Revealed: The 2016 Chevrolet Volt (Images/Video)

1 year ago by Jay Cole 96

The 2016 Chevrolet Volt made a brief 30 second appearance from the International CES in Las Vegas tonight ahead of its official reveal next week in Detroit.  With no cover!   The next gen Volt then went back into hiding until the official debut in Detroit on the 12th (sorry, no interior shots yet)

While we would still love to see more of the car, and aren’t sure we see a lot of the Corvette (as promised earlier by GM’s Global Head of Design), we still like what we see.

Here are some of the shots (as well as a video) that have surfaced from the first full exterior reveal:

 

Autoblog even caught a little video from the event:

2016 Chevrolet Volt At CES (photo via CNET/Tim Stevens)

2016 Chevrolet Volt At CES (photo via CNET/Tim Stevens)

Tags: , , , ,

96 responses to "Revealed: The 2016 Chevrolet Volt (Images/Video)"

  1. ggpa says:

    It looks great, and more aerodynamic than Volt 1.0.

    Great scoop, Jay!

    1. Jay Cole says:

      …that is why we never go to bed.

      Automakers are so darn inconsiderate with their random timing of releases, lol

      /Sunday night FTW

      1. Thomas J. Thias says:

        + 100

        Now, hold on, cause here comes Global #EVs3rdWave!

        Best-

        Thomas J. Thias

        517-749-0532

        https://twitter.com/AmazingChevVolt

      2. drpawansharma says:

        It is 5th of january already, when can we have the december sale figures…can’t wait any longer.

        1. Jay Cole says:

          Coming out right now…its an odd set of circumstances that delayed it this long isn’t it?

    2. Mike says:

      Aerodynamic, good looking and a shark grin.
      This think will sell.

    3. Darin says:

      Looks like a dodge dart from the front.

  2. Speculawyer says:

    It doesn’t look like that fat guy on stage would even fit into it.

    I hope the wheelbase is longer because it looks like the rear slopes down hard such that there could even be less headroom than the current Volt. I guess we need to learn more.

  3. Dan says:

    Excessively shiny grill aside, it’s really nice. The overall shape is very nice. Looks like something Honda would do.

    1. Nix says:

      In the real world (where there aren’t a bunch of stage lights pointed at the grill) the front end won’t look that obnoxiously shiny.

      It is a lighting trick, like how the burger you actually get at a fast food place never looks as good as the burger in the ads….

    2. pjwood says:

      Notice the parking sensors (ala Tesla autopilot) are not only on the grill, but four have become six, with a new pair just ahead of the wheel wells. I can’t see a main sensor, up front, but ahead of the rear view mirror also looks like new hardware (CNET photo).

  4. Speculawyer says:

    I wish they would rip the engine out of some and pack it filled with 40KWH to 60KWH of batteries. It could make a nice pure EV for those of us that don’t want to lug around an ICE. (And licensing supercharger access would make it REALLY great.)

  5. Kosh says:

    It looks good, but pales in comparison to the concept Volt.

    Now THAT was an awesome looking car.

    1. Speculawyer says:

      You gotta be kidding. That thing looked ridiculous and was aerodynamically even worse than that.

      1. Wes H says:

        No, the original Volt concept was as bad-ass as any concept car from any manufacturer in the last 20 years. I had plenty of time staring at it during the Woodward Dream Cruise the year it was released, and even had a chance to stick my head in the window… that was a REAL dream car! Aero doesn’t matter when you’re having fun looking at how great it looks 😀

        1. no comment says:

          these things are always “eye of the beholder” because i didn’t care for the Volt concept car either.

          1. Stuart22 says:

            The Volt concept was impractical and passe´. The side windows could not roll down and the hood was way too long.

        2. Tim says:

          I agree with you. I would have bought that concept car. The current Volt just looks like any other small car.

  6. no comment says:

    a) very nice work on getting this scoop.

    b) i personally prefer the front end design of the gen 1 Volt but this isn’t bad looking and is definitely a more aggressive front end design.

