Hear What Volt Owners Think Of Next-Gen 2016 Volt After Sneak Peek – Video


2016 Chevrolet Volt

2016 Chevrolet Volt

It was nearly two months ago when General Motors unveiled the 2016 Chevrolet Volt to a group of select individuals at the 2014 LA Auto Show.

Those select individuals, mostly current Volt owners, got to see what the rest of the world will see on January 12th when the next-generation Volt gets its official unveiling at the 2015 Detroit Auto Show.

Just moments ago, General Motors released this brief video via its Chevrolet Volt Twitter account:

Categories: Chevrolet


Leave a Reply

83 Comments on "Hear What Volt Owners Think Of Next-Gen 2016 Volt After Sneak Peek – Video"

newest oldest most voted

Tick tock

t minus 11 days. Staff members get your gear.

If true you’ll have a great time.

That reminds me Jay,

Thx for the airline ticket and press pass 🙂

The 2015 Chevy Volt may be the “story of the year”

Im rooting for miles electric, and waiting to see the styling of the new Volt.

Go GM!

As for me I’m rooting for a midsized car with a normal sized trunk!


As am I!

If there is only a ~5-10 % increase in electric miles, it will prove that GM is not serious in going green, but really serious in grenn washing marketing..

Remember they had the all electric Ni-MH EV1 in 1999 with ~120 miles range.

The EV1 had a SAE range rating of 78 miles. However, the EV1 could go ~120 miles at a constant speed of 45 mph but that is hardly an indicator of real range. Also the EV1 was a small 2 seater and even then it weighed only 300 pounds less than a modern 5 seat Leaf with hatch due to the weight of the Ni-MH batteries. If the EV1 using the technology they were using then were stretched to be a 5 seater and had to implement all of the safety features and added weight that goes with modern car design then it would have had a range less than that of the Volt. The Volt has a 5 star rating in crash tests while The EV1 would fail any modern crash test. The Volt has a 38 mile EPA range while carrying around a range extender and seats 4 with the ability to put the seats down for 15 cubic feet of cargo space to the EV1’s 2 seats and 9.7 cubic feet of trunk space. Aerodynamically the EV1 was better simply due to its smaller frontal area as well as its smaller overall area being that it was… Read more »
The EV1 had a GM rated “Nickel-metal hydride battery pack – 75 to 130 miles per charge.” Based on real life testing : “freeway commuting with minimal stop and go: 130-150 miles per charge city driving mixed with freeway (including “performance demonstrations”): 100-130 miles per charge worst case – hard use including driving in the hills: 75-100 miles per charge” It was a two seater like the Tesla Roadster. Do you see many cars with 4 people in it in your daily commuting? It had all the state of the art safety and comfort features of that time. Air bags, heat-pump, power windows, low drag tires etc. You know nothing about the EV1 ,s hability to pass modern crash tests. The Volt do not carry a range extender, it is a full ICE motor driving the whell and acting *sometimes* as a computer controled range extender, and sometimes like a plain parallel hybrid. The father of the Volt admitted that the Volt was a response to Tesla, NOT a continuation of a projet. If GM had produced the EV2 and EV3, we would easily have 300 miles range today. Most companies crushed their own perfectly working EVs. A situation never… Read more »

Ok, you win. It’s all a bizarre conspiracy where GM perpetuates the illusion of caring about EVs by spending a billions of dollars developing and making the Volt after developing and building the EV1 only to make a second version of the Volt that is awesome but not up to your standards of where EV tech should be. Their ultimate goal is to keep making EREVs that are close to perfect for some people like me but not to 100 percent of the population in order to….oh I got lost for a second. What is the conspiracy again?

Lustuccc is a troll. Trolls always win.

Oh! How easy it is to discredit someone by accusing him of trolling. I sent 3 links twice but they are not appearing. And their content prove vastly what I put forth.
And I see clearly that sven is not of good faith and exagerate a lot, while trying to ridiculise me. The fact is that GM and other car makers will spend millions (not billions) to make some ill equiped EVs to save their thousands of BILIONS dollar ICE car established industry.

