88 Comments on “Volt Birth Watch 87: It’s Official...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Find Reviews by Make
Latest Car Reviews
|
Review: Ford SVT Raptor |
|
Review: 2010 Cadillac SRX V6 |
|
Review: GMC Terrain |
|
Review: Audi TT-S |
|
Review: 1979 Mercedes-Benz 450sl “R107″ |
|
Review: 2010 Audi S4 |
|
Review: Ford Fusion Hybrid |
Latest News
- EPA: New Car Fuel Economy Continues to Improve; Back to Early 1980’s Level
- Saturday Concours: LeMons in Texas
- Question Of The Day: What Car Are You?
- Rolls-Royce Records Record Results – In China
- De Tomaso Back From The Dead
- Karmann Lives, Kindof
- London Olympic Committee: EVs Are Gimmicks
- Study Validates Common Sense: Air Cars Are Hot Air
- Ask The Best And Brightest: MINI or BMW Zero-Series?
- Curbside Classic Outtake: 1954 Allard K2
- What’s Wrong With This Picture: That’s Riich Edition
- Will The Prius Usurp The Camry?
- Wild-Ass Rumor Of The Day: Brilliance Buying Dealers, Saturn Brand For US Launch?
Recent Comments
-
Re: EPA: New Car Fuel Economy Continues to Improve; Back to Early 1980’s Level
Davekaybsc - I think we are going to see cars from some companies that will start heading back towards 1987 style weight... -
Re: EPA: New Car Fuel Economy Continues to Improve; Back to Early 1980’s Level
educatordan - Exactly, golden2husky, how much safer is a 2009 Mazda M3 wagon than the 1997 Ford Escort LX Wagon with dual... -
Re: Question Of The Day: What Car Are You?
Forty2 - After many years and many cars — Audi (2), BMW, Datsun (2-never had an actual “Nissan”), Honda (3), Toyota (2), Rambler (2, when I was... -
Re: Question Of The Day: What Car Are You?
TrailerTrash - 1964 Ford THUNDERBIRD. Convertible. Wrap around rear seats….THOSE were the days! http://www.mcecars.com/index.c fm?auto_id=405 As a side note,... -
Re: EPA: New Car Fuel Economy Continues to Improve; Back to Early 1980’s Level
golden2husky - I know most of those in TTAC land disapproves of CAFE, but I shudder to think what that weight number would... -
Re: Question Of The Day: What Car Are You?
RayH - I’m any 1988-1996 F150 regular cab 2×4 long bed with a bedliner. I have a 5-speed manual and the 4.9 i6 engine. The only factory options I have... -
Re: Question Of The Day: What Car Are You?
SV - That pretty much describes me as well. I think I’d rather be a Mercedes but I’m also reminded of my previous car, a 1997 Infiniti QX4. 5000lbs,... -
Re: Question Of The Day: What Car Are You?
rpol35 - Look at Farago’s last post and pick one; that’s pretty much me. -
Re: EPA: New Car Fuel Economy Continues to Improve; Back to Early 1980’s Level
rpol35 - Average weight has gone up due to increased truck and SUV sales but it is also out of control from NHTSA’s... -
Re: Question Of The Day: What Car Are You?
Daanii2 - 1966 Mustang convertible. Cherry red. White top.
Latest Editorials
- TTAC does the 24 Hours of LeMons. And Dies. Again.
- Curbside Classic: GM’s Deadly Sin #4 – 1983 Chevy S-10 Blazer
- Curbside Classic Review: 1951 Oldsmobile Super 88
- GM Zombie Watch 20: IPO Or Bust
- Feature: Five Automotive Passenger Pigeons
- The Candidate’s Choice
- Editorial: Sergio Marchionne: Savior or False Prophet?
Latest Product Reviews
- Book Review: “Shop Class as Soulcraft” by Matthew Crawford
- Review: BlackBerry VM-605 Speakerphone
- Review: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us)
- Review: Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!
