Next-Generation Chevy Volt to Debut in 2016 – GM To “Surprise the Competition” With Upcoming “Moon Shot” EV


Business Week is reporting that General Motors will debut two new plug-in vehicles in 2016.

Chevrolet Volt Z-Spec

Chevrolet Volt Z-Spec

One, the next-generation Chevrolet Volt, is expected  to employ a 1.0-liter three-cylinder engine to improve efficiency over the current Volt’s 1.4-liter range extender.  In terms of electric-only range, the next-gen Volt will likely get 50 to 60 miles per charge.

It’s unclear at this time if the next-gen Volt will be launched as a 2016 or 2017 Model Year vehicle.

The other plug-in vehicle that GM is expected to debut is an unknown, but according to Business Week it’ll come in 2016 as either a Model Year 2016 or Model Year 2017 vehicle with a price of approximately $30,000.  It’s believed that this unknown vehicle will be available in all 50 states and there’s even hints that it’ll be a compact with a range extender (though this seems unrealistic to us, as GM already has a compact EV with a range extender: the Chevy Volt).

As Business Week reports:

“Although GM has hinted that it’s working on a next generation of electric vehicle, Akerson says it’s aiming for a compact car that can go 200 miles on a charge and carry a generator, too. While it will be similar to the Volt, engineers are working on generators that could run on gas, diesel, or natural gas. The increased electric range is coming, in part, from advances in battery chemistry. GM is planning to bring the model out in 2016, for about $30,000, according to a person familiar with the idea who asked not to be named because the plans aren’t public.”

Business Week quotes GM CEO Dan Akerson as saying the following:

Spark EV

Spark EV

“We want it to be a moon shot so we can surprise the competition.”

But we’re not sure if Akerson’s referring to the next-gen Volt or that unknown 200-mile EV with a range extender.

It’s our belief that Business Week got quite a bit of the story messed up this time around.

Regardless, expect GM to launch two plug-in vehicles in 2016-ish: the next-gen Volt and some undisclosed “200-mile” EV that almost certainly won’t feature a range extender.

That’s our take on it.

Source: Business Week via Automobile Magazine

Categories: Chevrolet

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

86 Comments on "Next-Generation Chevy Volt to Debut in 2016 – GM To “Surprise the Competition” With Upcoming “Moon Shot” EV"

newest oldest most voted

I know a guy that starts out with 58 miles on his volt every single day.

Seems to me GM already has a good BEV chassis…The Volt. Lose the ICE works and retrofit it with a battery drive train.

I agree with your take on it, Eric. Businessweek really confused the matter badly in my opinion. Akerson dropped this info. awhile ago of offering 2 different distinct approaches, and seeing which would win in the marketplace. One was an enhanced next generation Volt with more electric range and still keeping the range extender engine, although offering a more efficient engine. Second was a 200 mile All-Electric car. I’m not positive but I think it was alluded that both cars would cost roughly the same price. GM was basically constructing a game to see which would take off better in the marketplace, the pure BEV or the EREV.

The two don’t really fight each other in the marketplace, there is room for both. Some people will do just fine with a 200 mile pure EV and will prefer it. They have good range, low maintenance and never have to deal with any of the downsides of ICE (stinky gas, smog testing, regular maintenance, more repairs, etc.).

Others will want the PHEV since it will provide them with cheap electric driving for all short trips and first X miles of the day, but it also provides them with no range issues and fast-refuel ability in order to do long trips.

I think the two-car American household would be well-served with one pure EV (for commuting) and one PHEV (that can handle the weekend trips and longer trips). Give the commuter with the shorter commute the PHEV and they’ll burn no gasoline except on long trips. The household’s gasoline usage could be cut by some 75% to 95%.

Looking at the number of Model S owners that claim to also have a Volt it wouldn’t surprise me to see more and more households have both an EV and PHEV.