Hybrids are also a way to delay as much as possible the BEV revolution.

I acknowledge that most of Volt owners are satisfied with their car, I am not blaming them at all, I am pointing at GM to do only 1/10 of what they could easily do.

GM never spent billions on developping EVs.

From Reuters: “The independent cost estimates obtained by Reuters factor in GM’s initial investment in development of the Volt and its key components, as well as new tooling for battery, stamping, assembly and supplier plants — a price tag that totals “a little over” $1 billion, Parks said. Independent estimates put it at $1.2 billion, a figure that does not include sales, marketing and related corporate costs.”

Your not going to convince any rational person that visits this site of your tin foil hat conspiracies about GM. You might be more successful in making an argument that GM due to internal politics hasn’t supported the Voltec platform as much as it should but to make an argument that the Volt exists as an intentional distraction is ludicrous.

If this were the case they certainly would have made the Volt obviously inefficient and and unaffordable to spread FUD about electrification of vehicles. Why would they make an EREV that is actually quite good? Doesn’t add up no matter how tortured your theory.

Oh! If you include the developpement of the Impact from 1990 the efforts to produce a good ev was genuine at that time, and it may have cost over a billion on a period of ten years. I apologize for this.
The race for good EV was also genuine for some years.
But Gm never spent 1billion on marketing as they say in “who killed the electric car. ”

And you may see cleary the fracture in the TV ads they produced if you only search ad gm ev1 on you. tube
The best is the one spielberg style with all enthousiast appliances. The worst the static repulsive scary one ask “how does it go without sparks and explosions…”

You may also consider that the RAV4 and the Altra with 120 miles range were plain ordinary cars simply converted to electricity. How easy could it be to do the same now with the new battery technology and on mainstream models?

Now if you read carefully my posts, and if my links are at last released by the moderation, you may want to apologize for your false accusations and insultings with “tin foil hat”, “fud” , and conspiracy theorist B S.

“If you include the developpement of the Impact from 1990 the efforts to produce a good ev was genuine at that time, and it may have cost over a billion on a period of ten years.”
Nope. That 1.2 billion+ estimate does not include the Impact or EV1. The 1.2 billion+ is just for the Volt alone.

Ok I misread your post. But GM make a profit out of the Volt sales, As Bob Lutz explained, you have to consider all the derived models from the Cruze platform (like the Volt, the Opel and the cadillac ELR), and all the sales of years to come when you calculate profits. The P.R. induced rumour of GM loosing money with the Volt is false.

As I can see from time to time, Reuters is not a very reliable source of information. it has a bias like the WSJ or others… we have to filter and confirm informations from different sources to get a better picture of reality..

I may add that for me the Volt is not an EV, it is an hybrid. that’s why I did not care to include the Volt in the billion dollar investment to develop the Impact, and his son the EV1 in the last decade of the 20th century. Now I know that the current new classification include all the electric helped car models in the term “EV”. A real EV for me is a Battery car and produce ZERO EMISSIONS of whatever. It is by far the most efficient technology , and the most economical for the owners. it would suffice to massively produce them to drive down the initial cost. As I said, companies formed a cartel not to produce such vehicles, they would loose to much money… while we loose our health, our ecospheres and now our climatic stability. The big three ‘s cartel pressured clinton as far as 1993 to replace BEVs with hybrids by 2003 This concerted subversive action wasnicely called “Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles” So we can have a glimpse about the real purpose of the (modest) spreading of hybrids and the almost absence of good all electrics : To delay as… Read more »

The father of the Volt (Lutz) said that the Volt was a response to TOYOTA and the PRIUS, not Tesla.

GM had the choice to make a car to compete with Tesla (Lutz cited the Roadster to other GM execs as “proof that this can be done”) and GM specifically chose not to build a car to compete with the Roadster or Model S, but instead to build a car they saw as their eventual Prius-killer.