  7. Dave S says:

    I don’t understand why GM decided after keeping me in suspense for the last year they would allow these horrible pictures out now. I’m sure the beauty shots we’ll get in a week will be much better.

  8. DonC says:

    Yeah horrible pictures. But good enough to let you know that a five door hatch doesn’t look like a sports car. Who knew?

  9. kdawg says:

    Aggressive.. I like

  10. QCO says:

    I don’t see much “Corvette” either, but I do see some Impala family touches. Which isn’t a bad thing….

    1. Jay Cole says:

      Definitely not a bad thing.

      Personal note: I just got back from Florida for 3 weeks and was provided a new Impala to drive around (I know sacrilege it wasn’t a EV). Put around 500 miles on it, no complaints at all. A lot of car and solid/good looking for the money too (~$27,000+) I thought.

      1. sven says:

        If gas prices indefinitely stay at historically low levels and global warming gets legitimately debunked causing the end of the EV revolution, you could change the focus of this website and rename it InsideICEVs.com? 😉

        /s

        1. Bill Howland says:

          “…global warming gets legitimately debunked causing the end of the EV revolution…”

          People buy electric cars for other reasons than the issue of AGW.

          Some doctors were against Bloodletting in the 1600’s, but it took until the late 1800’s before it was finally debunked, and even in 2014, we are still not totally rid of the practice since some Doctors think its advised for a few ailments.

          Perhaps a bigger issue is AGW is now Big Business; there’s money to be made and careers in jeopardy in any future debunking. Environmental Reporting would collapse into a fringe field from bein mainstream.

          I own 2 EV’s, make over 100% of my own electricity statistically (if you consider my entire neighborhood), yet my favorite central station generation besides Solar and Wind, is a Coal fired plant, which makes no matter since my State has effectively banned coal power, and the last plants in the state will be out of service in 3 years.

          So in summary, EV sales should do fine.

          AGW will not be debunked for a long time, or at least until the Silent Majority finally speak up (but they’ll speak up for other reasons), and the ‘solution’ for low gas prices, is ‘low prices’.

          Putin is trading ‘low priced gas’ for ‘low priced GOLD’, unlike Yeltsin who in similiar circumstances SOLD Russian Gold. So this game isn’t being played with dumb players any longer.

          I agree with Mr. Cole that the Impala is a very nice car…. I wish they would

          A). Put a voltec in the thing. And/Or:
          B). Sell their CNG bi-fuel version with a cheap, reliable home refueler.

          Sadly, neither has as of yet occurred. But EV’s are here to stay. They’ve sold too many already for them not to. Alot of Nuclear Power Plants would have to blow up for people to get totally soured on Electricity, and then I don’t feel people would blame EV’s for that.

        2. David Murray says:

          Global warming won’t get “debunked” any more than the theory of evolution, even though plenty of the same crowd would like to see it. Sorry, it is fact and people will eventually have to come to terms with it just like people had to come to terms with the earth revolving around the sun.

          The only discussion to be had about GW is what (if anything) needs to be done about it.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            While I disagree with your premise, (certainly you are not so close minded as to not allow people to disagree with you, or that is the HOPE anyway), they are certainly “DOING SOMETHING about it”.

            I used to believe in Evolution until, about age 18, I deduced it was impossible seeing as it violates laws of probability. Namely, anything with less than 1 in 10E50 chance of happening, is not going to happen.

            1. Calitran Dresdener says:

              Well Bill. I guess your right. You can’t argue against your logic. I’m convinced. And Gen II Volt sure looks to be a winner. Hope you give a wave if we cross paths. Good luck.

              1. Bill Howland says:

                Ok Calitran Dresdener,

                Very Philantropic of you. THis is a car blog after all.

                Just as the one blogger yesterday didn’t like the ‘constant bashing of Republicans’, when everyone he knew was a Republican and an EV owner, and didn’t want to be shoehorned into a Liberal group, so I’m saying that all EV owners likewise are do not necessarily have to believe the same things, or toe the line supposedly set out for us.

                I’m not Republican myself because all the Republicans on TV today were the Democrats who went “All the Way with LBJ” back in 1964, or if they were too young, would have.