We have a Volt+Leaf household..And that has worked out pretty well so far. But after driving both cars over the last few years, and the Leaf nearing the end of its lease, I’ve decided we’d be better off with two PHEVs. Not sure what the replacement vehicle will be yet. Kind of hoping for a BMW i3 with REX. But a second Volt or a CMax Energi are still on the table.

I have a Ford Focus electric and it serves me well for now. The problem is that I may get laid off an have to find another job. That being said I wish I had the option of gas power incase the new job is out of range. That range is 30miles one way because of a large mountain between me and most work.

I like both ideas as well as a the Volt-Z.

Telsa is an media darling with a quotable CEO and a “new economy aura”. However, GM seems to be building a much more meaningful long term ecosystem of high MPG cars with Volt as the flagship. Volt, EVs, eAssist all share a common set of intellectual property that is just on the cusp of getting to be scalable. Too bad for GM that media has not caught on yet.

Tesla doesn’t need eAssist, hybrids, etc. My view is wasted energy to the end game.

Airplanes had a similar switch to jet. I hope I don’t surprise anyone when I say that there aren’t a lot of commercial, schedule air carriers using reciprocating piston engines today.

But, there were hybrid jet / piston planes for a short while, many decades ago.

During these past two winters I have seen colder weather than ever before. This winter already more than a dozen mornings below -10F. During these conditions the amount of juice needed to heat the car + the battery is notable. Without an ICE to help out with both needs I wouldn’t have the range that I need. In other words, right now a pure EV doesn’t work for me.

Try to adapt a portable propane heater to your EV cabin. It is cheaper , cleaner, and less energy consuming than an ICE just for heating.

Or move south to a warmer climate and never suffer a cold winter. I did that many years ago (moved from New York to Puerto Rico) and I will not go back!

My question: could a 30.000$, 200 mile GM EV beat a 35.000$*, 200 mile Tesla EV in sales numbers with an theoretical unlimited output of their factories? My guess would be that Tesla could win if free supercharging is included and the network has been built as planned. GM probably won’t offer free CSS-charging and CSS infrastructure at their dealers – but if, they would win because of their size and reputation (as a large and reliable car company, not as EV supporters). Either way, it would be pretty close.

*I suspect at least 35.000$ for Model E with the supercharging ability.

I honestly don’t expect the 3rd gen Tesla to sell for $35,000. I really don’t find that realistic. I bet they’ll be a lot closer to $40,000 and by the time you add all the accessories you want it will probably be closer to $50,000. So I suspect if GM can really do a $30,000 EV with 200 miles it would sell a good bit cheaper than a Tesla.

There’s lots of wiggle room in pricing. Does that include the $7500 FIT credit? Base model is always more of a come-on than anything else. I bet the Tesla Model E pricing is after the tax credit and for a model that DOESN’T have supercharging. My guess for list price pre-credit is $45K (2.5K for SC, 7.5K credit), thus “$35,000”. I expect model E pricing up to $60K with all the trimmings.

I heard rumors that the Model E might even be as high as $65,000 with all the trimmings!!! 😉

Or maybe it just might sell for $35,000 after tax rebate per Elon’s comments!

Tesla chargers $2000 to add supercharging to their 60kWh version, so I doubt Gen 3 would come w/it free.

I’m afraid that will be the case…it would be an even stronger selling point if it was included – their network will be *complete* two years before the Model E goes on sale.

Oh, yah!!! It’s almost like Tesla planned this all out, and are just executing the plan.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

$2k at $0.1/kWh comes to 20,000kWh of juice, which in a Tesla is good for say 60,000mi. So I’d take that option and just call it prepaying for ‘fuel’..

Depends how much you use it. I’d probably do it just for the geek factor (and insurance) and never make my $ back.

Eric, with the marketing geniuses at GM I wouldn’t be surprised if they *do* think that a 200-mile EV needs a range extender.

