• On The Insider: Susan Boyle Makes History with Album
August 11, 2009 8:44 AM PDT

Chevy Volt snags 230 mpg city EPA rating

by Antuan Goodwin
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 28 comments
Share

Chevrolet Volt and its new EPA rating.

Toyota is NOT going to be happy about this...

(Credit: Chevrolet/GM)

For the last few weeks, we've been seeing a mysterious teaser ad all over the web. The ad simply displayed the number 230 (the "0" represented by a smiling electrical outlet) and a date. Well today's the day and the secret is revealed. The number 230 is significant because the Chevrolet Volt plug-in series hybrid has received an EPA estimated 230 city miles per gallon.

If that number sounds a little high to you, remember that for about the first 40 miles of driving on a full charge, the Volt uses no fuel. And once the batteries are low on juice, the gasoline generator kicks in to sustain the charge, not to motivate the vehicle--as is the case in parallel and two-mode hybrid.

The EPA has had to completely rethink its fuel economy standard for extended-range EVs like the Volt. For the Volt, that drafted number is based on combined electric only driving and charge sustaining mode with the gasoline generator running, although how much driving of each mode is still under wraps. The new draft works in GM's favor as the automaker now has bragging rights the the first ever triple digit fuel economy rating.

In addition to new fuel economy numbers, the new EPA stickers may also feature electric efficiency ratings. The Volt will consume 25 kW/hours per 100 miles.

Update: The EPA has subsequently stated that it hasn't actually tested the Volt to confirm or refute GM's claims.

Recent posts from The Car Tech blog
Car Tech Live podcast 147: The coolest, nuttiest cars from LA Auto Show
Mercedes-Benz shows fuel cells, split screens, and an iPhone app
The most beautiful cars in Los Angeles
Mazda6 doesn't try hard enough
Be a real-life racing driver with Nissan, PlayStation
2010 Lamborghini Gallardo does Australia
On the drive
Electric company will help launch Nissan Leaf
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (28 Comments)
by samhardin August 11, 2009 9:13 AM PDT
Hmmmmmm......... government owns GM............... EPA is a government entity............. Oh come on!
Reply to this comment
by c|net Reader August 12, 2009 10:31 AM PDT
Exactly my thought! The secret formula for computing the new mileage standard was created to make GM look really good, I'm sure.
by RitoMan August 11, 2009 9:19 AM PDT
I'll believe it when the car actually comes out and doesn't explode within a month of purchasing it!!!
Reply to this comment
by kingrah1 August 11, 2009 9:21 AM PDT
it better cost less than $20k
Reply to this comment
by rfelgueiras August 11, 2009 9:46 AM PDT
Why? It's new Technology on a large scale... initially it will be on the medium range, I think about 40k not counting the 7-10k off with the government "eviro-bribe" (I kid, that's a smart program), but why should it be cheaper than all the other hybrids when it's actually more advanced and it's production setup has to be created from scratch? Like the iPod, initially it will cost quite a bit due to initial production costs but as they sell more the cost will come down.
by antuan.goodwin August 11, 2009 10:25 AM PDT
Well, it's already been stated that, at $40K, GM will be selling the Volt at a loss for the first generation or so with hopes of recouping on later generations as the vehicle starts to sell better and the technology costs go down.

Toyota did a similar thing with the first 2 generations of the Prius and are only recently starting to make money from their hybrids. Of course, now they're raking in the dough, so it was a gamble that paid off.
by rfelgueiras August 11, 2009 9:44 AM PDT
Why? It's new Technology on a large scale... initially it will be on the medium range, I think about 40k not counting the 7-10k off with the government "eviro-bribe" (I kid, that's a smart program), but why should it be cheaper than all the other hybrids when it's actually more advanced and it's production setup has to be created from scratch? Like the iPod, initially it will cost quite a bit due to initial production costs but as they sell more the cost will come down.
Reply to this comment
by ITcomposer August 11, 2009 10:16 AM PDT
To the first 2 posters.

To samhardin : While yes you are right gm is now govermenet owned... you're only part right, the majority stake in GM is well.... UAW, sorry to burst your bubble there.

to ritoman: Um...im guessing in your driveway sits a japanese car, that explains the 5 year old like comment.

