Chevy Volt a Failure - GM to Layoff 1,300

Justin, You quoted what I quoted, but chopped off the very the very next sentence that was half the reason I quoted it for you.

"The Volt, which cost nearly $40,000 before a $7,500 federal tax credit, could take up to 27 years to pay off versus a Chevrolet Cruze, assuming it was regularly driven farther than its battery-only range allows. The payback time could drop to about eight years if gas cost $5 a gallon and the driver remained exclusively on battery power."

Gas is averaging $3.45 a gallon right now, not $5 a gallon. That $3.45 is actually 69 percent of $5, which means using the calculation, it would be more than 10 years for the thing to pay itself back (at that cost, at the price of gas right now), if you JUST drive the thing for limited range on battery power.

Of course, that is not how most people drive -- a charge gives you around 35 miles on average, which isn't going to meet most people's needs for daily driving. Which again, is why the cars aren't selling at that price.

In your circumstance, you are telling me that you drive a car less than 35 mpg round trip for a commute. And you chose an electric model that costs about $32,000 (not true cost, because it is heavily subsidized, but the cost to the person who buys it) versus a similar gasoline model that costs about $19,500 (the Chevy Cruze). You have $12,500 paid up front for your commuter car that you have to make up. The price of gas isn't anywhere near where it has to be for you to make that up very quickly driving what a TYPICAL person drives. But you are telling me you are spinning the thing less than 50 miles a day on average (average charge gets about 35 miles, actually), 5 days a week and saving tons. When I know that the price per mile on the kind of mileage a Chevy Cruze gets at current national gas prices is less than 10 cents per mile. And the current national price of electricity makes it so the Volt just on battery power costs somewhere around 3 cents per mile.

Bump ALL OF those numbers, OK -- and create a great scenario that you have somehow manipulated in your home that most people haven't? Let's say you got your Volt way more subsidized than most people have, so the price difference between what you would have paid for a Volt and a Chevy Cruze was only $10,000. And say you pay only 2 cents per mile for your electricity where you live, because you have the best ESCO ever, or it just costs less where you are that most of the country. And let's say that the Cruze for your commute would cost 13 cents a mile, because gas prices are significantly higher where you live than in the rest of the country, or your commute is all stop-and-go city driving and the gas mileage isn't as good on that kind of drive. So you are at a 10 cent differential per mile, and you are averaging a 35 mile commute, 5 times a week, and you believe you are going to make up $10,000 anytime soon at $3.50 a day, 5 times a week?

If that is what you are somehow coming up with your back of the matchbook calculations, and you believe that in 6 years because of some very unique circumstances that don't mirror most people's costs and driving habits, you are going to somehow defy the odds and break even, good on you. As I said, I am happy you are enjoying your Volt. Your utility is all that matters for your money spent.

I just know that you are maybe the only person in the world who has bought one of those and has legitimately found a way to turn it into a good financial decision, not just an "I feel good about driving an EV" decision -- which is why sales have been so low, even with them subsidizing the cars to ridiculous levels (at my expense -- which as you know, is my problem with the whole mess).

 

I should quote that post for posterity. Even if you meant 40 to 50 years, it isn't likely. The technology advances might happen in the next 50 years, but even the greatest technology in the world -- and this is 100 year old + technology -- has a investment problem when you are talking about such a big expenditure, and it takes time to overtake existing infrastructure.

The first problem with the EV--and this has been pointed out over and over again, for anyone who actually follows this technology--is that when you buy a car, it isn't like buying a cellular phone, which is relatively disposable, so when it becomes obsolete you can just toss it. For most people, a car is a resellable investment. The resale value for an EV is different than it is for a gas car, because the battery is at least half the cost of the car. So you first get hit with depreciation on the most expensive component in the car, because batteries degrade over time. Then, for what you said to happen, the technology is going to have to rapidly improve. That could happen. But that means when you are going to be trying to resell your 2013 Chevy Volt in 2018, it will end up being the equivalent of trying to sell a PC with an old processor in it. You can expect a fraction of what you paid. The problem is, unlike your PC or a cell phone or gaming system, you are talking about $30,000 + investments, which most people aren't going to risk becoming obsolete on them and having them depreciate to nothing quickly.

Second, as Boom has pointed out a couple of times on here, we don't have the infrastructure for everyone to be driving around in EVs. That can change. But in 4 to 5 years, when it hasn't happened in the last 50? Given our current infrastructure, we'd fry the grid if everyone was plugging in overnight right now. The hurricane and just how overwhelmed the grid was in the NYC area should pound home a logical point. Energy suppliers can't keep up with current demand for electricity, and add in a hurricane -- if everyone had been in EVs, the hit to our economy because of what it would have done to NY, NJ, PA area would have been enormous. New York would have shut down completely, rather than limping back, the way it is now. I've heard talk of a smart grid for at least as long as I have been an adult. That is what it will take for wide adoption of electric vehicles. And without wide adoption, you can't bring the costs down to where they can be cheaper to produce than gas vehicles or hybrids. If you think that it is going to happen in the next 4 to 5 years, when it hasn't happened in the last 40 years, you are the most optimistic person on earth.

That is just not a very thoughtful post. Optimistic, but not really well thought out.

 

Source for what? The miles you get for a charge? The EPA and Chevy are good places to start.

The EPA had the first model rated at 35 miles per charge. The new one at 37 miles per charge. Chevy tells cutsomers they can expect 25 to 50 miles per charge.

Here is a Chevy Faq. http://gm-volt.com/chevy-volt-faqs/

"The battery can power the car for the first 25 to 50 miles."

Here is the EPA. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=31618

Scroll down to driving range. Has the 2012 Volt at 35 mpg on electricity only.

 

GM runs this site.

http://www.chevrolet.com/volt-electric-car/faq.html

Q. I thought the EV range was 25 to 50 miles, Why does the EPA label say 38 miles?

A. While the published EPA EV range for Volt is an estimated 38 miles, the electric range that customers actually experience may be higher or lower than 38 due to the driver's technique, the terrain, battery age and the outdoor temperature. On a full charge, most customers under moderate conditions will experience an estimated 25 to 55† miles of EV range. The high range of 55 miles is based on ideal circumstances – conservative driving using no air conditioning in mild outdoor temperatures. The 25-mile range represents a slightly more aggressive driving style using the heater in ECO setting in cold outdoor temperatures of 25 degrees F.