Just like they thought most people won’t care whether their car has 4 seats or 5, or decided that they shouldn’t bother marketing their *other*, already produced 4-seat EV despite its rave reviews and the wide-open market niche waiting for it.

I hope the new CEO injects some sense into that “trying to understand what customers might want” aspect of GM operations. Otherwise they will be remembered as the company who had bungled the early EV transition in the most ridiculous manner.

Forgot to add of course… that it’s the same geniuses who thought 15 years ago, that the EV1 is a liability rather than an asset, and proceeded to kill it.

They didn’t kill it. They put it in in the freezer and thawed it out in 2007.

But that was a 2 seater… And you just complained about a 4-seater…

So, 2 is okay, 4 is NOT?

Weird logic.

You forget that Tesla began wit a two seat Roadster with bodies bought from Lotus. It was a pieced together design,

And how well did it sell?

Not nearly as well as the Model S, right?

Same logic applies to EV1

I also suspect they got their facts wrong. I don’t believe there is much point of a range extender on a 200-mile EV, especially if the price is around $30,000. I think that is just unrealistic. I mean, basically they are saying they’d have a compact car with 5 times the EV range of the Volt, plus still have the generator, and be $5,000 less expensive than the Volt. Well, who would buy the Volt if this were the case? The only way that would make sense is if the Volt was planned to be priced considerably less.

I’m picturing more of an i3 size small generator that just charges the battery in a range depleting sort of way, and not a Volt size motor that can power the whole car. That would fit into the California CARB rules better, where GM would be allowed to count it as a pure EV for the purposes of ZEV credits.

If the information is true, then the 200 mile EV for $30k (assuming after the $7.5k Federal incentive) is a go-for-broke venture for GM. Tesla by far has the cheapest $/kWh in the industry thanks to their modified 18650 cells. And, if you make a compact, people expect to pay less for a compact. I would be stunned beyond belief if they could turn a profit on a 200-mile $30k compact EV sold in 2017 before 2020 at least. Thanks to Panasonic’s 4.0Ah 18650 cells, Tesla basically already has a 200 mile mid-sized sedan. They just need the resources to get it to market faster. As far as I can tell, Tesla is pretty much maxing out their reach by the ongoing improvements (and international adaptations) to the Model S and developing the Model X, in addition to supplying powertrains to Toyota and MB, never mind rolling out superchargers on two continents. If the Model S and Model X are any indication, announcing the Model E prototype in 2015 means that the first deliveries will be at the tail end of 2017, at the earliest. And then, they will probably be looking at a refresh of the S and X,… Read more »

Why do people but corvettes?….. because they look better.
I would imagine the 200-mile will not look as good as the volt. Most people don’t buy there car with they’re brain.

Your right.

Writing about “brains”, both of you need to correct your grammar and spelling!

I disagree, There IS a market for a 200 mile EV with a ICE range extender. It would afford the driver more BEV range and also allow them to “keep moving” when outside that range by simply adding gasoline. Or why not just give the Volt?? those capabilities. Public charging infastructure while becoming more common is still FAR TOO SLOW and EXPENSIVE. The current Volts are hampered more by the small 3.3KW charge capability when the rest of the industry is at 6.6 “at least”

That said I am a Volt owner and due to it’s on board ICE generator it can be my “only” vehicle, and it is. But I REALLY wish it had more all electric range or a faster more capable charger so I could drive more electric miles.

IFF (if and only if) GM pulls this off, I will forgive them for limiting the SparkEV to CA/OR. It would make sense not to roll out this car nationally if they knew that they were “on the cusp” of a $30,000/200 mile BEV. If they don’t pull it off, I expect the Spark to be fully available nationwide by this time. It’s do-or-die time, GM.

That said, I expect this car to basically be a Spark EV with 2.5x the battery. They also need to make CCS standard, not optional. I don’t think that GM necessarily needs to follow Nissan’s approach of charging at dealerships, but they should be involved in pushing for infrastructure.

