Few believe that. Without the belief, there is worry. And you’re evading the issue of an extra $10K of worry.

Ressler: “However, battery replacement cost isn’t going to be their inhibitor if there is one.”

Repeatedly asserted, entirely unproven.

Ressler: “… but people in the market for “next” will pave the way for worry-warts and vanity brand seekers to shed their fears.”

The people in the market for “next?” They already bought a Prius.

There is no such notion other than that worry is a natural part of life, for everyone. It shouldn’t be an element of owning a car, and you can today buy Detroit 3 products that eliminate worry as effectively as anyone else does.

And if GM takes the stance that “10 years for a $10K – or even a $5K – part is perfectly natural,” the Volt will be DOA.

It won’t be $10,000 nor $5,000. Electric cars, however, will introduce different economic and maintenance properties that won’t be fully known until they’re in the market with significant presence. However, battery replacement cost isn’t going to be their inhibitor if there is one. If new scares you, stay old school. True, hand-wringers make up a large portion of the market, but people in the market for “next” will pave the way for worry-warts and vanity brand seekers to shed their fears.

Phil

I’m sure “Uncle Lokki” did just that… “When they have proven reliability, into a decade and more, then you should reconsider that, my dear.”

The notion that worry is a natural part of life for the middle class auto buyer is a significant part of the reason why GM is on the ropes.

And if GM takes the stance that “10 years for a $10K – or even a $5K – part is perfectly natural,” the Volt will be DOA.

You can buy a lot of miles in a Prius for $1K/year, you can even buy a lot of miles in a Prius for $500/year.

Of course, GM hasn’t built the Volt, yet, anyway, and may never.

Well, then, you have an opportunity to correct her misguided conclusion, right? Did you take that opportunity to set her straight?

Phil

Riiiiight… which of new GM’s products will be doing that, Phil – the Colbalt? The Hummer?

GM has to create many credible touch points with the market simultaneously and sustain the quality of those experiences. Cadillac sedans, Chevy trucks, compact cars and new tech alternatives will collectively have to be convincing.

Where are they? We’re heard about the Volt… are they keeping the rest under a bushel somewhere? The Camaro isn’t going to save them…

Volt is not a Hail Mary.

Phil…. GM hasn’t got a lot more chances coming to it. My 233 year-old niece is car shopping. She only knows one thing for sure: “No American cars, right Uncle Lokki?”

She’s love a Prius, though.

A gasoline engine car with electric assist will not win all economy car buyers. High mileage gasoline and diesel engine cars can and will be effective alternatives to Prius. GM can bring more small cars to market in the next 4 – 5 years during the Volt ramp-up.

And over here we are talking about worry. The worries of the middle classes. But a $10K part, critical, untested, in a vehicle that Ressler has previously assured us isn’t particularly up-market… No one will worry about it? Or it’s not worth worrying about? No worries, mate? It’s just $10K, pal, and probably less when you need one… Nothing to see here, move along, now?

Right, your worry is overblown. GM had an enthusiastic following for the EV-1, a vehicle that could have posed nothing but worry. Volt will have more range, more space, more utility and its battery pack will come with a warranty. It will be schematically less complex than a mechanical ICE / electric assist car that offers no real alternative in future direction.

It’s clear from GM’s own plans that Volt is important as a platform that can underpin a wide variety of automotive products, but the Volt car itself is not a bet-the-company proposition. When it is introduced, millions of trucks will still be sold in the US. Sedans, wagons, sports cars and even SUVs will remain in the mix. If the version 1.0 of the battery makes it just past the warranty period, subsequent versions will already be on the market having solved such a problem before that initial model’s warranty period is exceeded. Once people fully understand the implications of electric cars with extensive range all this pre-product hand-wringing by critics of Volt will look petty and foolish. Let them build the car and see how it plays out in the market of money, customers, ideas and product.

