds like GM is trying to kill the electric car AGAIN. :)

[Bob @ Jul 9th 2008 8:06AM]

How many times do we have to go through this? It's the Stone Cutters that hold back the electric car.

[ronbailey @ Jul 9th 2008 8:52AM]

So doing something as esoteric as reducing the size of the gas tank is a deal breaker for you? WTF is up with that?

Look at it this way - GM just reduced the weight of the vehicle by something like 42 lbs - meaning that they improved the gas mileage, reduced the stopping distances AND improved the overall handling and performance of the car, without even slightly increasing the carbon footprint. If anything, I say that the move was little short of brilliant.

[christapher @ Jul 9th 2008 10:38AM]

wasn't their main reason for killing the ev-1 that consumers wanted a car with a range of over 120 miles? now they admit that 40 miles is acceptable. what a bunch of pricks.

[Matt @ Jul 9th 2008 11:00AM]

Are you stupid or something? The range is still over 300 miles and if your capable of pumping gas then the range is pretty much only limited by your wallet.

[Johan S @ Jul 15th 2008 3:40PM]

@Adam

Wow, you fool that racist accusation was totally uncalled for. Did some Indian "take" your job? A lot of people criticize GM ..no problem, but since Nilay's name sounds Indian he must surely also be a Tata motors spy and maybe works in a convenience store too part time. Is that how your brain works?

People of certain descents are not allowed to offer criticism of American companies without having their patriotism questioned?

That has to be it, cause I don't see you arbitrarily accusing other people who criticize GM of supporting Tata motors. Hey now maybe you'll accuse me even though I'm not Indian. Good.

[cesium @ Jul 9th 2008 12:03PM]

Looks like someone can't take a joke...

[ABOMIBOT @ Jul 9th 2008 6:23AM]

Even with a smaller gas tank the Volt is nowhere near "just another hybrid." It is an electric vehicle with an internal combustion generator. And if that point of distinction is lost on you, then how about doing a bit more research before you dismiss what has the potential to be revolutionary.

[LarryLarryLarry @ Jul 9th 2008 6:28AM]

It's very hard to believe that the weight of the gasoline and gas tank was an issue for the car's performance. The battery pack is going to weigh many hundreds of pounds, how much does half a gas tank weigh?

350 miles is right on the edge of being inadequate for long trips. Stopping for gas every 4 hours is not cool.

[Shinigami @ Jul 9th 2008 6:41AM]

What about stopping for sightseeing every 4 hours? xD

[Twitchy @ Jul 9th 2008 7:07AM]

1. You are supposed to stop periodically in order to rest - this greatly reduces the likelihood of an accident by human error resulting from the onset of fatigue.

2. The absolute majority of usage will be for short trips, which means that the fuel in the tank will be rarely used. It is therefore not only efficiency that is increased by a forced weight reduction, but also aids in the maintenance of the fuel which remains in the vehicle - petrol (aka gasoline) has a limited lifespan, much less than diesel, and if left unused in a fuel tank for too long it will 'spoil' and become useless.

3. Times are changing. If you need to travel longer distances then it may be not only more environmentally conscious to use other means of transportation such as trains, but also a more economically sound choice vs private motor vehicles.

4. Don't be such a party-pooper, just because others like it doesn't mean you have to dis' it.

[Chris @ Jul 9th 2008 7:18AM]

If it had a 600 mile range, people would rarely use it to its full potential anyway - a lot of people can't go 8 hours without using the bathroom.

[greygabe @ Jul 9th 2008 7:50AM]

Gas weighs a lot actually. A tank of it is about 70 lbs. For fuel efficient cars, that's a lot more weight to account for - at least more than the battery packs.

[Shinigami @ Jul 9th 2008 8:15AM]

Twitchy
You're right, we will make stops every 4 hours in any case. Its just sad to see something extraordinary becoming ordinary.

greygabe
Yes, weight reducing is great, but with 70 lbs you won't get enough efficiency to notice the difference. If their "making the car cheaper" would also make it cheaper for the customer, I'd agree that its good. But making it cheaper for production while making it more expensive to the customer is all about greedy manufacturer. Thats my opinion.

[chris @ Jul 9th 2008 9:09AM]

@ Twichy - agreed on all 4 counts
@ Shinigami - i wouldn't Say 'ordinary' but i know what you mean. however with your comment to greybabe 'not noticing the difference'... don't think of taking 70lbs off the car for 1 fill up (360 miles/580km) . it's 70 lbs off the car for 100,000 - 250,000 miles/kilometers.
and with regard to making the manufacturing cheaper? making a tank smaller isn't going to save GM all that much... if you want them to pass that savings on to you... you might see $10-20. it's only formed metal.

I like this idea, I live close to work, and would rather not need to by fuel stabilizers.

[UHUH @ Jul 9th 2008 12:05PM]

Stopping every 4 hours? That's 87.5 mph!
How much is half a gas tank in weight? Not much until you consider the 8lbs per gallon of gas.