- “I’m gonna get you sucka!” Product Review: Mityvac 7201 Fluid Evacuator Plus
- Product Review: Turtle Wax Ice Clay Bar and Turtle Wax Black Box
- Product Review: Peak Wireless Back-Up Camera System
Links
Staff
Editors
- Edward Niedermeyer
Editor-In-Chief - Mike Solowiew
Road Test Editor - Bertel Schmitt
Overseas Editor - Sajeev Mehta
Writer - Paul Niedermeyer
Writer - Steven Lang
Writer - Jack Baruth
Writer Contributors
- William C. Montgomery
- Alex Dykes
- Martin Schwoerer
- Thor Jonsen
- David Holzman
Moderators
- Jeff Puthuff
- Daniel Stern
It looks better here than in the leaked pics, that’s for sure…
Doesn`t look too bad….but is that good enough? Why the blacked out shouldlers below the side windows? If the blacked out area was simply glass the effect would be similar and people would have excellent visability. High beltlines are getting old.
Looks like a Chrysler Cirrus on crack.
While it’s not awful, there is a little too much Prius in it for my tastes.
If GM had kept it looking like the original concept I would have seriously considered purchasing one.
It looks nice……….for a $22k car. Good luck selling it at $40k.
um…civic headlights, MKIV jetta greenhouse, cirrus trunk, malibu grille…i can’t believe i thought the transformers movie spy video of the blue/purple one looked good.
oh well. i wasn’t a prospective buyer anyway.
Looks slightly different from the leaked photos. My guess is that it may be because the leaked photos were actual photographs whereas this looks like a pixelated incarnation.
EDIT:
Autoblog now has actual photographs up. It’s the same as we saw Lutz and his cronies fondling
the interior looks disjointed…too much going on.
there’s the glossy white center section & white on the door, then black and gray, the LCD screen for the speedo, the futuristic looking cloth on the door panels.
i would have preferred they keep one common theme on the inside.
If GM had kept it looking like the original concept I would have seriously considered purchasing one.
The concept wasn’t practical. If you want a car that gets the Volt’s purported levels of economy, it is going to have to look a certain way, eg, like a Prius.
It’s a form-follows-function thing.
What a disjointed mess. So many PARTS of this car look great, but together they’re just ruined.
The front end, viewed by itself, looks really neat, and tends to mesh the brand styling of the Malibu and whatnot with a kind of Honda Civic headlight thing. It works…
Then the back end looks pretty cool, until you look at the tail-light that turns into a completely different shape when it goes to the trunklid–that doesn’t look futuristic or edgy, it just looks dumb.
Then tying the two ends together is that abortion in the middle–wtf were they trying to accomplish? They give the car the current fad of having an ultra-high beltline, then they drop the actual window beltline BELOW it, and below the rear window’s beltline. What a mess.
I understand the gorgeous concept was a little too “muscley” but this ridiculous.
ferrarimanf355 :
September 16th, 2008 at 11:16 am
It looks better here than in the leaked pics, that’s for sure…
That’s because it’s a computer rendering, expect to see it flying around in ads in a few months, if they don’t keep flogging the concept.
And don’t forget your also looking at the fully optioned out, “Super Touring”, $55,000 Volt. The typical one they sell probably wont have all those extra weight options if they want to make that 40 mile EV range.
If you don’t believe me look at the PR photos of the Cruze compared to the rental looking Cruze shots shown yesterday. Night and day in comparison.
Touchdown!! It’s Good! I like the styling. If it functions as good as it looks, I might consider buying it. (No I don’t work for or get paid directly or indirectly from GM) . Just my humble opinion.
From my perspective, the appearance is acceptable.
What’s with all the pictures of dudes? I think a few models could have done a lot to reduce the “meh” factor. Hey, now there’s a TTAC Photochop idea for you!
Anybody trust any GM product it’s first few years of production?
Looks decent enough. The attachment of the mirrors is unusual, I wonder if that will make it into production.