          2. Calitran Dresdener says:

            It is absolutely amazing the denial of climate change and global warming and the denial of it being precipitated by man.

            Sure everyone can have an uneducated or even a deluded opinion but you don’t measure facts against opinion.

            If folks can’t or won’t see the truth and choose to believe or be misled about the truth, and they can achieve a majority or at least a tipping point of followers and ultimately dictate policy that refuses to mitigate our primary negative influence on the entire global ecosystem then we are doomed.

            And so we are doomed. The fellows here who don’t get it won’t be more than minimally effected before they pass on but it is our collective legacy to have altered our global environment for the worse for our children and the successive generations.

            It is futile to change their beliefs or teach them, and so we have to just accept their intransigency and not argue the issue and accept they believe this falsehood and so respect their position.

            But that is actually the disrespectful approach because you don’t give them the respect that they otherwise are capable of learning if provided the facts.

            But when they won’t accept the facts there is nothing more to say. You can only do what you can in conjunction with those who do see the truth to change things for the better where you can, and accept that it probably won’t be enough. But then you’ll pass on too before you see the collapse and so it won’t matter.

            But in the mean time you get to enjoy the pleasure of driving electric with our man caused climate change denier compatriots. At least they get that concept.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              There hasn’t been any ‘Global Warming’ in the past 17 years.

              But, to just quote trite phrases, and not do any independent thinking is a big problem generally.

              It would be nice if people would stop spewing all the politically correct catch phrases, and actually made a personalized thought that they arrived at themselves.

              Totalitarian gov’ts always loved when the General Masses just spouted the party line and gave unquestioning allegiance to the phrases they had drummed into their skulls.

              I don’t intent to change anyone’s mind, but it would be refreshing to see an independent comment, since I’ve heard the hackneyed stuff before, and its lacking in scholarship.

              1. Lindsay Patten says:

                “There hasn’t been any ‘Global Warming’ in the past 17 years.

                But, to just quote trite phrases, and not do any independent thinking is a big problem generally.”

                Lest anyone believe the first statement, due to hearing it repeated endlessly, it has been thoroughly debunked many many times, for example see:
                http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998-intermediate.htm
                (A look at the heat content of the oceans demonstrates that warming continues apace.)

                The second statement appears to self referentially refer to Bill’s own post.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  Well Lindsay, I somewhat dislike discussing this subject because I’m invariably shouted down with catcalls. I did do a bibliography last year of Serious People who had something to say on the subject, from a wide variety of fields; I offer it in the hope that some might find it illuminating. Namely that, if there is any ‘Scientific Consensus’ its not at first Blush what you think:

                  “…I suppose after mentioning it, sooner or later I’m going to have to do it, so here’s a list of 13 Climatologists and/or IPCC Lead Authors:

                  Prof Dr. Nir Shaviv – University of Tel Aviv “Three to Ten times CO2 in the past as currently”.

                  Prof Dr. Tim Ball, Dept of Climatology, Winnipeg, “Most important Greenhouse Gas is Water, 95%”.

                  Prof Dr. Ian Clark, Dept of Eath Sciences, University of Ottawa “Co2 lags temperature changes by 800 years, Co2 never drove climate change in the past”.

                  Prof Dr. John Christy, IPCC Lead Author, Given award for developing new method for measuring temperatures in the atmosphere; “Water is the most important Greenhouse Gas”.

                  Dr. Piers Corbyn, Climate Forecaster, Weather Action. Bet money against England’s pretigious Met office and Won cash, several times. “No changes in climate due to Co2 in the past 1000 years”.

                  Prof Dr Philip Stott, Dept of Biogeography, University of London, “London was much warmer in the middle age warm period, confirmed by Chaucer, than now”.

                  Prof Dr. Paul Rieter, IPCC and Pasteur Institute, Paris : ” Malaria not a tropical disese, biggest outbreak reaching Arcangelsk at the Arctic Circle killed 600,000 in the early 20th century”. Also, ‘2500 of the world’s top scientists are bogus once you look at bibliographies, since the climatology scientific field is small. Plus if you disagree with the conclusions, it dosesn’t matter since they won’t take your name off the list”.

