The Chevy Volt - Revisited

Well, . . . it’s been a year since any discussion of Government Motors (GM) Volt automobile here on the LVA Forum. DonDiego wonders, . . . how’ve things been going?

Ref: Pssst, . . . . . Wanna Buy a Volt

Ref: Chevy Volt Getting Great Reviews

Hmm, . . . well there’s this from Automotive News: “Post-crash blaze from last May creates crisis for GM's halo car today”.
Uh-oh!
Ref: The Volt Battery Challenge
It seems way back in May the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) crash-tested a Volt and some 3 weeks later a fire broke out on the vehicle. So, . . . on November 11th the NHTSA acknowledged there had been a fire, and on November 25th the NHTSA announced they were about to open a safety defect investigation.
Wait a minute! Umm, . . . fire in May, . . . announcement in November, . . . start a safety investigation ? ? ? After 6 months ? ? ?

Well, . . . it’s not as bad as it might seem. See, . . . GM was notified and spent the intervening 6 months trying to replicate the fire and developing a procedure that will allow towing companies and repair shops to drain the Volt's battery after an accident.
On the other hand buyers were not notified. So, . . . who knows how many folks unaware of a “safety defect” might’ve bought a Volt? Well, . . . for one, DonDiego knows. Or at least he knows the upper-limit: 6142. That’s the total Chevy Volt sales through November 2011.
So, . . . it could’ve been worse. F’rinstance, when the Edsel was introduced in 1958 Americans purchased 63,110 of 'em in the first year.

And, . . .hey, . . . GM has already offered all Volt owners a “loaner” until the NHTSA investigation concludes. GM’s North American President said they may choose any GM automobile, . . . even a Corvette.
And in an interview with the Associated Press, the GM CEO stated that GM is willing to buy back Volts from any owners who are concerned for their safety; this was later confirmed by Greg Martin, a GM spokesperson.

Well, it’s refreshing to have a Government-sponsored American automobile manufacturer willing to go the extra mile in assuring customer satisfaction and safety, . . .
Uh-oh! Wait a minute! What’s this?

GM spokesperson Faye Roberts, subsequently reaffirmed the loaner program. However, Roberts threw cold water on comments attributed to CEO Dan Akerson who had been quoted as saying that GM was implementing a buyback program in the automaker's bid to keep customers satisfied.
"On the question of the buyback, I think Mr. Akerson was taken a bit out of context," she said. "He was talking about customer satisfaction, which is really what the whole program is about and we're serious about keeping our customers happy."
"We would ultimately consider all options to meet our customers' expectations, but the program is designed to ensure customers are satisfied and the program doesn't include anything beyond what we talked about on Monday, [i.e.”loaner cars”].”
Uh-oh.

Well, . . . at least President Obama's wisdom in purchasing GM common stock at $34/share with taxpayer money so that GM could, in turn, repay some of the taxpayer money loaned to GM earlier, . . . has been proven this year, . . .
Or not!

I'd remind Don Diego that we would never had to bail out GM if we didn't already have government sponsored automakers. We created and set-up the Japanese auto industry after WWII. Since the 1980s the federal government, state, and local governments have paid billions of dollars in subsidies and grants encouraging foreign competition to our own domestic auto industry to locate here. I'd say GM needing a bailout is just a natural consequence of the government providing financial support to GM's competitors. In any event I don't think it is feasible to compete in the automotive industry without government funding these days. The hottest automakers right now are Korean. The Korean government pumped billions of dollars into their auto industry to get it off the ground. A country that can't make its own autos is very weak militarily. When America needs tanks to go to war Don Diego wants us to have to call China and ask for them.

Let me just comment on DD's Edsel bashing statement.

DD makes it sound like the Edsel was a failure based on safety. Not so. The main complaints of the Edsel were of the controversial front end styling and the fact that it was overpowered. That's right......critics were crying a river because they said the car had too much power. I guess those tenderfoots couldn't handle a 410 ci V8. Where were those critics 8 years later when Chevy came out with the 427 rat motor and Chrysler the 426 street Hemi ?

Those 2 items, plus the car being introduced during a national recession, doomed the car.

Produced in 1958, 1959, and a very abbreviated 1960 model run, the Edsel is now considered a highly prized collector car, especially the 2dr hardtops and convertible models. They bring BIG $$$$$$$$$$$

It was and is a good car.