Nope. It was Tesla not the Prius that inspired the Volt (although more accurately I would say it was in response to the massively anti-GM negative PR nightmare of WKTEC):

At some point the executives may have said they wanted it to be the “next Prius”, but that is more as an example of a transformative “halo” car, not that they built the car in response to the Prius. I’m pretty sure the Nissan executives have said something similar about the Leaf and they most certainly didn’t build the Leaf in response to the Prius.

Before 2009 GM spoke about another electric car to calm down the popular anger aroud the EV1 controversy.
I remember how i was sad in 2009 when the Volt was supposed to be and hybrid instead of a pure EV.
And even then it was announced as a SERIAL HYBRID, with a range of 230 miles!

GM fooled us again when they finally rolled out the Volt 1.0 as we know it, a parallel hybrid with software driven 4 modes of operations. The only distinction with the Prius was a pure electric mode and a part time serial mode.

Why not both? Both the Prius and the Tesla inspired the Volt. The Prius for its hybrid technology and the Tesla for showing Li-Ions were ready to propel cars.

For any other PHEV you can make the argument of both, but for the Volt, I think not. This is because GM was very adamant that their car not be called a hybrid, and not be tied in any way, shape, or form to the Prius. In fact, GM treated the term like it was a bad word when used in respect to the Volt (esp. when the media does it). At least that is what it is for their corporate line. Internally, who knows?

Sorry I do not understand why the other links do not appear.
Try a youtube search for “general motors ev1 overview”

Second, look for EV charger News. On this site you will google again “original GM EV1 WebSite”
then go to “specifications”, then at the bottom again “specifications”

We are not seeing any links at our end…don’t drop in the embed code (if that is what you are doing).

Just put in the page URL and magical fairies will turn it into an embed video in a few minutes (usually)

I tried it before with a simple copy-paste of a YouTube url, and was quite surprised by the magical work of the fairies… I didn’t ask for that much!
Let’s try again..


it is fascinating to see how much was borrowed from the EV1 that went into the Volt.

And it is sad to think about how advance the EV would be today if they had continually made EV upgrades instead of abandoning the EV-1 program for many years.

…and again…
I stripped the “https://” from the youtube link.

No, for the evchargernews link, it doesn’t seem to work. Anyway people may find the official GM specs of the Ev1 Ni-MH with the instructions I provided. Thanks for answering! I will never doubt the html fairies anymore 😉

Remember this EV 1 commercial?….

Spooky isn’t it. This is went GM changed his mind and began the anti-marketing.

I’m with you Sivad. The EV-1 was an interesting vehicle and GM should have kept working on the program. But people who think it was some grand conspiracy are just wrong. The EV-1 was very expensive to build. They leased them out with large losses. They never actually sold them. They were goofy looking 2-seaters with limited range.

And worse, 1999 was like an nadir for gasoline prices. Go look up inflation-adjusted gasoline prices and you’ll see that the EV-1 was launched right at the time of some of the cheapest gasoline EVER.

EVs were just not economically viable at the time. Gas was extremely cheap and the available battery tech was clunky & expensive.

I’m really tired of seeing these stupid comparisons to the EV1. They are so urealistic. And besides. How could you claim a small increase in range would show GM is not serious? They would still be only second to the i3 Rex as far as the PHEV with the longest EV range.

ALL established ICE car company are only green washing with these weak, ill ranged EVs they are releasing one drop at the time, at a big price.
Not only the EV1, but also the Toyota RAV4-EV and the Nissan Altra-EV had a range of 120 miles! How do you explain that they all seem to have forgotten the recipe?!?

Explanation is simple. First and foremost, if those cars were to be tested on today’s EPA cycle, they wouldn’t get anywhere near those numbers.

Second, those cars were only compliance cars and were very expensive to manufacture. And EV-1 would have probably cost more than a Tesla model-S costs today if the consumer were allowed to buy them.

Third, the EV-1 was not a practical car, being a 2-seater with very little cargo area.