My only worry is that it will fall into the design trap of cars such as the Sonata, where for the sake of aerodynamics they have a steeply sloping backlight, producing a trunk with a very small opening that is a pain in the ass.
It looks more purposeful than most cars of its ilk.
I prefer these photos to the ones last week with the executives in them. I like the proportions and it looks pretty clean.
WRT the blacked out trim under the windows, that’s obviously a nod to the concept. I’d have preferred that they not done anything there, but having larger conventional windows would have given it a 1990 Lumina sedan-like profile, and that ain’t good.
I honestly see absolutely zero resemblance between this and the Prius. Now, the 2010 Insight and the Prius, that’s a different story.
I love the interior. It reminds me of my Mac.
Exterior…..I suppose I’ll have to see it in person to pass final judgement. These pics are just so-so.
At first glance the photchop pictures look nice, but the longer I stare at it the more I see a flattened Asstek in the design, especially the back. The white interior center stack screams “iPod” but isn’t bad.
Still, I’ll believe it when I see it.
Currently GM’s finest are working on a plug-in SUV. What are they thinking?
Heh, I just noticed that the upper grill is fake, a decal?. As noted above there is some interesting detail elements, but overall a D for effort and a “please see me after class” for execution. Here GM had an opportunity to stand out and blew it yet again with another derivative car styling exercise.
I guess it will give them another “you see people don’t want a car like this” excuse.
The car looks a million times better in live shots then it did in the leaked photos from last week.
Look at the live, in person photos of it on other sites. It’s a great looking car in the flesh. I think the reveal takes a little wind out of “The Volt Lie” editorials sails.
The new photos of the car will probably go a long way to satiate the initial negative reaction to it many had.
Now if GM delivers the projected range on electricity then they may really have a game changer on their hands. Price tag or not.
I am actually a little surprised that many of the LEDs made it into the production vehicle. This product does seem to be more technically advanced (and most likely more expensive) then the current Prius.
I’m shocked to say it’s not bad looking. In reference to what NickR pointed out, is this car a hatchback? Because that is one tiny trunk opening otherwise.
i like it i think the front has a lot of character. espically for a gm product. the interior is nice especially the buttons on the console which do not have any lines they almost have a touch screen effect to them. they are completly flat without the gaps in between.the interior seems to be made of high quality plastics and the instrument panel is a nice touch. it all screams high tech. i like it i would buy one if it gets the fuel economy and its closer to thirty grand then forty.
Even at $40k, GM loses money on every unit sold. How does this car save GM?
I like it. Sure it doesn’t come together like a RX-7 or look as classy as a Bentley, but I’m not expecting that. A car like this is first about economy, and unfortunately the automotive shapes that best blend aerodynamics and passenger space end up looking, overall, pretty junky. There’s a reason the new Honda Insight looks just like the Prius, and the Prius looks like a Prius, and the Volt looks very similar. Yeah, a gorgeous body would have been great, but I’m not about to dismiss this car because it doesn’t look drop-dead sexy. If it performs as is promised and delivers an otherwise overall solid driving experience, less than awesome exterior styling will matter very little to potential customers.
I’m just trying to see the big picture. This car is revolutionary. I hope it works as promised. I’m sure it won’t, there are always bugs and tweaks that will need to be made. But it represents a real, living machine that could very well change the world in a way we haven’t seen since probably the Model T. I’m willing to give up a few style points for everything else that will hopefully make this car wonderful.
And I LOVE the interior. I know some traditionalists will hate it, as will old people (who will probably have no idea what anything inside does), but to me, its got a fantastic looking steering wheel (finally from GM!), very cool center stack. The dash has a lot of character. It is actually designed with some flair and style, which not only looks very cool, it will help sell a car like this to its target audience: those who like their purchases to represent great design and progressive technology. Young, hip people who love their ipods, and have homes and cars full of technology, and who are willing to pay a premium for that technology. This car is not going for your grandmother (who still can’t program her VCR from 1988), nor the type of person who wants basic, cheap transportation. I love the style inside. I wish more cars today, regardless of propulsion, would look more like this.