But I won’t forgive them if they make this new car offshore outside of the USA like the Spark EV is.

The expansion of, not the PHEV, but the ZEV target to include 8 states is certain to have an impact on Barra & Co’s decisions. Mandates may not be that far behind.

From a marketing perspective, if your best margin is ICE you want to foster the “Econo”/”Cheapo” perception of electric drive and preserve the space where you’re earning more cash from your higher margin vehicles. In this sense, I suppose there’s another reason we could see the Spark lead.

I hope the new Volt or the new mystery EREV has a better laid-out interior. A used Volt would already be a contender for my money, except that the interior is inconveniently laid-out.

When I read the headline “GM… Moonshot EV” I swear I thought I heard trumpets.

Interesting that it would come from Akerson rather than Barra.

I find it promising to see 200 mile range being talked about by the majors. To me, this is the range that makes an EV acceptable to a large percentage of the population. Even if the “moon unit” is an ugly dog, it helps to make 200 miles the standard range. I hope all manufacturers take notice and start engineering 200 mile EVs.

For what it’s worth, I don’t see GM producing a car I would want to buy. Tesla is so far ahead that It’s going to take another generation for the others to catch up. This next round of EV is likely to still be transitional with the generation after that emerging as mass market vehicles. I think it takes 3 generations to get it right (yes, even the Model S isn’t right because of price).

200 miles (real miles) is the bare minimum I’ll go the BEV route.

GM needs to increase their range.
Tesla needs to reduce cost and improve refinement.
2016/2017 will be a fun year to car shop.

I agree my FFE has 76 mile of range but you can use all the range. My actual useable range is 60 miles which is pretty small. O(nce my wife used 72 miles of range and we were sweating bullets. I live in hilly terain and the range gage is not very reliable.

The sales of the Leaf, etc., compared to the Model S have long-already opened up the eyes of industry to the 200-mile limit.

Tesla canceled the 40kWh version before it went into production, effectively raising the entry-level Model S price by $10k. The base price and several options have gone up in price since then, and there is still a waiting list in both hemispheres.

By contrast, the sales of Leafs and Fits and Foci, and even the Volt, were far below their current levels until their prices were slashed and/or sweet lease deals were introduced.

That is b/c Volt, LEAF and Focus EV are signficantly more expensive than their gas counterparts before incentives. Where Model S is on par or similar priced as its ICE counterparts…

Without commenting on the article, the 2016 timeline actually lines up.

GM has disclosures it has to make to the DoE in regards to the battery facility/production and there is nothing of consequence for 2014 and 2015, but significant deviation in 2016 plans. (who doesn’t love reading government documents in their spare time?)

Links. We need links. I don’t mind probing dry documents for hints of company direction. I enjoy reading (sometimes) financial 10-Q and 8-K statements.

Yes! I too would love to read the source on this intriguing bit of info. 🙂

I am glad to see GM and Akerson talking about more electric car debuts, but I really wish the Gen II Volt would come sooner than 2016.
Will it really take 6 years to get to the Gen II? That seems to be a bit pokey considering how they invented the EREV wheel, so t speak, in just over 4 years. And now they are taking 6 years to improve that wheel.
There are still multiple ways to improve the current Volt that might not constitute the Gen II that would be very welcome, though. Everyone has different priorities, but my list of improvements has shifted a bit now that the MSRP is down to $35k. My most wanted new features would be:

1) More rear seat legroom
2) More AER (40 miles of EPA AER would be a nice interim upgrade, 44 would be great!)
3) Faster charging (3.3 kW is pathetic, 11 miles per hour of charging is glacial, 6.6 should be the minimum for any serious player, and yes, I know EREV’s don’t NEED faster charging)
4) Improved CS mpg would be a nice touch, even though it isn’t used that much. (40+ mpg)
5) Improved MSRP/better lease deals.

Considering they went through bankruptcy just 4 years ago, a 6 year re-design cycle doesn’t seem that unreasonable. I’m sure that development of the next gen Volt was slowed due to that.