And I’ll finish with this line of thinking. Let’s imagine where we could make a dealership that sells EV-1 and Volt to the general public. Let’s say, for the sake of argument that the price were the same on both vehicles. Now, which vehicle do you think would sell more, Volt or EV-1? I highly suspect the ratio of sales would be 99% Volt, 1% EV-1. Which pretty much makes my case that the Volt is an all around better product.

You cannot compare The 20 years old with the Volt.
Don’t you think that in 20 Years of aborted technical improvements GM would not have found enough power to put 3 more seats? And the MSRP of the EV1 ranged from $34000 to $44000 less a $9000 incentive.

By the way “compliance” as we know it now cars did not existed in 1995. According to the CARB original law, 2003 should have seen 10% of electric cars on the roads and manufacturers were on their way to make it so… Until Petro-Bush came along…

I have posted some interresting links earlier in response to svlad but it seems that they have to be autorized.

And even if the modern testing would reduce the range of lets say 20 miles, it remains that there is 15 YEARS of “presumed” R&D that would largely compensate.

If the EV1 had been given the green light and full support we would have been at generation 2 in 1998, at generation 3 in 2005, at generation 4 in 2012 and we would already be working on the generation 5 right now. The cars would have been going this course:
Generation 2:
Full NiMH battery with on board APU.
Generation 3:
Lithium battery with on board APU.
5 seat model as well as 2 seater.
Generation 4:
Improved Lithium battery.
Lower cost.

In some sense technology found its way anyway because we see there is actually not much difference with what is happening today except that Tesla took the place of GM. Although we probably still lost some years of implementation because generation 4 from 2012 is actually the same as the Tesla Model III that is only coming somewhere in 2017 or 2018, so that is 5 or 6 years latter. It will also be more difficult to ramp up the production of those cars then if it had been straight in the generation 4 plans of GM. By the way the generation 3 would also have spared GM from its bankruptcy episode and would have helped the global economy.

Simple answer:

They are unable to find a way to market such a car without entering luxury/premium territory. Unfortunately, the most effective way to cut the cost on an EV is to strip out its batteries.

Battery prices are exagerated on purpose. it is a pretty good excuse to keep prices too high to be attractive..

This is the hen and the egg situation.

Produce a Corolla-EV, Escape-EV or a Accord-EV by the hundreds of thousands, and the price will go down very fast.

Tesla’s CTO JB straubel said this summer that with the economy of scale alone (not considering technological advancements) they will reach easily 30% of decrease in costs. And that they are most likely to acheive 50% in costs reduction.
And have in mind that Tesla, with their projected 500 000 car/year is nowhere near the millions that any of the big player can release yearly.

Right. Tesla is years away from something that will compete on price with a Leaf or Volt. Musk and Straubel know the cost of batteries needs to come down first. And GM, BMW, and Nissan aren’t going to be standing still in the meantime, either.

Tesla has done a fantastic job at demonstrating the EV market goes beyond cost and eco-conscious consumers. Why can’t we just leave it at that? Let the major automakers continue to serve the mass market until Tesla is ready to join them.

Don’t you find odd that the tiny Tesla motors can already have the cheapest price/kWh and that all the others cannot seem to compete, even if they have a thousand times more ressources?
GM 99 factories, Ford 92 factories (10 000 cars a day)
Tesla one factory, 30 000 cars a year.

The recipe? A large battery that costs $$$$. You are presenting a false and irrelevant comparison between non-mass market cars of yesterday to cars that are making serious attempts to catch on with the mass market.

Don’t you remember the first years of the Volt, how hard it was just to find one in the dealerships? Even now with its success, only one plant is constructing it. Also remember that GM closed the plant in 2012. Advertising is weak and relatively new.

I repeat with great conviction based on all the informations I gathered over time : If there is a range improvement of ~5 – 10% it will show that GM is not serious about taking the green path.