So overall, while the show car was stunning, for a production car, I’m very very happy with how it looks.
the whole idea would be to change peoples idea of gm. look what i can build now tell me i can not build a good quality and dependable car or truck like the transplants. to change the consumers that they can build vechiles on the same caliber and that they have vechiles worth considering.
Nice.
40 Large?
No So Nice.
It’s not bad looking except for the aforementioned blackot stickers adorning the shoulders.
For those disappointed that it doesn’t resemble the concept (the front end in particular), what did you really expect? What would justify the long nose in a front wheel drive hybrid vehicle with a “small gas engine” to keep the batteries charged? What else would they stuff in there to best use the space? Maybe stick the batteries and fuel tank in there? That would really make it handle like a champ. I’m not GM fan but honestly, they had to make some concessions to practicality and efficiency. I think, aside from my gripe above, that they did a decent job.
All that said, this is not the look of a $40k car.
There’s something to be said about the fact that there are more pictures of the guys involved with the project than the actual car itself. At the same time, like it or not who knows if and when it will ever become readily available. This car is useless to the general buying public until they can manufacture Prius- and Civic-like quantities at a reasonable price. I can’t wait until they release it in small quantities. I want to see how this car really holds up. As for the black trim at the bottom of the windows, I wonder if that will follow my previous GM experience of warping, fading, and looking awful in a short amount of time.
Looks pretty good to me.
Wonder if you can tune a production EV?
Why can’t people here understand “CONCEPT?”
I was reading Hot Rod and the true enthusiasts there were mulling over the production ready Camaro VS. what they saw as a concept. They did take note that the prod ready version grew a “B” pillar. No complaints, no bitching, no whining. just glad it’s nearing their garage.
They also mentioned that the Challenger concept had no “B” pillar and it too grew one for production.
So is it that the true Hot Rod readers are less likely to get their panties in a bunch than the bloggers and Internet experts?
Or are they just more knowledgeable of the development realities??
I would buy this over the Honda version that I’ve seen.
And it’s for sure going to be more technically advanced. Believe it or not, GM is responsible for most of the OBDII diagnostic protocol for what we now drive.
What is up with the Impala/Malibu front end on everything coming out of GM? That half-smiley face look does not do it for me. The Volt should stand alone and have it’s design set it apart. It should NOT look like a cookie cutter GM car.
stupidstupidstupidstupidstupidstupidstupid ..
The back end looks nice, though. Looks like GM is going hatchback a la Prius.
And who designs GM wheels? Would anyone admit to that? They have the worst looking wheels. The wheels on the Volt look amazingly just like the wheels on the Silverado and just like most Pontiac wheels. Hopefully this will change before production as they pull weight out of the car.
“High beltlines are getting old.”
You can thank the SUV/truck craze for that one. Car beltlines have been raised in order to improve side-impact protection, especially when the impacting vehicle is a monster truck.
This looks pretty good. Solid B+ I say. There are a lot of ’sleek’ styling elements (tail lights) mixed in with a slightly unique / slightly prius-y profile (but not *too* much) to warrant a double take. No awkward lumps (Honda Insight) or too much ripping off (Honda Insight) , and the interior is a little ipod-y but is going to cater to the silicon valley crowd providing it’s functional.
The styling on the car looks OK. You can almost see the focus-group session that picked (polled?) the design cues in the reflection of the sheet-metal. If there is any criticism I would have on the styling of this thing, its that a Volt could drive by me this afternoon in traffic and I probably won’t notice. For a flagship product like this, I should see it coming before I am looking for it. I do like the user-configurable LCD concept for the dash, personalized dash is as natural as a personalized desktop for a PC. I think that will be ubiquitous in the industry and am surprised I don’t see it on a production car from two years ago.