[Anthony @ Jul 9th 2008 11:08AM]

I have a Civic Hybrid & generally drive alone or with just my wife & little boy. My parents came to visit. That added 300 lbs to my car. I could definitely feel it.

Cutting weight is one of the easiest ways to increase performance.

Aerodynamics are the other, more difficult, approach & this thing looks like style before substance in that regard so they had to make a choice.

1 gallon of gasoline = 6lbs.

[Sean @ Jul 9th 2008 11:21AM]

If SUV's and 'trucks' (I use the term loosely, mom dad and the two kids in a truck with a 6 foot bed is not a truck) don't stop for gas every 4 hours on vacations I'll eat my shoe.
Why? Because families stupid enough to buy a 'truck' or SUV bigger than a CRV or Vibe usually drive about 85mph on the highway, and that speed they aren't going to be getting much more than 20mpg. Even with a huge fuel tank, 4 hours is cutting it close.

[LarryLarryLarry @ Jul 9th 2008 4:29PM]

Twitchy -

You are the Nanny of the Nanny State.

First you tell me that I have to stop every 4 hours to "refresh myself" and if I don't, I'm dangerous.

Then you tell me that my gasoline will be useless anyway because it will be too old.

Then you tell me I'm IRRESPONSIBLE if I travel more than 350 miles in my own vehicle.

And finally you call me a "party pooper".

First, if I need to stop to "refresh myself" I will stop. I won't buy a car which FORCES me to stop whether I need it or not.

Second, gasoline lasts for a bare minimum of a year. You're both stupid and wrong.

Third, I live in a place where there is no reasonable long-range public transportation, AND you are not my God to decide if I am irresponsible or not.

So I have an idea. Why don't you take your moral superiority and blatantly wrong information, get in your ridiculously priced, ridiculously short-ranged Chevrolet Volt and then eat some cyanide.

That's the biggest contribution you can make to the world environoment.

[Michael Chastain @ Jul 10th 2008 12:44PM]

"First, if I need to stop to "refresh myself" I will stop. I won't buy a car which FORCES me to stop whether I need it or not."

Good luck finding a car with unlimited range. 360 miles is pretty average for a vehicle.

[:) @ Sep 24th 2008 11:05AM]

As much as I disagree with LarryLarryLarry (why 3?)....and as much as I would low rank him...I really, really, think they should get rid of the stupid low ranked gray. I like the new blue for highest ranked..but really, if you low rank a post enough...maybe you should make it get deleted or something. Sigh...

[Erin Potter @ Jul 9th 2008 6:38AM]

That's sad because I drive 40+, one-way, to work everyday. If I knew I could get that kind of milage, I'd snatch one up in a second.

[greygabe @ Jul 9th 2008 7:46AM]

Well at least you'd get the equivalent of about 100+ mpg to work with the Volt. Forgetting that magical first 40 miles without any gas whatsoever, it's still a fuel efficient car.

[Technophile @ Jul 9th 2008 10:35AM]

you could just buy a Prius and buy the battery enhancement back from A123 Systems...

it nets you 100+MPG.

And you don't have to wait till 2010 =P

[Alan @ Jul 9th 2008 2:48PM]

@Technophile
Being a Prius owner myself I've had the temptation to buy a Hymotion BRM, but this type of system won't match the Volt (if GM ever lets it materialize). For $9000 with the add-in you can go 40 miles at above 100MPG, but that's with assistance from the gas engine. The Volt is pure EV until its batteries are low. Yes, you can add a $2 EV switch from Radio Shack, but you can't exceed 34mph or else the combustion engine engages. The add-on for the Prius is just not suitable for EV except for around the neighborhood.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Jul 9th 2008 4:11PM]

@Alan

Hymotion in combination with an Integrated Solar Roof for the Prius would be killer.

http://www.solarelectricalvehicles.com/
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/05/31/putting-a-solar-roof-on-your-prius-go-20-miles-on-battery-powe/

[Shinigami @ Jul 9th 2008 6:39AM]

Just another greedy company thinking of more ways to make profit.

[kal @ Jul 9th 2008 6:52AM]

I agree! My high school teacher use to tell me not to hand in work that was simply "good enough" but to strive to do the best I could do.

GM is making a hybrid that is simply "good enough" to be profitable.
If they CAN make a 600-mile car, why not strive for it?
I thought this Volt was a sign that GM is finally getting it. Sadly it's just business as usual with these guys.

[Darth Abe @ Jul 9th 2008 7:37AM]

To kal and shinigami, they're improving both the cost and efficiency of the vehicle at the cost of range. WTF do you mean, just another greedy company? They're optimizing their product.

[Shinigami @ Jul 9th 2008 8:24AM]

If you're a proud American, don't buy sh!t, buy what you really want, something that satisfies your needs.

[Shinigami @ Jul 9th 2008 8:27AM]

Damn.
I need edit button!!!!

Anyways.
If the product becomes cheaper for the company to produce and retail price goes upwards...

How is it making more efficient? Its business! And the purpose of any business is... yeah, making money. Making the car more "efficient" as it making more money off selling it is...
...
...just another greedy business.