Now to some real business...

GM Needs to price this bad boy in the mid 30's so that after the tax credit it comes to like the mid 20s which would make it more affordable, just imagine when america starts to take this car out and the amount of oil the U.S consumes now 8.5Billion barrels a day or so starts to drop, what's going to happen to the price of oil?
Which reminds me, if gas goes back down to oh say $1.50 because of mass adoption of this vehicle, does that mean communistical countries like Venezuela will go bankrupt and have no funds to buy weapons? or how about the other OPEC nations, hmmmm this is the beginning of the end of petroleum.

Just my 2 cents worth...
Reply to this comment
by samhardin August 11, 2009 11:43 AM PDT
ITcomposer,

You're right, they don't own a majority. I still, however, see two major problems regarding conflict of interest. First, the obvious: The government still maintains a holding in the company. Second, and still not so subtle, with all of the meddling that Congress and the White House have partaken in with GM, they have a vested interest in seeing it succeed for political purposes. While seeing Toyota succeed in the U.S. is good for the country in the form of overall economics, seeing GM succeed has the added benefit of being able to take political credit at the stump.

Just one more huge reason why government has no business as a stockholder and/or bailout source.
by stigmattaman August 11, 2009 10:30 AM PDT
Holy Sh*t. Real innovation from American car companies? Color me shocked, but very very happy.
Reply to this comment
by fleurya August 11, 2009 12:50 PM PDT
it's not real. You get 40 miles on the charge, then it's probably 20mpg on average or something. Same crap, new scam.
by fleurya August 11, 2009 12:46 PM PDT
This is lame. Why do they need complicated mathematics and scenerios of the typical driver when all they really have to put on the sticker is "full charge: 40 mile, gasoline: 30 city, 25 highway"

Isn't that so much easier to put on the sticker and easier to understand?? Come on people!!!

What a load!
Reply to this comment
by Carrick1973 August 11, 2009 1:54 PM PDT
This story is just plain false. They say it does get this in the city, but they also say that the maximum range is 300 miles. So is that 40 miles on the charge, and then 1.1 gallons of gas takes you the extra 260 miles?
Reply to this comment
by rfelgueiras August 11, 2009 2:21 PM PDT
How is that false? Would you rather they say 230 mpg when fully charged? Seems like semantics.

Besides, your math is off. 230 miles - 40 from full charge = 190 Miles when the range extender is used to recharge the battery, using 1 gallon of gas. The gas isn't moving the vehicle, it's charging the battery. The 300 mile range is from a full charge and a full tank, obviously that hold more than a gallon of gas. 230 miles in a single day's commute is more than most will use in a given day. The argument holds up.
by carfan1 August 11, 2009 3:11 PM PDT
If the typical person drives about 40 miles each day for their commute and you can charge it each day then , at least during the week, the typical commuter would potentially not burn any gas or very little. If you drive 200 miles per week, mostly commute again, then you could not burn ANY gas. If you have a long commute, say 60 miles a day, and you cannot charge at work ( if you can and it charges within 8 hours well then no gas again), it works our to 300 miles. So for 100 miles you would put in gas. Using the brilliant fleurya's gas estimates of 25 higway you would burn 4 gallons. So that comes out to four gallons of gas for 300 hundred miles or 75 miles per gallon. In reality it will most likely get prius figures , in the range of 40 to 50 mpg. Taking the lower number would get you in the 2.5 gallon area, or 120 mpg. So low balling it with a high commute mileage 75 mpg, or more realistic 120 mpg. Maybe I'm way off, but that sounds like a very conservative figure to me. As others have remarked, eventually the price will come down to a reasonable price too. The early adopters will simply pay an excessive price. Remember when HD TV's were so expensive?!
Reply to this comment
by fleurya August 11, 2009 4:48 PM PDT
In the end, it's just stupid to make flat claims on something that is extremely highly dependent on how much an individual drives. It's better, and more transparent, to just give the miles on a full charge alone and the MPG on no charge, and let the individual figure it out based on their own driving patterns.

Most people know how far they drive and can determine on their own the benefit they'll get out of it. For me, I know I would probably only end up filling this thing a dozen times a year and getting way over the average if I charged it at night, but long commuters won't. And if you can't figure it out for yourself, then you should probably turn in your license because you're not smart enough to operate a motor vehicle!