Or is lack of worry only for the luxury buyers? Should those of us in mainstream cars accept worry as a normal part of automotive life?

Well, there’s a certain amount of worry mainstream buyers accept. Luxury cars often have longer or more comprehensive warranties. Luxury cars are more apt to have run-flat tires. Luxury cars got tech items like navigation and OnStar first. Electric starters and automatic transmissions. Luxury cars got 100,000 mile maintenance-free engines before mass market cars. They get better brakes and more competent handling. Luxury cars got traction control early, platinum spark plugs, and anti-rollover protections; airbags, xenon, light pipe, LED and steerable headlights, magneto-rheological damping, etc. before mainstream cars. All of these developments reduced worry for luxury car buyers relative to the mainstream at point of introduction.

There are manufacturers that deliver solid, long-term, reliable value.

As has been my unbroken experience with Ford and GM products for 25 years.

GM is running a single Hail Mary play

Volt is not a Hail Mary. It’s a bold initiative to field a new technical direction for continued evolution of the car, but it is just an element of a continuing array improvements to GM’s product portfolio. Volt is an attempt to recapture the market’s imagination, to re-assert GM as a capable innovator and to claim concept leadership for a new direction in relevant personal transportation. If it succeeds, other improvements across the product portfolio must nevertheless continue for GM to be able to capitalize on Volt success. If Volt stumbles, gets out of the gate slowly or fails, the rest of GM’s product effort can overcome disappointment on one car. GM has to create many credible touch points with the market simultaneously and sustain the quality of those experiences. Cadillac sedans, Chevy trucks, compact cars and new tech alternatives will collectively have to be convincing. Volt is not a Hail Mary. It is merely an initiative to recast GM’s future, that needs the context of progress in conventional cars to be appreciated. Frankly, if you’re among those who find early adoption of a new technology too daunting, you can and should choose something more conventional.

Phil

Yeah? Which way is GM planning to combat that? Send in the Silverados? I don’t suppose you’ve noticed that GM does not have a product to combat that? The closest thing they’ll have to it, someday, is the Volt… available in quantity at reasonable manufacturing cost in 2015 or so.

—

In Volt Implosion Watch 75, our attention was turned to “213Cobra” a/k/a Ressler’s discussion of the XLR-V.

I find it amusing that, in his long-winded initial refutation of the review, Ressler wrote, “that said, part of the luxury experience is never having to worry.”

And over here we are talking about worry. The worries of the middle classes. But a $10K part, critical, untested, in a vehicle that Ressler has previously assured us is’t particularly up-market… No one will worry about it? Or it’s not worth worrying about? No worries, mate? It’s just $10K, pal, and probably less when you need one… Nothing to see here, move along, now?

Or is lack of worry only for the luxury buyers? Should those of us in mainstream cars accept worry as a normal part of automotive life?

Well… this is why GM’s on the ropes… people have found out that worry is NOT a normal part of automotive life with other manufacturers. There are manufacturers that deliver solid, long-term, reliable value.

And they are ascendant and GM is running a single Hail Mary play in the waning moments of the 4th quarter… when they’re 35 points down.

I hope so! It’s a new car architecture for most people; a new design vector in the modern era. Expensive tech is OK — it *will* get cheaper. Unproven is an overstatement. GM has electric car experience in the field. Years, not months. Battery chemistry is proven in small applications; now we have a matter of scale and automotive conditions. No matter how perfect Volt — or any other electric car by anyone else — may be on debut, the learning curve begins in market. It doesn’t matter if Toyota sells more older tech Prius for awhile. There are other ways to combat that. Volt is a new direction wherein the delta between what was and what will be becomes obvious in a few short years.

Phil

And none of the long-term testing is being done on production batteries. Remeber the recent snafu with GM’s battery supplier for their whybrids?

To put the battery risk into perspective, the battery costs more than a conventional engine AND transmission. Do we say the “life” of those components is 10 years? Is the “life” of a car 10 years? Do we repair a car that needs BOTH engine and transmission replaced? Or do we junk it?