That said, all that really matters with this thing is the go-parts. Either it will actually have a technical edge on the Prius as a plug-in or it won’t. For $40,000, the money better be in the motor(s).
Much better pics! I like it.
The Cruze is a much better looking car, and possibly cheaper to manufacture and more practical. This new fascination to “futurize” electric/hybrid vehicles is out of control. It’s really not necessary to go this far – even as a concept, because we know the production model will not look like this – for so little.
Oh and definitely getting creeped the hell out looking at the serious man-love glam-shots of those executives.
My eyes – the goggles, they do nothing.
High beltlines are in a effort to minimize energy usage. Think about it.
A/C is one of the highest usage item of battery and engine power. If you reduce the exposed greenhouse, then you reduce the power consumption and increase the passenger comfort.
Pretty basic really…
1) Nice for a 20K to 25K GM. Not a 40K car.
2) Wait at least 3 years to have the bugs fixed.
3) Then go buy something comparable by ToMoCo, Honda or Nissan for better reliability and resale.
I like the fact that this looks like a car, not some uber-geek’s go kart. I’m not so wild about the view from the rear, but it may be changed by production time.
I noticed that the wheels look pretty decently sized, along with the brakes behind them. I wonder if they’re expecting great speeds from this car?
The interior is cool, but I imagine there will be other color choices. As a Mac user, I hate (no, really, hate!) the white keyboards and mice they’ve been issuing lately. I can’t imagine such a light interior looking good for any length of time (esp w/kids!)
So far so good.
Pretty ugly.
Form follows function. IMHO, I think it looks better than the Prius. Sure the middle of the car looks…ehm…slightly bloated, but at the same time, I think GM managed to give the Volt a very acceptable look for what the car is designed to do. No way would the original concept be practical and still manage to get 40 miles with those looks.
Only thing that turns me off is the price: $40K!?
Concur with comments above. Not a bad design, actually kind of like it, but not for $40k. It’ll be a hard sell to anybody but early adopters. Ma and Pa Chevy won’t be dropping 40 large for this.
Just to echo the sentiments here. $40k? no way it sells many, especially when you can almost get 2 of the competition for that .
Shiny white plastic on the dash? That is a good idea? I know iPods are all the fad but basing a car interior off a portable music player or a laptop doesn’t seem like the grandest of ideas.
The problem is it will be going against proven vehicles from other companies with (perceived or otherwise) reputations for reliability. I cannot imagine myself taking this to the local dealership for warranty work at all.
All in all it looks good on the outside, well mostly.
Hmm, over TWICE the cost of the upcoming Honda Insight…. Its not ALMOST twice the cost, it is MORE than twice the cost of the competition. Yet I don’t see how it looks any better, and the 40 mile EV range doesn’t save you that much money.
The point being?
Overall, I like the appearance. I won’t comment on price, as it hasn’t been set yet.
But look at Autoblog’s picture #30 from the full gallery (linked below). Are those the most ridiculously thick A-Pillars in history?
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2011-chevy-volt-live-reveal/1039902/
That’s because it’s a computer rendering, expect to see it flying around in ads in a few months, if they don’t keep flogging the concept.
Didn’t GM have the real deal over at the RenCen? I know most everyone here and their mother is skeptical about the Volt, but ‘cmon, at least have a little faith, like Merrill.
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/16/analyst-calls-gm-f-cb-mer-lly-ul-brcm-aapl-palm/
It looks like everything else.
RE: The $40k price tag.
The price is irrelevant at this point, considering the fact that they are only going to sell 10,000 units for the first few years, meaning this WON’T be the vehicle that saves GM. They need saving a LONG time before that, and press announcements won’t do it. Neither will building more small cars instead of trucks, considering the huge profit difference between them.
So even if the Volt does become a ‘hot seller’ in 2015…it might not be for a GM as we know it.
Looks very cool IMO. If the price is around $35K after tax break, sign me up. Its worth it.