Let's have a truthful talk about the cost of the Volt.

Rune

Mjölner
The Reuters article was based on figures from severalMichigan-based industry analysts, claiming that Chevy might be losing up to $49,000 on every Volt it makes.
Those figures were estimated by working out the total cost of development of the Volt project, divided by the number of cars so far--a method which we suggested ourselves was a little spurious:
"...it's worth remembering that this figure will go down with every Volt sold, and unit production cost can only truly be calculated over the course of a full production run."
Now, "father of the Volt" Bob Lutz has weighed in viaForbes to confirm just that--that the true cost of each Volt is nothing like the numbers estimated--and that the car is "doing exactly what it was designed to do."
The Reuters report explained that when dividing the $1.2 billion development costs, each of the 21,500 Volts sold so far has cost GM $56,000 per car. Throw in the actual cost of production and, depending on who you believe, the total per-car cost could be between $75,000 and $88,000. Minus the car's purchase price and--theoretically--you have your headline loss figure.
The article also suggested that due to the incredibly low lease deals being used to pull in customers, GM's losses could be even greater.
How to calculate unit cost...
Predictably, Lutz points out the same factor we did, which is that a product's true unit cost is based on to the total number produced over the product's lifetime. In other words, GM hasn't calculated its figures based on the 21,500 sold so far, but on a much greater number over the life of the vehicle.
What Lutz doesn't mention, but a commenter on our original article reminds us, is that the Volt's development costs are also shared with other variants of the Volt sold overseas--the Opel and Vauxhall Ampera in Europe, and the Holden Volt in Australia. Detail changes aside the cars are near-identical, so a true figure must include these vehicles.
Lutz throws together a few figures to show how in reality, the Volt doesn't cost a great deal more than a Chevy Cruze to produce. The electronic aspects of the car make up around $10,000 of the production costs, and Lutz suggests another $1,000 in labor costs, for 20 hours assembly.
With a dealer net price of around $37,000, that leaves as much as $26,000 to produce the rest of the car--more than a Chevy Cruze sells for. If the rest of the car cost that much to build then Chevy would be losing money hand over fist on the Cruze too--which isn't the case.

more at link...

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/I...he-Chevy-Volt-How-much-does-it-really-cost-GM

 
Too much text, too many "big words". Conservatives will never read it. If they did, they'd stop being conservatives, wouldn't they?
 
the undeniable reality is that the sticker price is still $39k+ and they aren't selling......thus, whether GM is losing $10k or $20k, its still losing.....
 
Electric cars will only work if:

a) they aren't butt-ugly
b) offer value and performance comparable to gasoline-engined cars
c) people want them

Even then, unless they charge their own batteries as they roll, they aren't doing shit for the environment, are they? Most electricity in the US is generated by nuclear, coal or oil powered plants, isn't it?
 
the undeniable reality is that the sticker price is still $39k+ and they aren't selling......thus, whether GM is losing $10k or $20k, its still losing.....

Congratulations, you are truthful about the price, but your honesty stops there. Like any product ever conceived, the losses will continue until the costs are amortized, but then you knew that didn't you?
 
Electric cars will only work if:

a) they aren't butt-ugly
b) offer value and performance comparable to gasoline-engined cars
c) people want them

a. beauty is in the eye of the beholder
b. how about better than gasoline (ICE) engined cars
c. people will want them when the RWA bullshit about them finally ends.


Even then, unless they charge their own batteries as they roll, they aren't doing shit for the environment, are they? Most electricity in the US is generated by nuclear, coal or oil powered plants, isn't it?

They do charge their batteries as they roll using re-generative braking.
Nuclear provides 20%, coal 45% and dropping rapidly, oil is at less than 10%, with the remainder being nat-gas and renewables such as wind, solar and hydro-electric. However, due to the much higher efficiency of the electric drive motor (over 90%) compared with the ICE motor (20% gasoline, 30% diesel), an electric car, even running on coal generated electricity is much better for the enviroment.

The ultimate benefits to using electric cars though are;
1.National security (reduction on dependence of imported oil.
2. reduction of trade imbalance.
 
a. beauty is in the eye of the beholder
b. how about better than gasoline (ICE) engined cars
c. people will want them when the RWA bullshit about them finally ends.




They do charge their batteries as they roll using re-generative braking.
Nuclear provides 20%, coal 45% and dropping rapidly, oil is at less than 10%, with the remainder being nat-gas and renewables such as wind, solar and hydro-electric. However, due to the much higher efficiency of the electric drive motor (over 90%) compared with the ICE motor (20% gasoline, 30% diesel), an electric car, even running on coal generated electricity is much better for the enviroment.

The ultimate benefits to using electric cars though are;
1.National security (reduction on dependence of imported oil.
2. reduction of trade imbalance.

Thanks for your response.

But do people want to buy them?
 
Don't give a rat's ass. The bottom line is the Volt is a piece of shit, hence why it is failing in the market place.

The Nissan Leaf, by contrast, is an awesome feat of engineering. Goes 80 miles on a single charge, compared to the <30 miles of the Volt. I'm probably buying a Leaf within the next year or so.
 
Correct, but the politics of oil are pervasive in this country.
At one time, over 1/3 of all cars and most trucks were electric. Oil profiteers got involved and it has been a battle ever since.

There is profit to be made either way.

As whatever we are supposed to call him, points out electric cars still require fuel. Most of the points in your counter argument did not apply.

I hope they make a fortune off the car, bring down the price to something a bit more affordable and it proves to benefit all. But it should be strictly a business decision. Progressives, who THINK, they have all the relevant data have always been at the forefront of creating new market manipulations and creating vested interests that do not care about anything but holding on their power and meal ticket. This should not be a political issue.
 
The Prius lost money for a number of years. However...

They perfected the technology.

They defined the brand.

They now dominate the hybrid market.

Japanese business philosophy looks ahead 20 years.

American CEO's look to their next bonus.
 
Back
Top