Captured Chevy Volt photos show updated look
Web site The Car Connection on Tuesday managed to get its digital hands on photos of the what is said to be the production version of the Chevy Volt, the much-ballyhooed plug-in hybrid from General Motors.
Click on the image to see photos of what is said to be the production version of the plug-in hybrid Chevy Volt.
(Credit: General Motors via TheCarConnection.)The photos were made available on GM's media Web site unintentionally, a company representative told The Detroit News. They were quickly taken down from GM's site after The Car Connection posted them.
Perhaps the most striking aspect of the photos, besides the fact that the product managers feature prominently in many of them, is that there is a significantly different look between the supposed production version and the concept car.
Whereas the concept car was futuristic and very low to the ground, the photos captured by The Car Connection show a more normal-looking sedan.
Last month, the design director of the Volt released a few photos of the planned styling, showing just corners of the car. He said GM is focusing on creating a very aerodynamic shape to boost fuel efficiency.
The plug-in hybrid Chevy Volt concept car.
(Credit: CNET Networks)GM has said it expects to ship the Volt at the end of 2010. It will be able to drive 40 miles on its lithium ion batteries and have a gasoline engine that will give the car a 400-mile range.
The car has piqued the interest of thousands of consumers, spawning the GM-Volt.com Web site--unaffiliated with General Motors--where people have signed up for a waiting list to get the car.
Financially, GM has a lot riding on the Volt, as it seeks to reduce its dependence on sales of sports utility vehicles and trucks at a time when high gasoline prices and a green-tech vogue are pushing consumers to look for more fuel-efficient cars.
A successful launch of the Volt and reliable battery technology would help demonstrate that GM can compete with other automakers in the market for environmentally oriented vehicles.
Martin LaMonica is a senior writer for CNET's Green Tech blog. He started at CNET News in 2002, covering IT and Web development. Before that, he was executive editor at IT publication InfoWorld. E-mail Martin. 
http://blogs.thecarconnection.com/blogs/marty_blog/2010/2010-chevrolet-volt-first-production-photos/
competence. I'm tired of seeing lamebrained articles written by the ignorant, for the ignorant.
diddleupdrs@netzero.net
Props for building an electric car yourself though... That's just freaking awesome!!!
Oh yeah, also: The Volt was targeted to cost around US$30,000. As of April 2008, General Motors Vice Chairman of Global Product Development Robert Lutz was quoted as saying that the realistic unsubsidised price had risen to US$48,000[46][47], that he reckoned that US$40,000 might be possible, without making any profit, and that only government tax incentives could take the price tag nearer to US$30,000. When asked directly about the price later, Lutz indicated that this was a misquote - and said "The answer is that we don?t know."
Also: "GM expects ten years of life out of the batteries."
Hell, if you want a real plug in hybrid, get an Aptera. 40-60 mile Range, but better gas milage:
"An asymptotic decaying exponential is an accurate way to describe the fuel mileage of the Typ-1h. For example driving say, 50 miles, one might calculate a MPG number that's 2 or 3 times higher, say, 1000 MPG. As battery energy is depleted, the frequency of the engine duty cycle is increased. More fuel is used at 75 miles, the MPG might be closer to 400 MPG. Again, we're using battery energy mostly, but turning the engine on more and more. Just over 100 miles we're just over 300 MPG, and just beyond 120 miles, we're around 300 MPG."
http://www.aptera.com/
But really now, GM needs to sit down and take a look at their strategy here. Instead of making a hybrid Aveo or Cobalt, which would probably get 50mpg+ without a sweat, they throw them in Pickup Trucks and Yukons, so now they get 19MPG instead of 14. Wow, i'll sure rush to get one of those. Then, they put all of their eggs in one basket with the Volt, a $40,000 car that will let you drive for 45 minutes a day before you have to use gas. So you get a higher electric bill, and a car that gets 50mpg if you have to go pick up groceries after work. Gimme a car that just gets 75mpg ALL THE TIME. Then i'll be impressed. I'm sure the volt will be great if you use it as a second car, then you can pretend your not using any gas on the way to work in your ugly car. Bravo. Just get a Prius and use the $18,000 you'll save to buy gas. You can drive a Prius 236,571 miles with that money. You will need to replace 2 sets of Volt batteries in the same time.
The Volt _CAN_ be the only car for a small family. It can get to work, it can go on a long vacation. It can hold two kids, and all the luggage. Not surprisingly, that's harder to do then making a super light 2 seat prootype car that gets good gas mileage.
You fail at understanding markets. That's why you think a Hybrid Pickup Truck is weird. The Chevy Silverado Hybrid gets nearly 100% better fuel economy then the non-hybrid version. 12 vs 24mpg.... When you're an American contractor... and you drive over 50,000 miles a year for your small business, and gas costs $4 a gallon.. That's the difference between spending $16,000 a year on gas, or $8,000 a year.... Those trucks will sell because they save real businesses, real money.
HEY GM, Americans do want (really we do) to buy some good looking high quality American-made vehicles. Hire some Japanese designer's if you can't figure out! What an ugly car!
1) Get you there
2) Safely
3) Reliably
4) Inexpensively
5) Comfortably
6) Stylishly
And with a hope that it will hold its value.
'Nuff said.
If you want style as your first choice, you are in the wrong swimming pool, pal.
1) get you there: as long as 'there' is less than 40 miles away, or else you may as well be driving a regular hybrid.
2) safety: dunno, guessing it won't be anything spectacular.
3) reliability: GM + new technology, somehow I don't see this as being reliable.
4) Inexpensively: Nope.
5) Comfortably: Again, dunno, it's possible, but it ain't gonna ride like a Caddy or Mercedes.
6) Stylishly: Well, they killed that one.
So this car really satisfies nothing on your list. At least it satisfied the item at the bottom of your list before (for those who liked the style.) And not everyone has the same priorities. Somehow I don't see Corvette and Wrangler drivers putting style after reliability and inexpensiveness.
Chevy had a great concept car and committed to delivering it on an aggressive schedule. They did most of their technology testing on a Malibu. As it became apparent that they couldn't get the engineering and certification done in time for their schedule, they decided not to throw away as much engineering as possible. They kept the adaptation of much of the technology to the Malibu frame and needed to keep as much of the Malibu to do it.
That's my guess as to why it looks like a slightly newer version of the Malibu with some dress-up in the form of nifty mirrors and black plastic panels to look like the glass on the original concept.
If it's a problem with space, then why did Chevy try to introduce this on a smaller car? They could have taken advantage with their love affair with the SUV and put this technology on a roomier platform without sacrificing as much style. Still I think it's what I said first. They couldn't meet their deadlines and just kept the crappy Malibu with some new sheet metal to look more like a Prius.
This looks entreily too much like a Prius. I'm very disappointed.
Not too surprising, noting the lack of anything daring or original from GM the last few decades. It is sad to me because it was my favorite car company. I learned to drive in a 1953 Chev. coupe. My fist car was a factory turbocharged 1963 Corvair.
And my favorite was my 1969 Oldsmobile Cutlas. But, now I am afraid the company is toast.
- by grtgrfx September 10, 2008 8:33 AM PDT
- I wouldn't want another Accord-like econobox from GM. When it was concept, it was a unique-looking vehicle that would bring attention to the e-car technology...now what do they have to get buyers in the door? I'd rather get a Japanese car that's proven reliable because they've been making them for ten years.
- Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (45 Comments)Sorry, Chevrolet. This is a loser design.