Ressler: “Nothing in the real world of established history of battery economics suggests the Volt’s battery pack will be anywhere close to $10,000 by the time replacement is needed.”

And nothing guarantees it won’t still be $10K.

You can pump all the sunshine you like, Ressler, but GM’s using unproven and expensive tech in a far more critical role than ever before. Many people will be, justifiably, leery.

If there’s any carmaker I have brand loyalty to, it’s Ford. I bought ten Fords in 20 years. I don’t have brand loyalty to GM, though I like current Cadillacs, and the Corvette retains my interest. I do have a willingness to back ideas in execution, and I also include the larger social context in determining who gets my money on major purchases, which includes cars and influences my willingness to spend money with GM when they offer a quality product that meets my desires and / or needs. “Self-preservation” nearly mandates that I buy from GM or Ford, if you think of it that way. There is total alignment of my interests with theirs, if self-preservation is the criterion for selection.

GM sells to millions. Their customer base is not the “few,” it’s comprised of many. Volt offers a way to get more over an extended product evolution path that brings true electric cars to the mainstream. We’ll see how it turns out but the mythical $10,000 battery won’t be an obstacle.

Phil

In that case, GM should have no problem with offering a price guarantee coupled with the warranty.

Consumers are increasingly unwilling to subsidize GM’s mistakes. They make that reluctance clear by buying other products instead. If GM can’t figure that out by now, then the company deserves to fail.

If you think that your cash alone is enough to save GM — and it had better be, because there aren’t many like you — I’d think again. You are a part of a tiny minority of consumers who will elevate brand loyalty above self preservation, something that very few people are willing to do.

It’s not an excuse not to serve the customer. Batteries are consumables. Everything you own with a battery consumes them over some timetable. Someone else offered that the Prius battery pack is warrantied for 8 years / 100,000 miles. The “will probably last for a quarter million miles” is highly uncertain and variable. Additionally, in a Prius, the battery pack is only powering electric assist. The car is primarily a gasoline engine car. Its battery pack only uses the middle 50% of its capacity.

In the Volt, the battery is both buffer and power storage for the primary motive force. If it performs under warranty for 8 years /100,000 miles and the computer is progressively widening the useful capacity of the battery pack, that’s OK. In practical use, my experience with Li-ion batteries is quite positive in this respect, except for in Apple products. I fully charge them and I run them quite low before I recharge. On batteries having essentially no warranty, performance doesn’t fall off a cliff. Li-ion in practical use is much more accommodating to user disinterest than NiMH.

If you honestly believe that a $10,000 component is a “consumable,” then I’d suggest that you aren’t in tune with the needs of the consumer.

Nothing in the real world of established history of battery economics suggests the Volt’s battery pack will be anywhere close to $10,000 by the time replacement is needed. I have absolutely no fear that the tab will be $10,000, nor that these batteries will suddenly fail shortly after the warranty expires.

The electric car is going to introduce more of what we see in the digital products realm, in terms of performance improvement curve and frequency of revision for introducing real improvements. In this respect getting into the market is vital, and early adopters will instigate the product improvement cycle that makes your battery replacement fears melt away. People who fear transition will conservatively stick with older technology. People who don’t mind using their own money to help move things along will leap into the Volt. There are always early adopters who accept the risks alerted by Chicken Littles and Luddites, knowing they are nearly always exaggerated.

Phil

Batteries are consumables, just like tires, fuel and lubrication. The motive force generator, the electric motor(s) should have very long life and be quite repairable for small money compared to an internal combustion engine. Managing the battery to be reliable through a reasonably extended warranty period is perfectly reasonable.

That’s a good representation of the can’t-do attitude that put GM in the (bad) place that it is in today. If you need to find excuses to not serve the customer, then don’t be surprised when the customer doesn’t serve you.

