GM taunts us with teaser shots of production Volt

Well, it sure looks like GM is intent to be milking the roll-out of its hotly-anticipated Chevy Volt for all its worth (and who can blame 'em), with it first offering a fleeting glimpse of the actual production vehicle on ABC the other day, and it now letting loose its first two official shots of the car that'll supposedly be rolling off the production line in 2010. While it's not much, the more interesting of the two (above) at least gives us a good look at the Volt's headlights, as well as what appears to be an LED fog lamp or daytime running light. Hit up the link below for the second, even less-revealing shot, as well as a few more pics that offer a glimpse of the Volt's design process.

[Via DailyTech]

[From My Cube @ Aug 14th 2008 5:24PM]

You know engadget...you could have quoted your other AOL partner autoblog....HOLY HELL NEW COMMENT SYSTEM

[From My Cube @ Aug 14th 2008 5:28PM]

In my over zelous excitment, I thouht maybe there would be an edit button...but here is the autoblog link

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/08/14/gm-releasess-new-production-volt-teasers/

[Techie @ Aug 15th 2008 2:33AM]

I have always hated the Volt's Grill. It's soo ugly!

[greg @ Aug 15th 2008 5:09PM]

I kind of like it...wanna see the rest of the car

[Jeff @ Aug 16th 2008 11:42AM]

@techie: yeah, that grill is serious ugly.

...and those lights are technically illegal in the US (forward facing blue and red? not happening.)

- so maybe it'll still change up a little before we see it on the street.

[papafew @ Aug 14th 2008 5:27PM]

from gas to electricity

"après moi le déluge"

[Winner! @ Aug 14th 2008 5:32PM]

Congrats! You are the first failure of the new comment system!

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

As a long-time GM hater (due to its craptastic automobiles lo these many, many years (my first car was a Chevy 20+ years ago, and that was the last domestic car I bought)), may I say I have my fingers crossed for you, Chevy. I hope you really pull this off. Seriously. I'd love to see my country pull its way out of the world's automotive cellar.

[kjb434 @ Aug 14th 2008 5:37PM]

I'm with you on GM making crappy cars, but the last couple of years they have gotten a lot better with quality.

Of course I'm still driving my 2008 Volvo XC90. GM burned me years ago, so I won't go back.

[Quix @ Aug 14th 2008 6:13PM]

Agreed. A friend recently bought a new Silverado. I was expecting the typical GM plasticky junk. The interior quality amazed me. It was a lot like my 2000 Passat I loved so much. And the doors opened and closed with a solid German feel. That isn't the GM I know.

GM finally woke up. But is it too late? It's hard to forget about 30 years of poor reliability, crappy build quality, and horrendous resale value when you're plunking down $20k+ for a new automobile.

[Joe @ Aug 14th 2008 9:25PM]

I recently got to drive a number of '08 and '09 vehicles to and from dealers for a car show at my uni and I was very impressed by GM's newer autos. I drove an Avalanche, a Trailblazer SS, an H3, an HHR SS, and a Yukon Hybrid, and they were all better than I had initially thought. My '98 lumina doesn't even come close to the quality of the interior on these new vehicles.

[kjb434 @ Aug 14th 2008 5:35PM]

One: your an idiot for trying to be first! FAIL\

Two: who cares, this car still uses tons (or barrels) of oil. Unless they are making this out of that corn plastic like that cellphone, all plastic parts of this car are made directly from oil. All the fabric if you don't get leather comes from oil. That foam in the seats and those tires come from oil too.

[Silverfrog @ Aug 15th 2008 2:18PM]

By your logic, then, we should avoid every plastic device, right? Wrong. If that were the case, you'd have to wait for all-metal or wooden medical supplies, medical equipment, and other less-glamourous items such as sewage pipes.

Technologies such as electric, E85, Solar, Wind, and Hydrogen fuel cells are not meant to supplant oil as a necessity--they are meant only to reduce our consumption of it. And, as hard as this may be for your illogical brain to comprehend, we consume more oil from driving the vehicles than we ever do in building them.

[Varnson @ Aug 14th 2008 5:35PM]

Super...2010...only about 10 years too late.

I love GM pumping up their new eco-image too. Way to lead guys.

[ausfahrt @ Aug 14th 2008 5:56PM]

Ya i agree and it seems to me they are screwing this up like their line of hybrids. The car is huge from the pics i've seen. I don't understand why they don't get that compact translates to better mileage.

[Michael Chastain @ Aug 14th 2008 7:44PM]

The Volt *IS* a hybrid--just of the plug-in kind.

[RC @ Aug 14th 2008 7:47PM]

While Honda and Toyota were busy working on Hybrid Drive vehicles GM was busy pumping out 10mpg pickups and SUVs. People don't associate hybrids and GM, the Volt will struggle to compete when the plug-in Prius comes out.