[thatrotierkid @ Jul 9th 2008 12:35PM]

@kal

If GM strove to make every car they made they absolute best it could be so that no one could complain about it ever either:

1) no one could afford them b/c they would all be $1M a pop

or

2) the would go out of business (faster) b/c they wouldn't make any profit on their cars

[aaron @ Aug 14th 2008 5:33PM]

actually gm won't be turning a profit on the first generation volt because of the cost of the batteries.

[StopTheInsanity @ Jul 9th 2008 6:41AM]

Yep, because us Americans aren't ready for cars that go 600 miles or more between fill ups.

[Erin Potter @ Jul 9th 2008 6:41AM]

h

[Kal Cole @ Jul 9th 2008 6:43AM]

What a mistake!!
Just because my bladder will want a relief at 300miles does not necessarily mean that I WANT to also fuel of the car. And even if I only do 40 miles a day, I'd love for a tank of gas to last 15 days.

Just more proof that GM is in Cahoots with the oil industry.

By the time this thing finally comes out, with all these compromises, Toyota will come out with its improved hybrid technology and will kick GM's butt...leaving Lutz scratching his head and reciting his usual line, "I don't know why we're losing market share, but if you're a proud American, you must buy GM products anyways".

[Twitchy @ Jul 9th 2008 7:09AM]

You forget that you would also charge it at night whilst at home, and as such would rarely ever use that petrol that is in the tank. Chances are that if you plug the car in every night when at home, the fuel in the tank would spoil before you had a chance to use it all.

[Jim @ Jul 9th 2008 12:48PM]

@ Twitchy "You forget that you would also charge it at night whilst at home..."

Why would I want to charge it every night? Do you fill up your gas tank every night?! I want an electric car that can last at week without having to be "refilled." A 300 mile charge would just about fit inline with current mileage from a tank of gas. It would also fit inline with American's refuelling habits.

Furthermore, there is a very large number of people who rent, own, or otherwise live in apartments and condominiums that will have nowhere to "plug into," as they will only have parking spaces. Will the electric car not be for them?

It seems since there are tens of millions of people who don't have electrical outlets available near their car... that an electric car should be able to be charged quicker and less often. If not, electric cars will not be the answer!

[dagamer34 @ Jul 9th 2008 1:38PM]

Do you want a pizza maker with that car too? Quit whining.

[thatrotierkid @ Jul 9th 2008 4:17PM]

@Jim

Do you only charge your cell phone once a week too?

The charging station is designed to be in your garage. You step out of the car, plug it in, go inside and sleep, then unplug it in the morning? Or are you just that lazy

[Anthony @ Jul 11th 2008 1:24PM]

>Just more proof that GM is in Cahoots with the oil industry.

Oh geez. Put down the tin foil hat already. Show me a battery that can drive a car for 300 miles between charges.... It doesn't exist. That would require something on the order of 100 kilowatt hours of energy!!! And don't tell me battery technology has been stagnated as another conspiracy... Battery research is HUGE for laptops and mobile phones. It just isn't there yet. Batteries for "minimal" Electric Car must.....

1.) must weigh in around 500 lbs or so.
2.) must hold at about 20 kwh of energy. ( to go 50 miles )
3.) must last for 10 years at at least 80% capacity. ( This is tough. )
4.) must cost less then 5 thousand dollars. ( Not there yet. )

We “barely” have a good enough battery for something like the Volt. It's a stretch, and a gamble, and GM knows it. I hope the testing works out. I hope GM can make it happen. I’ll be first in line to buy one.

It’s insulting, and downright mean, for you to belittle the hard working American engineers at GM. Their countless hours, and numerous innovations have built this country. I have little doubt that their intelligence, team work, and inventive spirit will once again be a shining example of what humanity can achieve when necessity knocks.

[BloodyGerman @ Jul 9th 2008 6:49AM]

Well 600 miles were probably anyway for fuel optimal driving with

[BloodyGerman @ Jul 9th 2008 6:50AM]

Well 600 miles were probably anyway for fuel optimal driving with smaller than 100km/h. When you drive faster the range will reduce quite a lot.

My guess is, at a moderate speed of 160km/h the 360 miles (576km) will reduce to something less than 300km which isn't really enough.

(hope comment isn't crippled again)

[vb @ Jul 9th 2008 7:04AM]

The "moderate" speed of 160 km/h (100 mph) will get you a ticket very quickly anywhere in the US (except maybe in the middle of nowhere where there are no cops). They're not building a car for Germany with its no speed limit autobahn. The highest speed limit that I've seen in the US was 70mph (112 km/h), with people going around 80 mph there.

[BloodyGerman @ Jul 9th 2008 7:20AM]

I wonder why it has a top speed of 100 to 120 mph then.

[From My Cube @ Jul 9th 2008 7:45AM]

@bloody german

thats only for looks, nearly all us cars spedomitors go up to 120 but that does not mean the car can go that fast

[greygabe @ Jul 9th 2008 7:46AM]

Americans wouldn't buy a car that couldn't go 100... That's the truth of it.
Even the trucks and SUVs need to hit the 100 mark.