You are likely one who would never buy a GM product anyway. You’ve given your pessimistic and unrealistic opinion, so why keep on hammering away with it?

If GM roll out an all electric Equinox with 200 miles range, I’ will be the first in line to buy it!

Given that the 2014 MY Volt has more than 10% more range than the 2011 MY Volt, you will not be disapponted. I’m guessing, however, that more range will not convince you that GM is serious about electrification.

AGREE with you fully DONC. From the cars I’ve looked at, only the very expensive BMW I3 is theoretically competition, due to the miniscule gas tank mandated by California Politics. AS it is, I’d have to stop with the I3, whereas I drove from Buffalo to White Plains Non-Stop in my Volt, quickly gassed up in White Plains, and drove home. I could have made that Particular trip in a Ford Energi, but then I’d never buy THAT car due to its lousy electric range in day to day local driving, where the VOLT is twice as good, and as intimated here, getting better. Why do people criticize a product where there is absolutely no competition to it at any price? And by almost everyone’s evaluation, the Volt just keeps getting to be a better and better value. The Tesla S would have been out of the question, since even at the avg price of $100,000 there is no way to take a direct route. Recent Supercharger installations may have made the trip conceivably possible by going way out of my way, but in the winter time when defroster use is mandatory, and range greatly suffers, I’d be gambling that… Read more »

Just as a note: The U.S. i3’s reduced gas tank is not due to “California politics,” or if it is, those politics are directly BMW’s doing.

BMW actively lobbied the CA Air Resources Board to create a new category of EREVs with gas range less than their battery range. This new category of EVs would receive the same Zero Emission Vehicle credit per car as a BEV. (Another criteria of this new category is that the REx must not engage before 5% battery charge remaining; again, lobbied by BMW.)

BMW could have released the i3 with the Euro-spec gas tank, or even a bigger one. They specifically chose this option so they could get more ZEV credits.

i.e. BMW sees the i3 as a compliance car

I was trying to be charitable to BMW. Ok, then forget being a ‘theoretical competitor’ to the Volt. There is no real competition to the VOlt then.

The volt is not a perfect car, and for some its a bit small. But I give credit where its due, and to its father, Bob Lutz, who said since a few guys can come up with a Tesla ROadster, shouldn’t GM at least try to make an electric vehicle? THat was the real Tesla-GM linkage.

Yeah, I don’t think it is just “California politics”. The REx is a bit underpowered and not good for regular driving and BMW knows that. So the small gas tank is partly to emphasize that it is mainly there as a solution to running out of battery power and not meant for long-distance motoring. The little engine is fine for flat-level driving. But if you try to take on hills with the ICE alone, you are not going to be a happy camper.

I find environmental eleitist like you are only really inerested in finding fault and complaining about something. Set aside your prejudices for a moment and consider the impact that this kind of hyper efficient drive train would have in the real world. Wide spread adoption of this would drastically reduce our common carbon footprint. Your childish insistance on having solutions that are still too expensive or impractical for mass adoption plays right into the hands of the people who pray this technologie never becomes widely adopted.

rooting for 50 miles electric. Duh!

interesting remarks, the first generation Volt is very well designed in my opinion so these remarks possibly say a lot. some people don’t like the current Volt center stack but i think that it looks really clean and slick and i have gotten used to the controls so the function isn’t a problem for me.

i’m not in the market for getting rid of my 2012 Volt but i am most interested in the improvements in NVH and in range. i personally tend to inflate my tires on the high side to improve range so NVH improvements are very welcome but increased range is of more interest. i still like the ICE generator and gas tank size because they all you do do long distance driving without having to do any advance travel planning for locations of charging stations.

I’m rooting for more than one Voltec car introduced and lower prices. The current electric range is fine but larger would always be welcome. But I’d stick at the 16KWH battery size to optimize battery to rebate number.

The gas-powered MPG should be increased though . . . I would think they should be able to get to the low 40s at least.

I am completely happy with my 2011 and plan to keep it at least 10+ years. I’m optimistic that that’s doable since the car is holding up really well.