                  Prof Dr. Richard Lindzen, IPCC & MIT ” Whenever you hear that all scientists agree and therefore you should too, in Science that is Pure Propganda”. “The one thing you Shouldn’t say, is ‘this may not be a problem’.” (!!!)

                  Patrick Moore, Cofounder of Greenpeace, AGW nonsense is killing Africa, preventing life saving development.

                  Dr. Roy Spencer, Weather Satelite Team Leader, NASA ” If it can be indicated that a catastrophe is near, then all kinds of money will flow to your research project”.

                  Prof Dr. Patrick Michaels, Dept of Environmental Services, University of Virginia, “Anyone who goes around saying AGW is responsible for the 20th century warming, hasn’t looked at the basic numbers.” , and, “Tens of thousands of jobs depend on AGW now, its a BIG BUSINESS”

                  Nigel Calder, Ex Editor, “New Scientist”, “AGW is a religion”, and “the whole thing stinks”, and “its a Looney Idea”.

                  Dr. Frederick Singer, Ex-Director US National Weather Service, “Computer Models of increased AGW are disproved by the temperature evidence”.

                  Prof Dr. Syun-ichi Akasofu, Director, International Arctic Resource Centre; “Co2 greatly increased between 1940 and 1975, temperature went way down”, and “Arctic Ice Extent is seasonal and will cause no problems”.

                  This is a pretty good cross section of people, many with impecable credentials (such as John Christy, the very TOP of his field). who stated the “Inconvenient Truths…”

            2. Bill Howland says:

              HA! I worry about pollution more than anyone here, in all modesty.

              No one else writes about the Huge Northern Pacific Die-off, since 2011, currently blamed on a “Strange Virus”.

              I also worry about other polutants, and I worry about Autism, Altzheimers, Infant Mortality and other problems that have skyrocketed recently.

              Any good historian knows Global Warming, if it was occurring, which it is not, wouldn’t be a problem anyway.

              St. Thomas Aquinas and Chaucer lived through it, and, coincidentally, it happened to coincide with a time of relative wealth.

              Its not a big stretch to see that the Wealth was a Benefit of the warming.

              1. pjwood says:

                Bill, I fight the same battles, but among the environmental crowd, who presume doing something about CO2, but disparage nuclear. I don’t remember LBJ. Wasn’t around, but many of those who hate nuclear were. They will hate it even if we plow through the next 1,000Gt of CO2, in 25 years.

                I’ll never understand how I was raised not to alter things, by the same generation that is going out clinging to an assumption they didn’t.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  Pjwood, I apologize if I appear thick (obtuse), but I’m not sure what your positions on CO2, Nuclear, gasoline, Diesel, and of course EV’s exactly are. I would be interested to know precisely where you stand on them, even if we may not ultimately agree, but then the views of Reasonable people differ.

        3. evnow says:

          I guess AGW is being “legitimately” debunked just like this whole idea of earth being round 😉

          1. Bill Howland says:

            You’ve got that backwards: portions of the Bible writen in 732 BC stated “the circle of the earth”, and “the earth hangs upon nothing”, both statements being evidently true.

            The scientific view at the time was that the earth was flat and it was carried by a big turtle.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Incidentally, it wasn’t until Pythagoras proved the earth was round in the 6th century BC that ‘science’ caught up with the facts.

    2. IDK says:

      I don’t see any Corvette in it either…looks more like a Acura to me.

  11. kubel says:

    Definitely hiding that rear end. Almost looks sedan-ish.

    1. DonC says:

      Good observation.

      1. Aaron says:

        I noticed that too. Almost looks like the G6 sedan by the taper of the rear window and rear deck.

  12. kdawg says:

    I noticed they went w/the Ampera style rims. And those tires look very low-profile.

    1. Nix says:

      My money is on those being optional upgrade wheels. I can’t see those being the standard wheel.