I think everyone is learning more about the market every year also. Lots of car companies are creating concepts and putting a wet finger in the air. Some have finally stopped waiting and joined the plug-in crowd. GM has probably been waiting a bit to see where the competition would come in, and where the market direction has gone, now that it’s *slightly* more mature (still lots of people that are clueless), and GM has data on 60K Volts in their back pocket.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

Doing a winter remote cabin start can take on the order of 5kW, so having a charger that can do 6.6kW would allow for such remote starts to run without draining the battery. GM really needs to get on the stick and start maxing out their charge capacity already, 50A should be the minimum onboard charger capacity!

I’ve pulled 7kW just heating/defrosting the car.

It makes complete sense to me that GM would build a 200 mile range EV with a small range extending motor the similar to how BMW has built their i3 to be an electric car with an optional small gas scooter motor. But the 200 mile range will be the 200 miles that is based on the old test cycle still used for CAFE calculations, and California CARB uses to calculate ZEV credits, not the new test cycle used for the numbers on window stickers now. That would make it a roughly 140-160 mile range EV based on the window sticker. And the small electric motor will probably fit into CARB’s definition they used for the i3, where BMW will be allowed to take full ZEV credit for the range-extended EV version as if it were a pure EV. Right now, Chevy can only use the Volt to fulfill half of their ZEV credits, because PHEV’s cannot account for more than 50% of any company’s ZEV credits. A new 200 mile EV with a small range extender like the i3 could be used by GM to make up the other half. 200 miles also happens to get GM more ZEV… Read more »

Fully agree.

Why would they not use current testing methods?

The i3’s small gas tank is what allows it the credits in CA. 50% of the range by EV, 50% by gas.

None of the EV and PHEV makers have used the latest EPA test cycle when they talk about their cars while they are in the development stage. They don’t talk about those numbers until the window sticker is official. Why? Maybe because the ZEV program uses the old test cycle for calculating how many ZEV credits a car gets. And the CAFE program still uses the old test cycle for calculating fleet MPG numbers. It might not make sense, but that has been what everyone has done. It seems silly, but what is even crazier is that the CARB ZEV program and the CAFE program haven’t been converted to the new test cycle yet. They should do it now to keep people from being confused about everything that is going on with both programs. Yes, the small tank that only provides the same range as the battery is what allows the i3 to get full EV credit. Which would make even more sense with a 200 mile range EV with a big enough gas tank to go another 200 miles. All the sudden you are talking about a decent 600 mile day of driving when starting with a full charge… Read more »

The new Volt should have a level 3 charging option. Heck all plugins should be able to level 3 charge.

It’s called gasoline. That generator puts out far more electricity than most BEVs can take from a quick charger. Plus it does it while driving.

I don’t see GM ever putting a real quick charger into the Volt. I would love to see a 6-7kW on board charger, though.

I disagree especially if we see $5/gallon national average, I will really would want lv 3 as an option at least. although it should be a standard. This would also benefit pure BEVs as well, by pushing for more lv3 stations.

I’m getting a Model E, so I don’t care 😉

I think it depends on the size of the battery. Does L3 charging make sense for a PiP? (Does the PiP even make sense?)

The PiP would make sense for me. If I replaced my Insight with one, it would use less gasoline than the Volt, plus it would actually have room in the trunk for my family’s luggage.

But then why not just save the $ and get a regular Pri? Why bother with a plug?

Because a PiP would burn less gasoline than a regular prius. In the end, it’s all marginal in my case (PiP/Volt/Prius) and I’m not interested in marginal improvement. What I really want is a 200-mile BEV so I can you ZERO gasoline.

In many cases, due to government incentives, you can walk away with a PiP for the same cost as a regular Prius. The same is true with the Cmax Energi. In many cases you can drive out of the lot without spending any more money than a regular Cmax. At that point it becomes a no brainer. This is especially true if you want a lot of equipment on your car because the plug-in models are well equipped. So if the price you are comparing on the regular model is well-equipped, then it evens out pretty well.