The new version can in no way woo me to give up my 2011 since it meets my needs so well. However I fear that with lower gas prices, fewer people will be interested in alternative fuel vehicles.

I’m hoping a stripped 2016 will sticker for $27,499, which will give Chevy the ability to advertise the car for $19,999 after the $7500 tax credit. Optioned up it doesn’t matter if it goes for $35 or 40k. But this program will only stay alive if Chevy can get a lot more people interested in it. Up to now, a lot of people won’t give it a chance because of the price. It’s a shame because they simply don’t realize the car has such a lower cost of operation.

More lookers translate into more buyers. More butts in the seat mean that when I’ve worn out my 2011, I won’t be forced to go back to a ICE vehicle

Despite the reveal of the front end, which makes the car look hideous IMO, the comment in the video about the car looking like a premium vehicle is right on. The next generation Volt looks like the EREV that BMW should have designed. (And I believe BMW is very serious about electrification).

Are you talking about this ugly car with a small battery, an EPA electric range of 81 miles and a defective optionnal range extender?

Have you noticed that none of the big car maker gives us the psychological threshold of 100 miles range?

Toyota and Mercedes both offer > 100 miles range.

Both use Tesla Drivetrains to do it.


the mercedes-benz 100+ mile range for the b-class ED is a “nominal” value. the EPA rating is 87 miles. that means that under idea conditions you can probably get about 120 miles.

That’s silly. “Ideal conditions” means driving around at unrealistically slow speeds that nobody wants/needs to.

The EPA cycle is designed to simulate normal driving (some freeway, some city, at normal speeds) and is what most people will experience.

Under “ideal conditions” most gasoline cars will exceed their EPA rated MPG figured, but nobody drives them like that either.

Most ICE cars in my experience do not meet their EPA city, combined or highway mpg, esp. Ford, and also Subaru.

Ford is typically -4 mpg off.
EcoBoost == EcoFraud.

For what it’s worth, I looked up the word “boost” in the Urban Dictionary. Shared here for your enjoyment are definitions no.s – 1) Boost to steal “I looked out my window the other day and saw this dude trying to boost my ride, so I shot him in the face”. 2) Boost to exaggerate; an exaggeration, to blow out of proportion John: “I mixed 26 flavors of 26” Mark: “Your boosting” 5) Boost 1. To blow vastly out of proportion. To exaggerate or stretch the truth so far that you are basically a straight up liar. 2. To lie. Usually not used as a verb but as a interjection. It is mostly used to call someone else out on what you believe to be a lie. The proper way to call boost is to get as close to the liar’s face as possible without touching them and scream BOOST. Similar to Bull Shit, but different. Edward: “I totally got l**d last night”. Jacob: “BOOST!” Girl 1: “We didn’t do anything”!, “I swear!” Girl 2: “Swerve!”! “Stop boosting!” There are several other definitions relating to exaggerating or plain-out lying. So – could Ford have been just reaching into it’s urban… Read more »

It’s more complex than that. 87 miles is what it gets without the range package, but with the range package (which is basically just a button that allows it to use the full battery pack) it gets 104 miles of EPA range:

However, they are both compliance cars and have limited availability.

$600 for a measly extra 17 miles??? what a dumb option, for that price. i assume that isn’t even 17 EPA-rated miles but instead probably represents something closer to an “up to” value. in cold weather that probably means that this “option” is only worth another 8-10 miles.

As relevant to this thread, I’m pretty sure many here would gladly pay $600 to unlock 17 extra EPA miles from the Volt battery pack. In fact, isn’t the “holy grail” for the Volt 50 miles EPA (vs 38 miles currently)?

Irrelevant for the 2015 B Class ED, the range mode will be standard.

I’m just not FEELING this Volt thing, as being some kind of compelling EV I’d want to own… Sorry. 🙁

Honestly, GM’s teasers have done nothing to increase my interest in this non-BEV vehicle.

