Quote Of The Day: Right Round Baby Right Round Edition

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Right now, the [Volt’s] propulsion system is too expensive, even with using an existing engine… We have a strategy to go rotary engines or a two-cylinder [gas] engine making 15-18 kW. I have driven the car already. Rotary has a higher fuel consumption but here’s the advantage [holds up his hands to form round, frisbee-sized shape] — packaging.

GM’s Karl Stracke talks Volt 2.0 with InsideLine, and yet never quite explains why a less fuel-efficient rotary generator would even be on the table. Or how a rotary (let alone the also-mooted diesel generator) would be the solution to high drivetrain costs. How much room does the (implicity and reputationally) more-efficient two-cylinder really take up? Wasn’t the only mass-market rotary-powered car left in the wild, the Mazda RX-8, just canceled for flunking European emissions standards? Can’t the rotary engine die with a little dignity?

Common decency demands that this flagrant of fanbaiting be reserved at least until the first-gen Volt hits the streets.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 16 comments
  • Lokki Lokki on May 28, 2010

    Flailing. Searching for a miracle cure for their miracle cure car. Reeks of desperation to me. How many months ago was it that the Volt project manager Bob Kruze resigned? With 31 years he resigned - vs. retired. That tells you everything you need to know. This doesn't mean that there won't be a Volt, but it strongly suggests that it won't be ready for prime time.

  • Cackalacka Cackalacka on May 28, 2010

    "Sure, they still have a long way to go, but how can you criticize a company for trying something new." Telling, that you took a question and made it a declarative. I'm as liberal as they come, but those guys have our tax money. Try something new. That's rich. Last night I was having some pints on the patio of my neighborhood bar. A peculiar, old-looking Toyota sedan with a hood-bra and a spoiler drove up. My friend asked if that was an old Yaris or something. Nope. 2nd Gen Prius. That 'try something new' is a 40-large piece of vaporware; down a path that was worn down 15 years ago by an innovative company, and nearly 20 years after the Clinton administration threw a bunch of our tax money at these boobs for the express purpose of developing a car like the Volt. I would be willing to bet good money that that beat-up '01 or '02 Prius will be on the road longer than half the first year fleet of Volts. If there is a first year fleet of volts. Cimarron. Avalanch. H2. Aztek. Our taxes. You'll pardon some of us if we're skeptical and scornful of this companies product announcements.

  • Facebook User Facebook User on May 28, 2010

    Is it bad I would have been a lot happier with GM simply licensing toyotas tech or simply copying the prius just so there is something directly comparable in the market at a lower(chevy) price point? They have had how long to develop this car? its now summer of 2010 and the marketing of it has been going on for nearly 3 years. the only thing this car has done is employ engineers and secure govt loans and taxpayer funds. I'll take a second generation prius any day, and for under 12k now, Every potential volt buyer will surely look at this possibility. Or just buy the leaf.

  • Beken Beken on May 28, 2010

    In the case of the Volt, where it just needs a motor to generate electricity to charge batteries (or maintain current), a rotary engine would be very efficient and clean. The problem with the rotary engine in the RX-7/RX-8 application is the lack of torque. Most of the inefficiency of the in powertrain is during acceleration and deceleration. At constant velocity, a rotary engine should be highly efficient. More so than moving reciprocating pistons. I think a rotary or small turbine would be better for the Volt than a 4 cylinder motor. But I doubt GM has the money or time to do the research and development into this theory.

Next