If you honestly believe that a $10,000 component is a “consumable,” then I’d suggest that you aren’t in tune with the needs of the consumer.

The upside is that this outlook could land you a senior management job at Ren Cen. You’ll undoubtedly find many at that level of the organization who agree with you.

This is what the battery in the Prius is considered; it is warranteed to last for eight years and 100,000 miles and probably will last for a quarter million miles or more. The Volt basically has to match or exceed that.

Because the consumer may well be unable to prove such fraud.

Except it wouldn’t be fraud; not in the least. In fact, it is not only entirely acceptable for GM’s software to progressively widen the use of the battery capacity on tap, it’s the right thing to do. If there’s, say, an eight year warranty period on the battery, fine.

Batteries are consumables, just like tires, fuel and lubrication. The motive force generator, the electric motor(s) should have very long life and be quite repairable for small money compared to an internal combustion engine. Managing the battery to be reliable through a reasonably extended warranty period is perfectly reasonable. Battery prices will decline, as they have in every other sector with volume demand, and there will be sources other than the automaker. Consumers should not expect any electric car to never need a battery replacement on their dime, if they keep the car beyond the warranty period. Batteries are consumables.

Phil

If they can skate you through the warranty, your car ends the warranty period doing the 40 miles but will be running on a battery that’s basically being abused… Range is going to drop like a rock. But… that didn’t happen inside the warranty period.

Oh man oh man oh man, I think you’ve hit on it. This is exactly what GM will do. I’m sure of it, absolutely positively certain, and you know why?

Because the consumer may well be unable to prove such fraud.

And this is the way new markets work for new products. Early plasma TVs sold in the tens of thousands and now they sell by the millions. Same with early personal computers, DVD, CD, etc. In cars, new technologies like rotary power, GPS navigation, paddle shifting, hybrid powertrains including the Prius itself, etc. all leveraged the same market dynamics of sliver start by early adopters, with market penetration expanding after.

A short-range Volt could be on the market today if there were no specific objectives on battery-powered range. The architecture can be supported with existing battery chemistry. GM, rightly or wrongly, has chosen to do something more ambitious, but a lesser-battery-range car is always an option.

Phil

That “dead end” is a real product that exists today. It has generated a million sales, with the promise of many more to follow. GM should pray that achieves “dead ends” like that.

The Volt is just a promise, and given GM’s track record, may well prove to be a broken promise. A broken promise that arrives delayed, and underperforms if/when it gets here.

With Volt, you also don’t have to worry about being near a power outlet.

You used the wrong verb tenses and forgot add qualifiers. I’ll rephrase for you: “With Volt, IF it proves to be successful (and this is GM that we’re talking about here, so it might not), you also won’t have to worry about being near a power outlet. But the Volt doesn’t exist today, so if you want a solution now, you had better buy a Prius, instead.”

Consumers use their hard-earned money to beta test in-market R&D all the time. Everyone who bought a $30,000 plasma TV in 1998, or a $15,000 one in 2001, or an $8,000 example in 2005 did exactly that

That actually proves the point. There were very few customers for these products until the prices came down and they proved themselves. The only way for those products to achieve commercial success was in achieving a point at which they could be sold in large numbers.

GM comes into the situation with a lousy brand to back a product that will cause a lot of grief if it fails to work. If a TV doesn’t work, you might miss a soap opera or a game; the stakes with a car are much higher.

Prius is a pragmatic concept, not a brilliant one. It’s just a conventional internal combustion engine car with electric motor assist. It’s a dead end that has some value now and awhile longer. Volt is an electric car, which means it’s a renewed design vector for which the ICE charger is expendable. The supplemental electricity source could be a fuel cell, a super-battery, super-capacitors, an LP or CNG fueled engine, etc. Volt is a start, not a finish, for an entirely new line of vehicles.

With Volt, you also don’t have to worry about being near a power outlet. If you have to go days without charging, while using the car, you’ll just use more gasoline than if you had been able to keep the battery charged.

