GM Forum / GM News GM Forum / GM News
 
Go Back   GM Inside News Forum > Press Room > Global Chevrolet & Daewoo News
Register Home Forum Active Topics eBay Marketplace Media Gallery Mark Forums Read

Please Visit our Site Sponsors

GM Inside News & GM Forum is the premier GM Forum and GM News Source on the internet. We discuss all GM models on the forum. Registered Users do not see the above ads. Please Register - It's Free!
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-08-2008, 09:01 PM   #16 (permalink)
4.4 Liter Supercharged Northstar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Drives: 2009 Acura TSX
Posts: 2,879
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

If it runs on pure electricity, there is probably no need for a big gas tank.
kenman923 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-08-2008, 09:09 PM   #17 (permalink)
6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8
 
big swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Midwest
Drives: 07' Monte Carlo SS
Posts: 5,065
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

It will still have a range of over 350 miles which is plenty. If I had a Volt I would probably never keep more than a gallon or two in the tank unless I was going on vacation. Maybe more in the winter to keep condensation at bay but that's about it.
big swede is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:10 PM   #18 (permalink)
4.6 Liter Northstar V8
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SoCal
Drives: '04 Sierra '02 Regal GS "05 PT Cruiser
Posts: 1,543
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

It makes sense to make the tank smaller and 360 miles is about average for cars today, the EPA does MPG tests with a full tank of gas so some weight saved there could help ratings in addition to the added space mentioned by many.
SierraGS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:13 PM   #19 (permalink)
6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8
 
plane's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Banned
Posts: 5,185
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

What's not being stated is that the batteries are so good and the series efficiency so good, the range loss isn't quite as significant as calculations might indicate.
400+ mile range?
__________________
A successful man is one who can lay a firm foundation with the bricks others have thrown at him.
David Brinkley
plane is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:18 PM   #20 (permalink)
6.0 Liter L76 V8
 
Ambalanche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS
Posts: 2,110
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

I hope you're right Plane. I get the feeling too, rightly or wrongly, I have no evidence, just a feeling that the batteries are going to be better than GM originally thought. If that's the case, maybe they can advertise an all electric car that uses no gas until it hits 50 miles! That would be awesome!
__________________
Hotness
Ambalanche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:33 PM   #21 (permalink)
2.8 Liter Turbocharged V6
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 809
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

Quote:
Originally Posted by eaton53 View Post
Smaller tank = less gas sitting in the tank for long periods of time.
Exactly, for a large number of Volt owners a tank of gas will probably last over 1 month. An 8 gallon tank would also give the Volt some barging rights at fill up. 50% less expensive to fill the tank for the same mileage as a Cobalt/Focus/Civic.
Z28x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:36 PM   #22 (permalink)
6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8
 
member12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Baton Rouge
Drives: 2007 Silverado 4x4
Posts: 7,665
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

Not sure about that.

Drive all day for work on battery power, but at the end of the day your car is spent and you only have a 7 gallons of gas (7x35mpg....245 miles), and not enough range to make it all the way to a weekend getaway.

I don't know about this, but then again, I have no idea how the car works.

It seems like it would be miserable to drive on long trips..having to stop so often for fuel. It does have re-generative braking, therefore works like a Prius when the "plug in" charge is depleted?

That means that 40 miles on pure electricity and then 45-50 mpg average after that. Not bad at all.
__________________
Get your geek on in 2012!
member12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:38 PM   #23 (permalink)
2.8 Liter Turbocharged V6
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto
Drives: 2002 GTP
Posts: 992
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

If anything it might be an indication the ICE efficiency is increasing... that would be good news as well. I think it's a good decision even at face value... 350 - 400mi range is enough.
__________________
2007 Avalanche, Black LTZ 4x4
2002 Grand Prix Black GTP, Intercooled
tholland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:40 PM   #24 (permalink)
6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8
 
member12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Baton Rouge
Drives: 2007 Silverado 4x4
Posts: 7,665
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

BTW, this might save them 85 lbs...tops.