  13. SW says:

    kinda looks like a honda from those angles… hopefully there are other good engineering features that will sell the car…

  14. Anthony castro says:

    Looking good. I like it! This could interest a typical buyer for its looks alone. Please oh please have a 5th seat and leaf-like data for energy consumption. (Kw going to climate control and motor) enough of that green ball.

  15. John F says:

    These Volt 2.0 reveals are getting tiresome. Can’t we just not do this any more for the next 7 days. Full specs and photos are all I need now. Please, no more pictures of curtains, blankets, blocking objects, and bad viewing angles. If Chevy wants to sell it, they need to just show it.

    1. Nix says:

      Gee, it is almost like GM is intentionally teasing photos that make people want to see more of the vehicle when it is finally revealed. So that when the final reveal actually happens, lots of people who now know when the reveal will happen, will all scour through each and every picture to see what hasn’t been leaked yet.

      Hmmm… It is almost like they planned this, the way a professional advertising company would.

      They got you already posting about the Volt release, days before the official reveal actually happens — didn’t they? Seems like the pictures are working exactly the way they are supposed to.

  16. Anon says:

    Pretty sure the poor quality of pics are not helping sell the redesign.

    Not seeing any Corvette, but it does have a certain Honda Insight 2.0 vibe to the front. shrugs*

    I think grill block out kits will be popular for this vehicle…

    1. Djoni says:

      +1
      Or could they provide automatic shutting of the grill in EV mode?

  17. Alaa says:

    This man is too fat!

    1. Victor says:

      They could have paid one of the ladies in the audience a few hundred dollars to stand next to the car and pay the gentleman on stage $200 to find a seat.

      1. no comment says:

        these are STUPID comments.

  18. James says:

    Thursday we may get an overhead shot, and by the weekend they’ll roll it out with little black patches of duct tape over the taillights a sheet over the back seat! L 🙂 L

    It really has an Accord Coupe vibe to it – I’ve always liked the Coupe versions of Accord – but it does look skimpy in interior dimensions. Check the farthest side angle photo you can and check out that nose angle! Very pointy indeed. It really has a shark-like look. The shiny grill inserts are no doubt emphasized by the stage lighting, but I’m not into shiny silver plastic nonetheless. Notice the Chevrolet logo isn’t gold? Finally!

    Food For Thought Dept.: Once GM actually stops the Leg Show and gives us a chance to see it in the flesh, I’m sure our crack staff at InsideEVs will take lots of human-perspective shots. So far, we see it up on stage, not below our eye level. The car may really wow once seen from a normal perspective.

  19. david_cary says:

    Definitely does not look bigger – too bad as I am pretty confident that is one of the big sales barriers.

    Was for me, too small for a family road trip and that is the main thing it did better than a Leaf.

    GM – if you want to sell the platform – give us room for a road trip. Won’t happen I think and Mitsubishi etc will eat your lunch….

  20. pjwood says:

    +1 on scoop.

    I like it overall. Glad they put a horizontal line into the lower front grill. Looks like 19’s.

    Not sure about the hood and windshield being on nearly the same plane.

    I see Corvette in the vertical DRLs, and front protrusion (visible from the video side shot. I won’t be surprised if the tail lights resemble the new squares.

    Maybe they’ll amp things up, and have Ben Stein introduce it at NAIAS. Quite an “m
    kay” from Mahoney.

    1. Josh says:

      +1 on the mmm kay. That was my first thought also.

      Judging by the crowd response, he needs to get some lessons from Musk on stage presence.

      1. Aaron says:

        Elon doesn’t have the best stage presence. He stutters and stammers, as I would on stage in front of the world. His products and projects just speak for themselves.

        1. Josh says:

          Musk might be a terrible speaker, but he is actually excited about the stuff he is presenting and wants the crowd to be excited for it too. That is what I meant by stage presence.

    2. ffbj says:

      Yeah. I was like MMK? MMK, I guess.

  21. Sam says:

    Maybe just me but it doesn’t look much different from the old Volt. I don’t care about the front grill I want to see if there’s added space inside and from the looks of it I don’t think there’s significantly more or different interior that before.