Pip rarely makes sense unless you drive so slowly and will NOT use any heat in the winter….

If that 11 miles was “real EV” miles or EV only miles, I would have supported it more.

Regular Prius is cheaper and more efficient on the long trips, plus better safety rating and 150lbs lighter…

You disagree with what, exactly? That GM planned to use gasoline as their “quick charge” solution for the Volt? It doesn’t matter what the price of gasoline is, that was their plan. I don’t see them changing it as much as I wish they would.

Awesome. A 1-liter 3-cylinder engine should reduce the costs and increase the efficiency. The Volt is going to become a very mainstream car when people realize how practical it is. You’ll get most of your miles on electricity, have no range issues, and you don’t even need to install a home charger because it will do just fine with 120V outlets.

The closer I get to the PHEV/BEV community, the more it feels like an old foray into competitive cycling, where noboby believed Lance Armstrong. I get the same vibes with this “200 mile” car stuff. It’s one thing for a reveal not to have a spoiler photo, but this kind of breakthrough? They’re good, just not that good.

Well… I would not rule out so easily the possibility of a “long AER + range extender” car. Yes, there is the odd aspect of having a “only” 50-60 mile AER Volt (which in that case should sell for a lot less than the other). But to me it does make some sense that GM, wanting to compete with Gen III Tesla, wants to keep a range extender even on the 200 AER car (maybe they’ll turn out to be 100, though…). In fact, without range extender, you simply cannot go anywhere with it, unless there is a dense network of fast chargers all over the country (and all over Europe as well). Since Tesla is creating that (and it’ll be quite developed by 2016-2017), and GM most probably (and of course unfortunately) doesn’t plan to do the same with CCS (or any new standard), the range extender will actually be a must, from that point of view. And GM will brag about the existence of a much wider net of “chargers” than the Supercharger network: the gas stations network (a bit sadly). For some of us might be different (not necessarily, though), but thinking of the general public: 1-… Read more »

It’s the $30k / 200 AER car that is the mirage, IMO.

These companies are shrewd. Sitting in MA, and no superchargers despite good Tesla sales, one interpretation is they, and others, expect government help. Last week, mention was made that a grant program for L2 may expand to highway L3.

Scoop – MA DOER Commissioner, as chronicled today:
“The program will also pay for fast charging stations to be installed along major highways across the state. Sylvia said that the charging stations would deliver an 80 percent charge in just 20 minutes, which he said addresses one of the main arguments against electric vehicles – worries about range”

Read more:

Concerning the price, certainly GM relies on a next generation battery (unlike Tesla). Completely different costs. In that case a $30k / 200 AER car would be possible: 60 kWh @ $100/kWh is just $6,000.
Till few days ago, one would have bet on those being ENVIA batteries. This website has reported rumors about problems for ENVIA in actually delivering on promised results. If this news about GM plans is newer and correct, than I would assume that either they have some other battery to count on, or that the rumors about ENVIA were not correct (at least not totally correct).

Concerning L3 chargers deployment, as I said, if that will happen by 2016-2017 then GM might change plans. Of course I’d be very happy if that happens. Though I think that, especially considering the possibility of better batteries (higher capacity, faster charging, better standing regular fast charging) coming, a new standard (250-500 kW, whatever technically/practically convenient) would do an enormously better job.

Tesla IS relying on next-gen batteries, as well. The Model E (and presumably a future Model S/X overhaul) will have 4.0Ah 18650s rather than the 3.1Ah versions currently used in the Model S/X.

The form factor has been the main driver of Tesla’s cost-advantages – not old, inferior tech.