[Killer @ Aug 14th 2008 10:05PM]

@RC

Wow...and while Toyota (during that same time of developing those hybrids) had more lobbyist in Washington D.C. to lobby agianst raising the MPG standard than GM. Weird.... I'm not seeing where you're trying to say Toyota saw this coming...all I see is that Toyota and Honda saw a market, in which GM, Ford, Chrysler didnt care much for. You make more money from the SUV, then Cars in the auto industry. The American auto companies kept with the easy cash, while Toyota turned out cheaper to produce cars and made money off numbers. Personally the prius, even the re-designed one looks like a toy, Volt has the one up on the look of the car.

[Joe @ Aug 15th 2008 9:41AM]

@ausphart:

Most of the pics that have been released of the Volt were the concept, which looks much like the new Camaro. However, the production model will be much smaller (hence the fact that GM is releasing 'teaser' images of the final product). I've heard from inside GM that it looks sort of like the new Chevy Cruze that's coming out, with a little bit of standard prius-y hybridness (high rear spoiler and such).

[RC @ Aug 15th 2008 8:13PM]

@ Killer

Pickups and SUVs were hot when gas cost $1.50 a gallon. Not so much anymore. And many people are choosing fuel economy over style. That's why Priuses are selling like hotcakes.

[Bryant @ Aug 14th 2008 5:40PM]

Wait, so what's new about this comment system? It just looks like they added tabs to comment posting.

[d @ Aug 14th 2008 5:40PM]

I thought it was creative...

[BubbleBreaker @ Aug 14th 2008 5:40PM]

Wazzup with the red light/reflector thingie?
I don't think that vehicle would be immediately street-legal in my state. A vehicle cannot have any red lights forward of the midpoint of the vehicle unless they are emergy responders here.

[Bryan @ Aug 14th 2008 5:41PM]

Weird new comment system...

[Innocent Bystander @ Aug 14th 2008 5:41PM]

not so fast mon ami...

[iEye @ Aug 14th 2008 5:43PM]

GM cars are crap, the underlying power plant is meaning less, gas or electricity, Honda and Toyota will make a better version. I know because I own a GM car, but the plan was to scrap it anyway...

GM = CRAP

[duffman @ Aug 14th 2008 5:43PM]

You're clearly missing the point kjb. No one cares how much oil it takes to make the car, they care how much oil it takes to operate the car. Obviously oil is used for everything in our world, but not having to pay to burn it for travel is pretty sweet.

[RD. @ Aug 14th 2008 5:46PM]

All they need on it now is that bumper sticker that reads "Out of a job yet? Keep buying foreign." Damn I hate those.

[roole @ Aug 14th 2008 10:45PM]

Yeah, hypocrite.

On what keyboard -- more to to the point, made where -- were you typing your super-sardonic comment?

[CTCABM @ Aug 14th 2008 5:55PM]

This car is a joke 40 MILES RANGE
Does GM think we are this stupid?
Look at the TESLA Roadster here http://www.teslamotors.com/

Tesla
250 Miles range

VOLT
40 Miles range

Tesla has 6 times the range

[PopsG @ Aug 14th 2008 6:02PM]

You are mistaken. It has a 300+ mile range. 40 miles of that is pure electric. After those 40 miles it has a small gas engine to recharge the batteries. More then 90% of people drive less then 40 miles a day.

Tesla
$100,000

VOLT

[PopsG @ Aug 14th 2008 6:04PM]

Last reply got cut off.

VOLT
$30,000

Tesla will cost 3 times as much.

[Zadillo @ Aug 14th 2008 6:06PM]

The 2009 Tesla Roadster will cost $109,000, and there will only be 1500 of them. Even with the apparently price increases of the Volt, it will certainly at least be relatively much more affordable.

[batzgam @ Aug 14th 2008 6:25PM]

Yeah, the Tesla has 6 times the range - until the Volt's gasoline engine turns on. Then, you just keep filling it with gas while you drive all day. Dr. Moneybags in his Tesla has to stop and charge for 8 hours every 250 miles (not counting those last few miles that are going to goooo slooooow). If you're just commuting 30 miles a day to work and back, neither car uses a drop of gas.

I'm not sure where the perception that the car is massive comes from - it would fit in a smaller box than a Prius:
Prius: 60 in. X 68 in. X 175 in.
Volt(concept): 53 in. X 71 in. X 170 in.

I do hope they don't stray too far from the concept's looks - if so, it could be the first American car that I buy.

[Holla@urboi @ Aug 14th 2008 6:45PM]

I heard they changing the price to $40,000 but that still beats paying $109.000.

[fred tan @ Aug 14th 2008 7:12PM]

the tesla is a tiny toy car costing many times more. as said, 40miles is fine, which is why its a hybrid.

[jake @ Aug 14th 2008 8:08PM]

@fred tan
Hey, don't hate on the Tesla. The Volt is not much bigger, it's about the size of a civic. And the Tesla is a sports car, 0-60 3.9 seconds, low volume and all carbon fiber body, so of course the price is higher. The Volt is half as fast at 0-60 in 8 seconds.

