GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
21,022 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This is something that's been floating around in my head for a while, and I'm sure others have contemplated the same idea. BAS+ sounds quite promising. I don't exactly remember what the predicted increase in MPGs was, but let's just say a 15% increase.

So taking this increase into account and incorporating that with GM's largest SUV, the GMC Yukon XL Denali (or the Chevy Suburban or the Escalade ESV, whichever), could theoretically achieve 21.85 MPG. Not a big increase, you might say. But from my experience, 20, 30, and 40 MPG are magic numbers in the car world. Say that your SUV gets 19 MPG and people look at you like you're crazy for not trading it in for something better. But, say that your full size SUV gets around 22 MPG, and people will think, "Well, that's not too bad for a V8-powered SUV I guess."

Now let's take a pickup, like the Sierra 1500. 20 MPG with the 5.3L Vortec V8, factor in a 15% increase, and you'll get 23 MPG. Sounds even better, 23 MPG in a full size pickup? Take into consideration that the 20 MPG is with a 4-speed auto tranny. Stick a 6 speed auto in there and the expected fuel economy could increase even more.

Now the Malibu, 32 MPG with a 2.4L ECOTEC and 6 speed auto. Add in the 15% increase and get 36.8 MPG. That's pretty amazing for a midsize car. And it's nearing the magic 40 MPG mark.

The Cobalt's going to be even better. Take the 36 MPG Cobalt XFE, factor in the 15% increase, resulting in 41.4 MPG.

Crossovers? The Acadia with BAS+ could get 29.9 MPG. The Equinox with BAS+ could get 27.6 MPG.

Also, take into consideration that this 15% increase is across the board. Smaller vehicles may have an even larger increase with BAS+.
Now, the only problem with this plan is that it will add some $$ to the MSRPs of all these cars. What I think needs to be decided is if the benefits outweigh the extra cost. Maybe not for the big SUVs, but for smaller vehicles, it may just work.

Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
I think GM should make it standard equipment on every vehicle they make. It is already fairly cheap to produce, making it in bulk will only make it that much cheaper. Besides, adding that and some of the other low cost gas saving technology that allows GM to use smaller engines should help them achieve the EPA increase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
I agree, I think it should be standard. My Vette has 6.0L of displacement eating up gas at lights. It's burning fuel without moving that kills the mileage. I usually turn the car off whenever I know the light will be longer than 30 seconds. It's amazing how much it helps my mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,693 Posts
I think it's a great idea to make BAS standard across the board. But I think you're smoking crack if you think it will translate to a 15% increase in fuel economy. It won't do jack for highway mileage, since all BAS does is shut-off the engine when you are idling, as it contributes 0% for propulsion. (Correct me if I'm wrong)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
I too have been thinking about this. I think this would be great a idea for GM and i think that this is where all cars might end up going. Yes in the short term it might cost a lot. But if you think about it, if GM equipped every car in its lineup with some type of BAS system the cost should go down really fast. So instead of selling maybe a 100k mild hybrid cars a year, you sell nealry 9 million regulars with BAS. I would think that would help bring cost down. And whats even better is that not only are all of GM's car getting great fuel economy. But GM would be the first car manufacturer to do this and i think that would make GM the new Green Giant of fuel effiecency and beat Toyohonda at their own game.

I think GM should do this, their public image will more than double.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
21,022 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I think it's a great idea to make BAS standard across the board. But I think you're smoking crack if you think it will translate to a 15% increase in fuel economy. It won't do jack for highway mileage, since all BAS does is shut-off the engine when you are idling, as it contributes 0% for propulsion. (Correct me if I'm wrong)
I think I read somewhere that the current system already got a 15% increase in fuel economy...but then again I may be wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,478 Posts
Doesn't starting and stopping the engine constantly greatly increase wear? If GM has overcome that problem, then I'm all for it. But start first by adding it to small cars, and do the trucks last. Imagine a 10-15% gas mpg increase on the Cobalt XFE, not too shabby.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,692 Posts
Doesn't starting and stopping the engine constantly greatly increase wear?
I have to hope that GM fixed that if it was ever an issue since they are selling cars that use that technology as "high tech" right now. I think with a cold engine frequent startups would be much more harmful than an engine that's been running and is, along with the oil inside, warmed up.

