Volt Birth Watch 132: GM's Lauckner Thinks People Will Have Trouble Understanding That Electric Cars Require Actual, You Know, Electricity
As the National Enquirer used to say, Lyle Dennis and GM are closerthanthis. On his gm-volt.com website, the doctor turned propagandist reports on a conversation with Jon Lauckner, VP Global Product Development (a.k.a. “Mr Volt”). Much like GM PR, Dennis has made the psychological leap from proof of concept (for Chevy’s plug-in electric/gas hybrid) to real world logistics—without actually completing the first step. Down the rabbit hole we go, with gm-volt.com’ s “GM Close to Launch Plan for the Chevy Volt.” Oh, before I share the spin, I’d like to point out that GM was really close to being close to having a launch plan for the Volt long before they were close to having a launch plan for the Volt. Right. So. Lauckner.
I would say what we have decided is we probably are not going to use an approach where we launch the Volt simultaneously in all markets in the US. Lets face it, this vehicle is a bit different than a normal vehicle. We need to make sure that all of the charging infrastructure is in place so that all people have a really good customer experience.
I’ve decided that I’m probably not going to point out that the “charging infrastructure” in question is . . . a plug. Oh, wait. I just did. Seriously. Is GM going to wait until the government puts sockets on the streets before launching the Volt? I don’t think so. At least I hope not. Wait, am I being thick here? No dumberer than Volt customers, apparently.
There needs to be some education and training. Obviously if people buy a Volt and they don’t plug it in at night or they plug it in only sporadically they’re going to have a very different customer experience and probably not be as completely satisfied with the Volt as they would if they were plugging it in each and every night and using it exactly they was it was intended, recognizing that electricity was meant to be used as its primary fuel, not the small gas engine on board that was intended to be its range extender.
My takeaway: Mr. Lauckner probably, maybe, kinda sorta ya think never met a qualifier he didn’t like. Or a . . . no, I’m not going to say it.
Will you be soliciting feedback from those initial buyers?
More by Robert Farago
Comments
Join the conversation
The engine only runs when it needs to generate power. If the engine is so inefficient below 10 hp then they won't create a setpoint down there. I can't remember the lower cutoff power for the Prius, I think it is 1500 rpm, or thereabouts, probably 10-15 hp. There is no real reason why the Volt's 1.4 should be a whole lot less efficient that the Prius engine, most of the Prius' efficiency is engineering, not magic. Specifically the supposed Atkinson cycle benfit would be very small.
-Greg I would rather leave the Prius out of this discussion and concentrate on series hybrids. But FYI the Prius is known to "park" its engine at 1211 rpm for powers to 12.5Hp although calculation shows it could possibly be capable of 18Hp at that speed. This elevated speed above a normal idle is Toyota building in some insurance against a degraded engine to manage end-of-life issues I would imagine. With series hybrids efficacy is as important as efficiency. I am sure that if weight were no issue then a 1000lb genset at 1800rpm could be very, very electro-mechanically efficient, but not something you want to drag around the streets at any great speed and acceleration. Bearing in mind that the purpose of the car is to convey people and not massive pieces of machinery. It may be efficient for the total mass being moved but the payload is usually a 200lb person, so only a fraction of that energy gets used for the primary purpose - which is to move YOU around. The paradox being that the most efficient method per pound of mass moved is the least efficient in fuel and materials. Simply put, where mobile powertrains are concerned one wants to avoid sacrificing oneself on the altar of high efficiency. That being so, lightness is key. And that infers high speed machinery. In aeronautics, turbine driven 12,000rpm 400Hz generation has been around for decades. And that is where automotive gensets are headed also. On the downside reciprocating engines must be used here for their superior part load efficiency, on the upside they will not need to hold continuously those stratospheric rpms but only sporadically and for less than ten seconds at a time and mostly with spirited driving only. The new Fiat Panda 2 cyl 900cc SGE with 65Hp would be a suitable candidate, though changing the crankshaft and conrod for a shorter stroke would be necessary. Then there's the canadian Bombadier company through its Austrian Rotax division. Rotax, a manufacturer of performance snowmobile engines, recently designed the 800cc parallel twin F800S for Aprilia motorcycle. The high rpm capability of this engine and its off-shelf availability make it look to be an even more viable candidate in this field. The technology I am proposing avoids the use of a "boutique" battery system. Some electrical power may go back to a conventionally sized Pb-acid battery during Regen braking or routed through the A/C compressor as capacity and gentle braking allow, but for the tens of kilowatts from harsh braking - they will find dissipation in electrical resistors strapped to the heater core. Dirty deeds, as they say, will be done dirt cheap. There is however, an impasse to this technology which I ought to point out. It is whether you can get the consumer acceptance and the enthusiasm for an electric vehicle essentially propelled by a two cylinder motorcycle engine even if it does net you 70mpg and eight seconds to 60. That's going to be the real challenge. Are you up to it America ? T2