@CTCABM
In the end the Volt is a PHEV (they like to call it an E-REV), so it shouldn't be held to the same range standards as a full EV (some will argue this IS a full EV, but the EV range makes it about the same as a NEV (40 miles) if you hold it by EV standards, so it is better to judge it by PHEV standards) , since after the 40 miles it can continue running on gasoline.

[Joe @ Aug 14th 2008 9:25PM]

The Tesla Roadster may have 6 times the range, but also at least 3 times the cost.

GM's decision to have 40 miles on battery alone was based on many things -- price, safety, and the fact that most commuters only drive ~40 miles (round trip) daily. Bigger batteries would be MUCH more expensive, and there's safety risks, especially in crashes -- not to mention 'thermal events.' Also, even with the gas engine charging the battery, it'll get the equivalent of 150mpg (so I've heard).

I recently got to speak with the VP of GM Global Powertrain, and it was very interesting to learn about this vehicle.

[ds @ Aug 18th 2008 1:31PM]

"The Tesla Roadster may have 6 times the range, but also at least 3 times the cost."

-Tesla $109,000 Volt $~40,000+ (will likely be more since the estimate has increased a great deal throughout development)

-So I guess one of three things happened here.
1) Your math skills are hovering around the second grade level.
2) You have no actual information, and you are just here at engadget typing random words into the comment box.
3) You are smart enough to realize your statement was a lie, but you are a disgusting human bring that has no integrity.

"Bigger batteries would be MUCH more expensive, and there's safety risks, especially in crashes"

-This statement is also completely ridiculous. If the batteries were not safe to be in the car, then they would not be in the car. They limit the battery capacity based entirely on cost. The batteries are safe, and the cars will pass very strict regulations / impact tests. The batteries are in fact **far** safer than the lead-acid battery under every hood in the country.

"even with the gas engine charging the battery, it'll get the equivalent of 150mpg (so I've heard)."

-I have to wonder how stupid you are after reading this statement. The first 40 miles come from the battery. So if a person drives under 40 miles, they just got 999,999,999,999,999,999 mpg. Obviously infiinte mpg, but the big numbers tend to catch morons like yourself. The 150mpg number Chevy tosses around is nothing more than a skewed scenario like the one I just gave you. No one knows exactly what the car will get after the batteries drain.. Chevy hopes to be able to sustain 50mpg, but the (rumors) and reality seems like that will not happen. Every initial prediction about the car has been overly optimistic to say the least.

I recently got to speak with the VP of GM Global Powertrain, and it was very interesting to learn about this vehicle."

Did you realize he was lying to you, or did you make all this fake info up all on your own?

[PopsG @ Aug 14th 2008 5:57PM]

Anyone else notice this front end looks nothing at all like the concept? I plan on getting one, but it was the look of the concept that really peaked my interest.

[jp23 @ Aug 14th 2008 6:10PM]

PopsG,

I would love to see you buy one for $30k but we all know that ain't gonna happen. Be lucky if you can get on for under $45k after dealer markup.

[Genjinaro @ Aug 14th 2008 6:27PM]

Yeah I hate when automakers stray from the concept version, the concept sells me but then it somehow gets f***ed up on the way to production...

[futurepastnow @ Aug 14th 2008 6:40PM]

GM basically said that the Volt concept wasn't aerodynamic at all, so a significant redesign should not be surprising.

[paul34 @ Aug 14th 2008 8:04PM]

Pops,

Please tell us when the last time was that an automaker actually produced a production car that was 100% like the concept car, which are usually not designed with practical considerations in mind, then back to us.

Thanks.

[Ignatius @ Aug 14th 2008 10:11PM]

Corvette.

[ausfahrt @ Aug 14th 2008 5:59PM]

It's because this thing is massive. Much like their hybrids. All marketing and no real care for the environment.

[Michael Chastain @ Aug 14th 2008 7:53PM]

In all fairness it does more for the environment to make large cars more efficient than it does to do the same with small cars. The additional cost of batteries and/or a hybrid system is also easier to absorb on a larger car. Here's an example (assuming 15,000 miles per year):

Improving a small car from 30mpg to 50mpg (a 20mpg improvement) saves 200 gallons of gas per year.

Improving a large truck from 15mpg to 20mpg (a 5mpg improvement) saves 250 gallons of gas per year.

Let all the people who want a big expensive car buy it and help drive the price down. Inexpensive small cars are right around the corner.

[John @ Aug 14th 2008 6:01PM]

So your argument is that this car is made just like every other car, requiring lots of oil to be built. Pardon me for pointing this out, but the point is that it takes less oil to run. If it took MORE oil to build it, you might have the glimmerings of a suggestion of a point somewhere, but sadly, you do not.

[CanisMinor @ Aug 14th 2008 6:07PM]

Well, until they send Rick Wagoner and Bob Lutz packing, I'm going to continue being pessimistic about GM.

The Volt concept is promising, but I see absolutely nothing in it to re-establish the brand identity of any of the GM products.

[techieguru16 @ Aug 14th 2008 6:14PM]

Looks nice....