Besides, I think its the bad starters or whatnot that we've seen in movies (the cars that never start in time in a Horror movie scene) that perpetrate that image. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,019 Posts
I think it's a great idea to make BAS standard across the board. But I think you're smoking crack if you think it will translate to a 15% increase in fuel economy. It won't do jack for highway mileage, since all BAS does is shut-off the engine when you are idling, as it contributes 0% for propulsion. (Correct me if I'm wrong)
Y9ou're right about BAS, but the topic is about BAS+ (the next generation, which isn't out yet). It will have Li-ion batteries and be able to propel the car without the gas engine being turned on at low speed. Not sure if there is any significant increase in highway mileage.

Doesn't starting and stopping the engine constantly greatly increase wear? If GM has overcome that problem, then I'm all for it. But start first by adding it to small cars, and do the trucks last. Imagine a 10-15% gas mpg increase on the Cobalt XFE, not too shabby.
I think it lets the gas engine warm up before it will do the stop/start.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
Raise the base price $300-400 and make BAS+ standard. For example, the Malibu starting at $20,400 with 26/34 MPG sounds pretty good. I wonder how much adding BAS cost GM? If it's $1000+ I can understand why they wouldn't do this.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,653 Posts
GM should make BAS+ (along with flex fuel) an option on every trim level of every vehicle. Then it can advertise the higher mileage ratings, and anyone who wants it can get it. As some would rather have a cheaper vehicle, they could have it their way, too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,198 Posts
I think it should be standard. The improvement in mileage across the board would be a big impact on reducing oil consumption and air quality in the cities would improve a lot as well. I'm surprised that California hasn't mandated auto stop.

I don't think wear is as big of a concern with the engine at operating temp as compared to a cold start.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
This is something that's been floating around in my head for a while, and I'm sure others have contemplated the same idea. BAS+ sounds quite promising. I don't exactly remember what the predicted increase in MPGs was, but let's just say a 15% increase.

So taking this increase into account and incorporating that with GM's largest SUV, the GMC Yukon XL Denali (or the Chevy Suburban or the Escalade ESV, whichever), could theoretically achieve 21.85 MPG. Not a big increase, you might say. But from my experience, 20, 30, and 40 MPG are magic numbers in the car world. Say that your SUV gets 19 MPG and people look at you like you're crazy for not trading it in for something better. But, say that your full size SUV gets around 22 MPG, and people will think, "Well, that's not too bad for a V8-powered SUV I guess."

Now let's take a pickup, like the Sierra 1500. 20 MPG with the 5.3L Vortec V8, factor in a 15% increase, and you'll get 23 MPG. Sounds even better, 23 MPG in a full size pickup? Take into consideration that the 20 MPG is with a 4-speed auto tranny. Stick a 6 speed auto in there and the expected fuel economy could increase even more.

Now the Malibu, 32 MPG with a 2.4L ECOTEC and 6 speed auto. Add in the 15% increase and get 36.8 MPG. That's pretty amazing for a midsize car. And it's nearing the magic 40 MPG mark.

The Cobalt's going to be even better. Take the 36 MPG Cobalt XFE, factor in the 15% increase, resulting in 41.4 MPG.

Crossovers? The Acadia with BAS+ could get 29.9 MPG. The Equinox with BAS+ could get 27.6 MPG.

Also, take into consideration that this 15% increase is across the board. Smaller vehicles may have an even larger increase with BAS+.
Now, the only problem with this plan is that it will add some $$ to the MSRPs of all these cars. What I think needs to be decided is if the benefits outweigh the extra cost. Maybe not for the big SUVs, but for smaller vehicles, it may just work.

Any thoughts?
I think BAS should be standard across the board as well. That said, your theory will not come to play. BAS does most of it's benefit in the city, and primarily because of the idle stop feature. As for 23 mpg in a full size V8 pickup? I can do that with my 4.6L V8 Ford F150, simply by driving a steady state 55 mph on the highway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
I think it's a great idea to make BAS standard across the board. But I think you're smoking crack if you think it will translate to a 15% increase in fuel economy. It won't do jack for highway mileage, since all BAS does is shut-off the engine when you are idling, as it contributes 0% for propulsion. (Correct me if I'm wrong)

BAS does assist on acceleration. How much is up for debate, as it's a very low power, low voltage (for hybrid systems) design.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
They can hardly ship cars based on the current BAS system. How many Aura/Malibu hybrids have you seen out on the road? I haven't seen any.

IF they could get it working and IF they could supply the vehicles and IF it didn't increase the cost too much then having it on all vehicles would go a long way towards repairing GM's image, but that's a lot of "if's"
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top