It's not for weight savings. It must be for space.
__________________
Get your geek on in 2012!
member12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:43 PM   #25 (permalink)
2.8 Liter Turbocharged V6
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto
Drives: 2002 GTP
Posts: 992
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

Quote:
Originally Posted by member12 View Post
Not sure about that.

Drive all day for work on battery power, but at the end of the day your car is spent and you only have a 7 gallons of gas (7x35mpg....245 miles), and not enough range to make it all the way to a weekend getaway.
IIRC the mileage with the gen set running all the time is closer to 50mpg.
__________________
2007 Avalanche, Black LTZ 4x4
2002 Grand Prix Black GTP, Intercooled
tholland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:47 PM   #26 (permalink)
4.6 Liter Northstar V8
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SoCal
Drives: '04 Sierra '02 Regal GS "05 PT Cruiser
Posts: 1,543
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

Quote:
Originally Posted by member12 View Post
BTW, this might save them 85 lbs...tops.

It's not for weight savings. It must be for space.
Your right it is not much weight, the problem is the EPA has weight "classes" and rounds weight up so another 5 lbs could get another 100 lbs added.

I might be wrong about that but that is the explanation I got when I questioned the crazy gas tank size differences on some late 80's GM products that were nearly identical otherwise.
SierraGS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:47 PM   #27 (permalink)
2.8 Liter Turbocharged V6
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto
Drives: 2002 GTP
Posts: 992
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

Quote:
Originally Posted by member12 View Post
BTW, this might save them 85 lbs...tops.

It's not for weight savings. It must be for space.
I think gas is about 6 lbs per US gal., so it would be more like 40 lbs. The extra space is good to have though.

Actually, I think it's encouraging to hear this... it likely means they are serious about reducing the weight.
__________________
2007 Avalanche, Black LTZ 4x4
2002 Grand Prix Black GTP, Intercooled

Last edited by tholland : 07-08-2008 at 09:51 PM.
tholland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:52 PM   #28 (permalink)
4.6 Liter Northstar V8
Premium Member
 
WishIhadatruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Drives: '01 Grand Prix GT '96 Roadmaster Wagon
Posts: 1,789
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

Every pound counts. There was an article on CNN/Money not long ago about all the weight that was saved on different parts of the Ford Focus. A pound here, a few pounds there, it all starts to add up. They were able to offset all the extra structure and safety equipment, etc. and the car didn't end up gaining weight overall. I'm sure the volume savings is important as well. It will still offer excellent range. 600 miles really was overkill. I have heard that when the battery is new it will likely give you more than 50 miles of range. After 150k miles of use it will still be good for 40+ miles.
__________________

1996 Buick Roadmaster Wagon
2001 Pontiac Grand Prix
WishIhadatruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:07 PM   #29 (permalink)
6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8
 
genjy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,852
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

Sounds fine to me. If the Volt will work as advertised, then the smaller tank won't be a problem for most people.
__________________

2008 5-cylinder turbo hatchback w/ 6sp manual
2006 4-cylinder minivan w/ 5sp manual
genjy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:10 PM   #30 (permalink)
6.0 Liter L76 V8
 
ronald mcretard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,408
Re: GM To Reduce Gas Tank Size for Volt

Quote:
Originally Posted by member12 View Post
Not sure about that.

Drive all day for work on battery power, but at the end of the day your car is spent and you only have a 7 gallons of gas (7x35mpg....245 miles), and not enough range to make it all the way to a weekend getaway.

I don't know about this, but then again, I have no idea how the car works.

It seems like it would be miserable to drive on long trips..having to stop so often for fuel. It does have re-generative braking, therefore works like a Prius when the "plug in" charge is depleted?

That means that 40 miles on pure electricity and then 45-50 mpg average after that. Not bad at all.
where are you getting 35mpg from? GM has stated they expect 50 mpg (after the first 40 miles of course).
ronald mcretard is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  GM Inside News Forum > Press Room > Global Chevrolet & Daewoo News



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0
©2008 GMInsidenews.com.
GMInsideNews.com is not affiliated with GM, General Motors or any GM Divisions in any capacity.
GMInsideNews.com is an enthusiasts' forum dedicated entirely to news about GM vehicles.