According to that same Bloomberg news article: The Volt will use about 40 cents’ worth of electricity to get its overnight charge, he said. Used that way, “numbers between 150 and 300 miles per gallon are realistic” for the average driver, Weber said.

 

Somehow this 230 mpg GM claim is very confusing. To begin with, EPA city cycle is 11 miles long therefore Volt can do it without using a pint of fuel, shall we say infinite mpg here then? Because of this, EPA is in the process of revising it's testing, to better reflect actual results on the road, but it has not accepted new method yet. Now, I can't find one word how GM came with 230MPG. I did find some reference claiming Volt gets 50 MPG, when battery is depleted and needs to use gas engine to generate electricity, I also found listed 300 miles range when using ICE to charge battery. Neither number is very impressive, comparing to 42mpg and 650 mile range I get on my $30k TCH, $10k cheaper than projected Volts price. Also, I average 65-70 miles per day, so I would have to burn gas and could rarely drive on battery charge alone. Never the less, it seems to be very interesting car and the only question I have is what took them so long???? And whats the real deal with MPG? I'm assuming first 40 miles is on battery alone, another 300 with ICE assistance at 50MPG (why such low range? I'm sure they can squeeze more than 6 gallon tank in there?).

 

The mileage (in my guesstimation) was based upon what they thought how a typical driver would drive. They probably assumed they did around 50 miles M-F and 100 miles on a weekend, so they fudged a scenario and came up with their MPG.

 

CNNMoney.com

 

I had read a while back that the Chrysler and GM mostly electric cars use a small gas engine to recharge them. Something like a 1.1 to 1.3 liter engine. That's pretty small to recharge the batteries and get the car back home.

I'm looking forward to some detailed driving test and reviews on these cars.

 

Living where it gets really cold for several months in the winter (-30 avg) I wonder how GM (and others as they show up) plans to keep the occupants warm and the windows defrosted in the dead of winter?

 

The engine comes on to heat the coolant. During that time a electric coil comes on to provide instant heat for the cabin. Once the radiator water is hot enough the coil is switched off. The hybrid has a electric water pump that keeps recirculating the hot water though the heater core to keep the cabin warm.

The engine temperature would have to be at normal temperature to handle the -30 degrees. Knowing me, I would mostly block the radiator to help warm the engine in that cold of winter. Most 4-cyl engines can't quiet reach the 175/180 degrees with it being that cold unless you drive 5 miles or more.

One cold winter my '84 VW Rabbit diesel would not get over 150/160 degrees. (1/4 scale) Using pasteboard I carefully and completely sealed the radiator. Then I had cabin heat and the engine heated up to normal temperature. I often wonder why the manufactures don't put a strong wide bladed venetian blind with a servo to operate the blades. Allow it to work from the water temperature sensor from the ecu. This with a block heater would be a good combination for the northern states and Canada.

I need to mention that in 85/90F weather, the normal temperature for the Camry is about 190 to 193 degrees.

 

Thanks rburt, but I was aware how the TCH dealt with it, but am curious about the EV cars like the Volt/LEAF.

This past winter was a sad time for me watching my prevoius low to mid 40s tanks plummet to low to mid 20s. My problem is that I have a 6mi commute to work and no plug at work. I did try and squeeze out as much efficiency as I could but the short commute just wasn't long enough to get the TCH into mode 4. Strange thing is that it was frequently in the heretical mode so at least the running mpg went up for a fair amount of the commute.

 

There's noting to be sad about. Your goal, if I understand this whole 'conservation' thing properly, is to use less gas.
Now, if you have a 6 mile commute and are getting 25 MPG, you're using 2.4 gallons per week. You'll need to fill up your tank once every 6 weeks. At $3/gallon you'll spend $375/year.
Folks who are able to achieve a 40 MPG winter time average might be driving 25 miles each way. This person would be using 6.25 gallons per week. They'll fill up every two weeks. At $3/gallon, they'll spend $975/year.
Comparing your scenario with a person with a longer commute (albeit with better statistics)....your car is polluting less, burns less gas, costs less to run and will probably last longer and save you a lot of money over the long run.
The point (IMHO) of conservation is to economize. In every aspect (except this nonsensical notion that 'MPG' is a meaningful number...it's not) you're achieving greater efficiency and saving money. Be proud of your short commute!

I have a seven mile commute and glance at my MPG screen rarely, usualy only because I have to toggle through the list to get to other items, such as outside temperature or cruising range. I guess, when the car is in "E" mode, I can drive around the block a few times to increase my MPG, but I don't see the point.

 

everything you said is true, but I'm one of those types that would like to also have the bragging rights to a much better annual avg. No it doesn't change any realities of the short commute or anything else, but it is just a personal thing. My last tank I got my TCH to get to a combined traveled/distance to empty to 1020km (630 mi+) with the SG giving me an extra 230km (140+mi). It's a game/distraction but it's a fun one for some of us.