    Meanwhile Nissan announced December sales of Leaf. Over 3000. Record breaking year.

    1. John F says:

      Yes, Green Car Reports had the Leaf figures about an hour ago! Very good number for the LEAF — especially in a month where the gasoline prices have dropped so much. We can only imagine how much higher the demand might have been if there was another ‘gas crisis’ .

  22. Victor says:

    Why fluffy had to be on stage? Don’t they know anything about marketing? In all of Las Vegas couldn’t they have found a beautiful young lady to put on stage? Was fluffy ego so big that he had to be on stage? I love the car, and I want to see you do well. They could have asked one of the waitresses to take off her apron and stand next to the car.

    1. Nix says:

      The original target audience of this show was to give information to GM insiders, not to titillate men with short attention spans wandering around at car shows. Fluffy is the right guy to be on stage.

      (Sort of reminds me of the poor guy blocking the spy photos of the BMW 1-Series back when it first came out. He got his internet 15 minutes of fame just for casting a huge eclipse in front of a 135i. Poor guy.)

  23. offib says:

    Oh… Am I the only one who dislikes this? Yeah, it has aggressive detailing with the chrome cones that stick true to the Voltec range, but it’s nothing doing anything for me.

    Is it a Camry, Corolla, Cruize? It’s it a stand out? If this were to be rebadged as an Opel, it would just look like a new Insignia.

    It has aggressive styling, but not an aggressive stance. Not an aggressive and more importantly bold appearance.

    After seeing it for a while, I’m not looking back at it very often. I’m not deterred from it, it’s nice, but I’m not thinking about it. I might change my mind when there’s a side profile and rear photo. Still, it’s lacking that upgraded, fresh impression of progressive or sharp luxury (at a stretch there) compared to the Volt when it came in 2010.

    So those are my tarnished two cents. The new Volt is just not doing it for me. Bit like the Prius, the 2nd gen is the preferred and well recognised ‘Prius’. Maybe the mechanical upgrades of the new Volt would compensate.

    The wheels are really nice though, but not rememberable. Not much in my taste compared to Volt’s pentagon rims.

      1. offib says:

        At least you care.

    1. DonC says:

      Not everyone will like any one design. I think the vast majority of people will think the design is greatly improved over the first generation. IMO a better design than either the first generation Volt or the ELR (I don’t like the very large ELR rear).

      Not sure, however, how much this will matter for those more interested in specs. On the aggressive stance, I think the designers hit the right note in that you want the car to be consistent with its performance.

      1. no comment says:

        EV enthusiasts tend to be a very short attention span lot; people raved over the design of the gen 1 Volt when it first came out, apparently tiring of the design in a very short period of time after the “rush” wore off. i suspect the same will be true for the new gen 2 Volt; the initial thrill of newness will wear off and then there will be calls for something new to reinvigorate the “rush”.

        EV enthusiasts have their place, particularly in the early stages of product introduction, but i think that the value of EV enthusiast comments is starting to reach a “diminishing returns” stage because the comments are less valuable in a more general market context.

        1. Nix says:

          This phenomena isn’t limited to just EV enthusiasts anymore. Lots of cars are starting to see shorter 3-4 year refresh cycles now because buyers get tired of new designs pretty quickly. For example, Honda Civic generations have averaged about 4 years apart.

          The Volt is “due” for a refresh, with 5 Model Years already under it’s belt. This might seem short compared with 7+ year cycles cars used to have a few decades ago, but it would have actually been unusual in today’s market to see the Volt go 6+ years without a refresh.

          1. CAB says:

            Heck, this phenomena isn’t limited to cars! People tire of same old, same old in about 8.3 minutes these days…when is the iPhone 7 coming out again?

    2. kubel says:

      I feel the same way. I don’t think it looks bad, but it just doesn’t stand out like gen 1 did.

  24. David Murray says:

    Hmmm.I can’t say for sure because the angle we are given is very limited. But it doesn’t look all that attractive to me. Maybe I’ll change my mind when I can see it from the side and rear. It does look like the windows are very small for some reason.

