Comments on Darryl Siry's Blog: GM Volt gets unrealistic 230 MPG rating

Google search works well for this site. Site is re...

2010-06-20T05:50:19.124-04:00

Google search works well for this site. Site is really cool. I am trying hard to develop my quality. Thank you

I just purchased a fuel saving device which is a throttle body spacer. I have seen increased fuel efficiency and there are no outlandish claims from the maker.

methodology-wise, how about they use a energy rati...

2009-08-12T22:06:05.107-04:00

methodology-wise, how about they use a energy ratio of natural gas/gasoline - and have an accepted avg amount of natural gas that goes into operation of a natural gas peaking turbine to produce the Watts being pumped into the batteries.

How does one get MPG when the vehicle does not con...

2009-08-12T16:39:23.748-04:00

How does one get MPG when the vehicle does not consume Gs to get Ms? LOL.

It seems like a waste of time to quibble over the ...

2009-08-11T22:12:16.923-04:00

It seems like a waste of time to quibble over the minutia of the test procedure. The crux of the issue is that this whole idea is a broken one.

Rather than come up some kind of arbitrary test based on mostly EV charge and some much smaller amount of gas usage to arrive at an arbitrarily larger number, they should simply report EV range and charge sustaining mpg.

That is the only sensible and honorable number. GM can't duck behind the EPA here. GM has been driving this new standard as they proudly mentioned in the news about a year ago where they talk about the agreement they reached to let them score this high:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a2GgcMQbsIcU&refer=us

It's sad to see GM go down that road. There...

2009-08-11T21:49:08.917-04:00

It's sad to see GM go down that road. There's only one true measure for EVs: range on batteries alone.

By this measure, GM is losing to Tesla, Nissan and Mitsubishi -- and *that* is the real issue.

Sad.

- Nick P. -

After the bankruptcy GM had to come out with a gam...

2009-08-11T19:34:40.385-04:00

After the bankruptcy GM had to come out with a game changer.

To say 230mpg just confuses consumers who don'...

2009-08-11T15:55:00.496-04:00

To say 230mpg just confuses consumers who don't know any better. There should be two numbers for REEVs (or EREVs):

- all electric range
- mpg in charge sustaining mode

I think the appropriate response is ridicule. GM and the EPA should be shamed into using more honest metrics. Wish the MSM had a basic understanding of this stuff.

Though you have a valid argument, you still seem t...

2009-08-11T13:04:02.184-04:00

Though you have a valid argument, you still seem to be missing the point and that is that it is/will be far more fuel efficient than most other vehicles on the road.
Yes, the Tesla is pretty sweet looking, and is quite fuel efficient, but who can afford $129K US? People aren't buying more fuel efficient cars simply to be enviro-conscious - they're buying them to save money.

The return investment on the Volt will happen within a year or two, once you factor in rebate, fuel consumption and electricity.

Return investment on Roaster will take way longer than that, and don't expect any families to be driving around in that.

What about cost per mile? The Volt comes out about...

2009-08-11T12:21:34.152-04:00

What about cost per mile? The Volt comes out about twice of what the Prius does. Why not just say it's twice as cost efficient?

I think it's a bad move for 2 reasons:
1. Early green adopters know it's total BS #. These are the folks who would put up with the new tech for the sake of owning it. And you've just alienated them.
2. Normal joes who might be impressed by the # and buy it, will drive it like a regular car and get 40 mpg and be pissed off.

It's just a bad move. They should've aimed for a 100 mpg # instead.