In Southern California in the San Gabriel Valley there are still people who don't have power from last Thursday. I wonder if any of them are electric car owners and if they are stranded? If so, I wonder how much they like their cars now?

Just use a Gas power generator to charge up the Car and they can still drive being green

Boy that GM IPO at $33 turned out to be a piece of crap, feel bad for anyone holding that IPO.

It was not DonDiego's intention to disparage the safety of the Edsel. He apologizes.

DonDiego cited sales figures solely for comparison between first-year sales of the Edsel and of the Volt. Over its 3-year production, 118,287 Edsels were sold, priced from under $2500 up to $3800. Today prices are significantly higher; Edsel convertibles can fetch over $100,000.
Actually young DonDiego liked the Edsel when it came out; he likes it even more now.

Just a few retorts to Don Diego's objective review of the GM Volt.

- The Volt retains a 5 star safety rating despite the devasting fires. I guess the Highway Safety institue is not as taken aback as this threads gentle author.
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2011/12/chevy-volt-keeps-top-safety-rating-despite-fire-reports.html

- The Volt tops the Consumer Reports owner satisfaction survey as of Dec 1, 2011.
https://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2011/12/chevrolet-volt-tops-consumer-reports-owner-survey/1

- By current stock price, the us taxpayers are on the hook for about 25 Billion in one-time debt that was used to bailout GM and save hundreds of thousands of domestic jobs directly - and an equal number of small business jobs indirectly. How much money in subsidies and tax breaks has been issued to the fossil fuel companies in that same time period? Give you a hint. Exxon Mobil made 39 million in profit in 2009 and paid no Federal Income tax. You can also consider how much money taxpayers would have spent paying all of thos GM/Delphi/small business workers in unemployment had we sent them to the breadlines like so many wished we had done.

- I love the argument that electric cars should now be abandoned because there is a developmental flaw that caused harm. Is that the metric by which we abandon technology? Did we abandon nuclear power after 3 mile island? Did we abandon deep well oil drilling after the biggest oil spill in US history 2 years ago?

- On the political note, I love that conservatives continue to bash the industry that defines the rust belt of our country whch also coincidentally resides over several swing states. I'm looking forward to Newt Gingrich's townhall meeting in Toledo, OH where he tells everyone how much better off they would be if we shut the doors on GM and Chrysler in 2008. Its gonna be hilarious.

Not to mention the Federal government was on the hook for their pension liabilities if they went out of business.

Yada-Yada-yada . . . .yada-yada-Yada-Yada-yada, . . .
Yada-Yada, . . . Yada-Yada-yada.

Ho-hum. DonDiego supposes that’s a pretty good summary of the left-wing-excuse-prattle above.

DonDiego reminds malibber that when a normal bankruptcy occurs the manufacturing facilities do not vanish in a puff of smoke. The skilled employees, likewise, continue to exist. It used to be fairly commonly recognized that a bankruptcy was an effective way to have a neutral Court end an unsuccessful enterprise, often due to poor management, and distribute its assets to those more likely to employ them productively and efficiently, . . . and the proceeds from such distribution would go to the creditors of the failed enterprise. This was thought preferable to, say, having politically influenced Government officials decide who wins and who loses.
This era is commonly known as the “Good Old Days”.

And, as for tanks, . . . and China, . . .

The current US main-battle tank, the M-1 Abrams and its variants/upgrades, is manufactured in the Lima Army Tank Plant (LATP) in Lima, Ohio. This facility is a government-owned, contractor-operated (GOCO) facility, presently run by General Dynamics Corporation.
There are several other factories in which other military vehicles and parts of the M-1 are fabricated. But lately even much of this production is being transferred to the LATP, . . . so much so that it has been renamed the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center (JSMC).

To be fair, GM Defense does manufacture several armored fighting vehicles at its facilities in Michigan, California and, most notably, the Stryker Lightly Armored Vehical (LAV) at its London, Ontario, Canada plant.
Oh, and by the way, . . . GM Defense was the Military Products Division of GM; since its purchase in 2003 GM Defense is part of the Land Systems Division of General Dynamics.

Nonetheless, GM still provides trucks to the Army, mostly modified Silverados under the Commercial Based Tactical Truck (COMBATT) program.

So it would seem to poor old DonDiego that the good Old USA would likely not have to impose on our Chinese friends for tanks or even other combat vehicles after all, . . . Canada, maybe, but not China.

Umm, . . . and now the Federal Government is on the hook for the pension liabilities if they go out of business. Machts nichts.