1, Put the PHEV batteries under the floor so as to fit five people.
2. Make it a larger car that is not a compromise in size.
3. You only need one car, virtually identical, to address both PHEV and 200-mile BEV: make the generator unit (for the PHEV) and a 40KWH battery pack unit (for the 200 mile BEV) with identical size and mounting points (both should weight about 400 pounds), so that the factory can either pop in one or the other on the same assembly line.

50-60 miles of electric only range would be a *HUGE* technology advance, and would greatly reduce the amount of gas driving currently being done,.

Seeing as there are no Superchargers in NY State, only a Volt like vehicle will allow me to take atrip. The one for the buffalo area has now been relegatedto southen ontario, Canada.

I will bet that the SuperChargers will be build before the 50-60 mile Volt will be built.

I do think the 50-60 mile Volt with 5 seats will be a great vehicle. That being said, I think the 30-40 mile CUV built with the same drivetrain will have more sales success in the US market.

Sounds like GM wants to make a Tesla Gen III Killer…

The company that will “win” will be the one that delivers unexpected benifits. EV enthusiasts will be going into the 2016-17 foray expecting a 200 mile range. Whose going to have AWD? Whose not going to get caught in a charger format war? Which will be able to fit a bigger family? Who doesn’t cap me at 85 mph? My lease on my Ford Focus Electric will be up in the summer of 2016 and I will be in a fun dilema: 1) Buy out the FFE because I love it so d*** much for commuting and add a family vehicle that can go on long trips (AWD, room, range, charging flexabilty). Or…. 2) Switch to a single family sized AWD EV vehicle with lots of longer term range viability. Sorry Ford. The problem is that I suspect my lease will be up before these magic 200 range competitors hit the market. 🙁 We should not be surprised by the slow progression of hybrids and plug-ins. Plug-ins only started to be offered in ernest when Federal subsidies for hybrids dried up. Magically, if not reluctantly, plug-ins started to be offered to keep the addictive milk money flowing. The real question… Read more »

Why would you buy out your lease when you could get a new FFE for the same price. Ford si charging 30K minus the 7.5K brings you to 22.5K. With the state rembate in ca 2.5K the final Focus price is 20K and your buyout is around 19K.

If GM keeps talking about coming out with a 200 mile range vehicle, it’s not going to surprise anyone. The way they keep talking, it will be more of a surprise if they don’t succeed.

GM has said a $10k price reduction of the volt is a priority. I see at least 2 if not 3 products:
1) $30k gen2 Volt
2) a 200 mile pure BEV.. Maybe with an optional i3 like extender with a purposely puny gas tank like the i3…. And hopefully 3)
3) a Model S like performance PEV sedan for Cadillac. As much as I think the ELR is attractive, it is not a real Model S competitor. The Model S can go head to head with a BMW 5, Audi A6 or e-class Mercedes. Cadillac should make a 50 mile AER sub 5 second 0-60 Cadillac luxury performance eREV sedan.

I agree with 1 and 2, but I think 1 will happen before 2.

The third product I see is a Voltec CUV, i.e. Outlander PHEV fighter. I would be shocked if that is not the next plug-in body style they release.

How about a plugin Equinox with AWD first?

+1. Even FWD to get the ball rolling.

if you have a 200 mile EV with a small charger that can gen 1/2 of avg output for the battery and you know that you need extra range for a long trip so you activate the onboard charger. At 200 EV miles you may have generated enough energy for another 100 miles. So now you have a 300 mile range when needed. +50+25+12.5 & etc to almost 400 miles before you need a charger and meal break. A lightweight, efficient charger always running at a fixed capacity may be what they have up their sleeve. Simplifies all the exotic mechanics too if it is independent of drivetrain and possibly removable.

5 seats, are there 5 seat?

That is the central question if you want families to be even interested.

I am one of those that don’t buy a Volt for that one and only reason. It is just not able to replace a standard five seat car, so what’s the point.

I hope that’s not their attempt at a redesign. This thing looks ANCIENT and really needs a serious overhaul inside and out. If it looks like the current Volt, forget it.