Oh, and I hope they give away a free bottle of Sta-Bil, because if you leave your gas sitting in the tank for too long it's going to go stale!
Reply to this comment
by ez-man August 11, 2009 5:25 PM PDT
All I know is that when I go to Long Island New York it costs me a tank and a half of gas and my tank holds 17.2 gallons, with the Volt I would still have to gas up in order to keep the car running and besides they never mention how many gallons of gas the car holds. I do go to New York at least 4 times a month.
Reply to this comment
by Iamrod August 11, 2009 5:45 PM PDT
This is BS. Why not say if you commute less than forty miles, you get INFINITE miles per gallon?
I don't believe that the "generator" will charge the car to run an additional 190 miles on one gallon after you deplete the charge. What does it cost for the electricity?

I agree with Fleurya - "put on the sticker : full charge: 40 mile, gasoline: 30 city, 25 highway"
Reply to this comment
by chaselucaskloof August 11, 2009 11:52 PM PDT
Unfortunately GM's track record of following up on their outlandish claims and over the top press releases with something of actual substance is very poor. This looks like the usual smoke and mirrors to get some attention but I really wish they would prove me wrong.

Lets all hold their feet to the fire on this one and by the end of next year (when they say these cars will be ready for sale) lets have a reality check.

History is not on their side with this one.
Reply to this comment
by mistaqu August 12, 2009 5:30 AM PDT
sure this thing can get 230 mpg..but remember that mpg still stands for miles per gallon
why cant we go with something like miles per charge...
i remember when GM always talked about themselves as revolutionary...whats so revolutionary about a 40 mile battery
Tesla's first, mind you, FIRST car into the market can go 6 times as far. their second will go even farther and seat 5, with way more cargo space than the volt. and dont forget their 17 inch infotainment touchscreen AND 3G in the car..
Reply to this comment
by tshrtkng August 12, 2009 9:21 AM PDT
You said it consumes 25kwh per 100 miles. But how many kwh does it use off your home electric meter to CHARGE IT???
Reply to this comment
by broker6000 August 13, 2009 10:16 AM PDT
I will be sure to buy a chevy volt when they are availiable and the middle east can keep most of there oil.


<a href="aquazullauderdalebythesea.com/">Michael from Fort Lauderdale</a>
Reply to this comment
by Lori5150 August 13, 2009 5:09 PM PDT
I love the way that electricity just comes from the sky....
Just because it gets plugged into the wall when your sleeping
DOES NOT mean that coal plant used to make said electricity has been turned into a bowling alley!
Reply to this comment
by antuan.goodwin August 14, 2009 12:03 PM PDT
True, but think of it this way:

Which is easier, making sure that the thousands of cars in any given metro area run cleanly, or cleaning up one dirty powerplant? Now offset that single powerplant with cleaner alternatives (i.e. solar panels on homes or *gasp* nuclear) and you have a formula for overall cleaner air in a given region.

I don't think that anyone thinks electricity comes from the sky (well, unless you count lightning) but there are far fewer variables when you reduce the number of polluters.
by phillip worthington August 14, 2009 5:00 PM PDT
How bout miles per battery replacement
Reply to this comment
by texasdan August 14, 2009 6:11 PM PDT
Leave it to GM. Remember they are the same people that brought out the EVO 1&2, which they only leased, and then recalled all the leased cars (except 1) so they could crush them. The technology has been around for quite some time, but when the oil company's own the battery company's....well let's just wait and see if GM keeps up with the other companies when it comes to electric (or hybrid) vehicles.
Reply to this comment
by roadbase August 15, 2009 7:52 AM PDT
It's just a MPG spin made especially for the Volt who lives in its own little world. So now we have another way to figure MPG. Remember that it?s GM speaking-spinning.
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (28 Comments)

Search Car Tech

advertisement

About The Car Tech blog

CNET's Car Tech blog covers the latest developments in the automotive industry, with commentary on car stereos, hybrid and concept cars, GPS, and much more. The Car Tech blog offers the latest news and reviews from CNET's Car Tech reviews channel.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Car Tech blog topics