  25. Mikael says:

    I hope it looks better in the real world. What were the design team thinking?

  26. Wes H says:

    I love the front end, but what I need is room for two car seats and two strollers in the truck, so let’s see the back half!

  27. Taser54 says:

    Could there be both a hatch and a sedan varient? Backend looks sedanish while all the camo testing vehicles were hatches.

    1. kubel says:

      I thought the same thing, but then I looked at gen 1 Volt at that same angle and it too looks very sedan-ish from that perspective.

  28. Kakkerlak says:

    One of the most distinctive things about a Volt driving down the road is the tail-lights… which they’ve deliberately obscured every time.

    1. David Murray says:

      Yep – I’ve been wanting to get a look at the tail lights. I hope they keep the same look as the previous generation.

      1. QCO says:

        Probably not, based on the rear end teaser photo.

  29. Ryan says:

    I think it looks a lot sleeker. I like the shorter windows. Looks like a Honda Civic though.

    The prototype was definitely a very unique vehicle. That would have been GM’s own Prius had they built it.

  30. Mike says:

    Rolling off the roof too early means tall people cannot sit in the back seat. I had planned to buy a Prius for the longest time and when I went to really purchase, I found I could not get in the back seat (so my kids couldn’t either). Only the Leaf passed muster in 2012. There are more choices now.

  31. Barbara says:

    When I first looked at the car, no dealers would answer my questions not sell it. They wanted to sell me a Silverado cause “it’s truck month”, or a Cruze that replaced other entry level cars.
    Phillips Chevy in Frankfort Illinois and Webb Chevy in Oak Lawn, thanks a bunch! Each dealer blew a car sale.
    I bought another Honda Civic Hybrid, a car with better resale value

    1. kdawg says:

      You only went to 2 dealers?

      1. QCO says:

        How many Chevy dealers should you need to visit to get the Chevrolet car you want?

        1. kdawg says:

          How many banks should you research to to get home loan you want?

  32. EV says:

    Front end on the current Volt looks way better

    this thing looks like a civic and a camry smh

  33. Jm says:

    I don’t give a crap how “pretty” the car is. Give us specs! How far can I go on a charge? Do the specs beat the daylights out of the Prius? Is this new car BETTER than the original one? These things matter.

    1. CherylG's_DirtyLittleSecret says:

      Didn’t the first Gen’s specs beat the Prius and the PiP specs?

  34. Martin T says:

    Lower Grill – paint it black, only a circumcised (Mutilated) American designer could have ‘thought’ that was a good idea.

    Love the copy Honda, however my 21013 volt had it’s own special design which I like personally.

    I trust the copying of Honda will extend further to the headlight and tail assemblies, so no more condensation and water ingress?
    Or
    Did they pay the lower grill and committee group who approved that too much again ?

    (You can see how much by my post I hate the lower grill 🙁

    1. James says:

      @Martin – hey buddy, just remember in many states there’ll be a mandatory license plate over that lower maw. Since the shark-nose of Volt v.2 ( I’m now calling “E-Shark” ), that license plate may be creased, as to allow for better air flow. I’ve already told my machinist friend about it and he’s eager to give my future license plate a custom bend so it’s not the typical billboard out there pushing wind.

      The big faux grilles are in response to consumers wanting cars to have “faces”. It does give each model it’s own personality. I’d rather have Volt and Model S have a smooth Saleen or Panamera-like nose, but we’re the minority, it seems. Look at current Camry and Corolla – two best sellers in their respective categories…Man! They went grille-crazy on those beasts!

      1. Martin T says:

        True James, In Australia all states have mandatory front license plate holders (I hope there will be location marks and nor randomly drilled state wholesaler / dealer bracket mounts.
        Agree with you, but believe certain Ford vehicles take the lower grills to obscene levels. Why does GM copy that trend and why the majority of Americans have no real car design taste?
        Need more car guys at GM less committee sheep.

  35. CherylG's_DirtyLittleSecret says:

    The front looks like an older Prius.