That’s too bad. I’m feeling it, but then I already own one so I get it.

It would probably help if they gave us some numbers on things like EV range and MPG. They seem to be sticking to safe topics like styling, etc.

The lack of hard data on the update, is a turn off, yes.

And I’m just not a fan of silver painted plastic…

look, you can’t buy the thing today, so you might as well wait until they make the announcement. if they gave out all of the details today then there would be no point in scheduling an announcement to tell people stuff that you have already told them.

GM’s key goal after the reveal has to be putting together the right advertising/communications package so that more people “get it”.

Up till now the teasing has mainly been directed to enthusiasts and Gen 1 owners, which GM needs as ambassadors to get the message out. Social media marketing 101.

The only problem is the unexpected and untimely plunge in gas prices, which may mute the message somewhat in the short term eyes of John Q Public. Unfortunate, but there it is.

I can’t wait to see the 2016MY Volt. I like my 2013, but more range, faster acceleration and roomier back seats/fifth seat sounds good.

But it all comes down to MSRP. If it ain’t at or close to $30k it won’t matter. People aren’t going to buy a $35k Chevy, even with a tax credit. You have the EV-1 nutters plus the “Electric cars don’t have a gas tank!” puristas on the left and the “GM took bailout money” nutters on the right. There aren’t enough of us normal people in the middle to get the Volt up to a decent level of sales. LOL! And I am one of those right wing nuts on most issues.
I think I will like the new Volt despite the odd nose, but I really would like to see it succeed in the sales department, and it needs a lower MSRP to do that. Given the fact that Rydell is selling 2014MY Volts for $29,500, it is possible that the new Volt will come out close to $30k.

GM really does need to start building a real pure EV. The Spark EV is a nice compliance car start. The specs are good. But they need to build a pure EV that looks much nicer and has a 100 to 200 mile range.

And if they are really smart, they’d license the right to access the supercharger network. But NIH syndrome will probably prevent that. :-/

The upcoming Sonic platform 200 mile BEV is guesstimated to arrive in 2016-17.

As an owner of BOTH a Tesla and a Volt they are both great cars and fill different needs. And to boot we just sold our Prius (for the Volt) which we drove for 6+ years.

While the Tesla is a blast to drive the Volt is not bad AND if we need to drive to southern Mississippi, Washington DC or Pittsburgh, all common destinations for us, the Tesla is a poor choice as slow level 2 charging adds about a day to the trip. So would I prefer A BEV yes; but for the foreseeable future they do not meet our needs. But we can drive over 80% of our miles on our solar generated electricity.

The best thing about the EV1 was it’s NiMH battery. The battery was so good that Toyota copied the design and used it in their Prius, however while Toyota was design their Prius GM sold the design to Chevron. Yes a oil company! (ouch) When Toyota started to sell the Prius in the US market Chevron sued Toyota on Patent rights and won! Toyota agreed to pay Chevron a royalty on cars sold, which was in effect until 2013. Toyota used the NiHM battery all these years and paid a royalty on top of it all shows what a great battery it was!


That Spooky GM advertisement also made its way to magazines. As “Who killed the Electric Car?” stated, you don’t make this kind of advertisement if you really want to sell cars; you put a pretty girl in the car caressing the gear shift. In other markets you’d put smiling people doing everyday things in the whole car, not just show shadows or portions of it. Yet the ‘designers’ of the EV1 ad campaign claim its ‘award-winning’. So they have Buick give an award to Saturn? Big deal. At least the old GM realized they had Lemons with that Delco/Delphi battery. The things supposedly crapped out in less than a year, and the loss in range would make modern day Nissan feel good. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on how you view it, the battery they got was unbelievably good, and it was not foreordained: OShanski (sp?) got the contract since he had a battery already made, and it didn’t have to be designed first, as the other competitors to manufacture the new battery were planning. OF course, coming out of left field like that with a 120 mile battery THAT NEVER WORE OUT, was something BIG OIL could never tolerate. I’m… Read more »