The Volt Is A Moonshot? I Get It, It's THAT Moonshot

Bertel Schmitt
by Bertel Schmitt

Since the early days of the Volt, the folks at GM loved to compare the car to putting a man on the moon. That analogy wasn’t without its problems. The moon program did cost more than three times its original budget of $7 billion, all it produced was a few rocks, and it ran out of money before it could get going in earnest. 40 years after Eugene Cernan and Apollo 17, the moon has remained untouched by human feet. But what the heck, GM loves the symbolism. To death.

GM likened the Volt to the moonshot in 2008.

GM likened the Volt to the moonshot in 2011.

They did it one more time in 2011.

A few days ago, the director of GM’s moon program, Bob Lutz, was at it again with his favorite moon analogy. Except that this time, Lutz asks readers to remember the “45th anniversary of the Apollo 1 disaster that killed three of our hero astronauts.”

I am old enough to remember that Chaffee, White and Grissom were killed by an electrical fire. Maybe that moon analogy wasn’t so good.

Or maybe it was.

Join the conversation
10 of 58 comments
  • Mikey Mikey on Apr 02, 2012

    Yeah I have to agree, this TTAC Volt hate is starting to wear thin. We need something different. Hmmmmm? I got it! Lets do a UAW bash piece.

  • GS650G GS650G on Apr 02, 2012

    Help us out here, how exactly did the writer or indeed anyone else here make light of 3 dead astronauts?

  • Bertel Schmitt Bertel Schmitt on Apr 03, 2012

    A few comments: Yes, three astronauts that died 45 years ago should not be abused as car salesmen. You rightly complain that this is of extremely bad taste. I trust the people who raised this issue will make their voice heard in the proper places. To make it more comprehensible to some: Complain to Bob Lutz, he brought it up. As far as writing about GM and the Volt goes: We are a customer-focused website. As long as there are many comments, we assume that people are interested in reading more, we will strive to fulfill customer demand, and get you more – if there is more. Appeals to stop writing about something are routinely ignored. If the appeals for self-censorship become too incessant, we might just write more, inspite of the wannabe censors. To make it more comprehensible to some: Telling us to shut up will result in more stories, thank you.

    • See 4 previous
    • TheHammer TheHammer on Apr 03, 2012

      Love the arrogance! Not surprised.

  • Tallnikita Tallnikita on Apr 03, 2012

    "Let's start cheering on American innovation and ingenuity instead of spitting in its face." Trying to sell an average midsize sedan for $45K is a spit in my face. Basing your business strategy on gov handouts is a spit in my face, Mr. Putz.

    • Doctor olds Doctor olds on Apr 03, 2012

      A good performing midsize sedan with 100MPG operating cost equivalence at $4 gas and can operate with zero emissions and zero reliance on fossil fuels is not innovative enough for you to be proud of as an American success? The vehicle is winning awards all over the world, and every major carmaker is working to come up with their own erev. Seems like a lot to justify pride. Volt's role in GM's business plan is being fulfilled. It has never been expected to generate profits or sell in huge volumes, and is almost irrelevent in the overall, increasingly strong financial results of the company.