Toyota is not foolish they appear to understand that the battery (the key componet of the hybrid drivetrian)MUST be affrodable enough to replace, hence why they are sticking with their Nickel battery in the next version.

All experiences with Li-Ion batteries to date point to declining price over time. What once was very expensive for power tools, computers, phones, etc., has become cheap. Same will happen with the Volt’s battery pack. But there’s no reason Volt can’t also be offered in a cheaper version with NiMH batteries. You’d just get less electric-only range. I’m sure there’s a market for a 10 or 15 mile electric range Volt for less. The option remains open.

Also, what is the big deal about a 40 mile battery driving range and how much of your auto fuel expense are you simply transfering to your home electric bill? Aint nothing free in this world!

Indeed. The market is created by persistent effervescent environmental concern both real and imagined, as well as chronic consumer irrationality about anything associated with gasoline.

Consumers won’t want to use their own hard earned money to beta test a rolling R&D project, they will want something that works as advertised straight out of the box.

Consumers use their hard-earned money to beta test in-market R&D all the time. Everyone who bought a $30,000 plasma TV in 1998, or a $15,000 one in 2001, or an $8,000 example in 2005 did exactly that. Everyone who bought a $1000 Sony CDP-1 CD player in 1982 did just that. Everyone who bought an early PC or first gen McIntosh, or myriad other digital products has subsidized in-the-field R&D at high prices. Early Prius and Insight, and even EV1 owners did the same. Every technology push requires this. Nothing new; behavior already established.

Phil

Dumb to mention it – I swear they’re trying to kill their child before birth (I guess it’s still legal).

I know enough about GM to know that they have a propensity for exaggeration and overselling. I would never accept their bold proclamations at face value.

Much of the reason why the GM PR machine is on full spin cycle with the Volt is because of the stockholders and the analysts. Based upon the current operations and balance sheet, the company is dead — the only reason to invest in it or loan it money is because there is allegedly some hope for the future due to the Volt.

If the present circumstances were so great, GM wouldn’t have to spend so much effort to talk up products that may not see the light of day or meet expectations.

As it stands, Toyota has delayed its lithium ion Prius until 2011. If Toyota needs more time, I can’t imagine what advantage GM could possibly have.

According to the article Mr. Farago points us at, GM says they “are testing batteries to make sure they last at least 10 years or 150,000 miles.”

This is “short shrift”? Ignoring their customer? Pandering to “Wall Street brokerages”?

No, actually, it isn’t “unknown”:

“”The Prius battery (and the battery-power management system) has been designed to maximize battery life. In part this is done by keeping the battery at an optimum charge level – never fully draining it and never fully recharging it. As a result, the Prius battery leads a pretty easy life. We have lab data showing the equivalent of 180,000 miles with no deterioration and expect it to last the life of the vehicle. We also expect battery technology to continue to improve: the second-generation model battery is 15% smaller, 25% lighter, and has 35% more specific power than the first. This is true of price as well. Between the 2003 and 2004 models, service battery costs came down 36% and we expect them to continue to drop so that by the time replacements may be needed it won’t be a much of an issue. Since the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single battery for wear and tear.”

Presumably things have only gotten better in the four years since. I dont’ see why we can not expect the same for lithium batteries.

I don’t think that the Volt will be terribly “stirring” (at least in a good way) if it doesn’t work as promised.

Consumers won’t want to use their own hard earned money to beta test a rolling R&D project, they will want something that works as advertised straight out of the box.

It sounds to me that in an effort to claim some sort of promise, GM has given short shrift to the weakest link in this chain, namely the battery. That would be a bad thing, decidedly not stirring, and worthy of belittling.

The difference between Toyota and GM is that Toyota worries about pleasing its customers with trustworthy, reliable products, while GM worries about delivering promises and quarterly numbers to Wall Street brokerages. The wrong priorities get the wrong results, just about every time.