Electric cars head toward another dead end

"brewertr" > wrote in message
...
On Feb 6, 3:53 pm, jon_banquer > wrote:
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...tric-hydrogen-...
>
> "Vice Chairman Takeshi Uchiyamada, the "father of the Prius" who
> helped put hybrids on the map, said he believes fuel-cell vehicles
> hold far more promise than battery electric cars.
>
> "Because of its shortcomings — driving range, cost and recharging time
> — the electric vehicle is not a viable replacement for most
> conventional cars," said Uchiyamada. "We need something entirely new."

Nothing like stating the blindingly obvious and then representing it
as if it's some sort of revelation.
==================================================

The Q is: are fuel cells a (develop-able) answer? Dunno.

Keep in mind, the new Prius "c" (sposedly for "city") gets 68 mpg (according
to lightfooted drivers). Which means Moi would proly get 80 mpg....
helium-foot. lol
The "c" is the smallest in the prius line.

That's VERY significant, for high-mileage drivers. Low price, as well --
$18K, for the base, not that much more various trim levels. Don't know how
battery cost/lifetime factors in, tho.

Electrics have indeed been disappointing, tho -- not much better than the
Ranger EV's, from way back, which had 30-40 electric-only mile ranges, using
lead-acid banks.
Part of the "failure", I think, is the refusal to limit hp, and the
incomprehensible *weight* to these effing cars. Whazzup wit dat?
.. VW beetles did fine with between 36 and 54 hp, under 2,000 lbs -- 54
being the hot-rod bug -- in 1974!!! Also their minivan/bus.

Also, part of the "failure" is of our own making, ie urban sprawl, where
commutes are 30-100 miles, one way.
The Leaf, et al, could reliably handle 50 mile commutes (one way), but you'd
need charging stations at the yob.

The Tesla, tho, seems to have surmounted much of these limitations -- if
it's not all hype. And then, who can afford them?

Urban planners, in general, condemn urban sprawl. PBS had an inneresting
documentary on this, focusing on PA, and featuring Bri'ish "solutions to
space".
Manhattan, and the 5 boroughs, has a large-scale solution ito public trans,
but now you gotta be a multi-millionaire to partake -- unless, of course,
you are a drug dealer, living with his mom on Sectoin 8..
No good (city planning) deed goes unpunished, eh?

As an inneresting tangent to this, energy-wise, altho subways have
"regenerative brakes", that regenerated electricity is NOT fet back to the
grid, but goes up the proverbial chimbley, through resistor banks.
If that energy was grid-bound, the NYC subways could power a city of approx
200,000 homes, as the energy from a braking train is fairly incredible.
--
EA



Tom

On Feb 6, 10:11*pm, "Existential Angst" > wrote:
> "brewertr" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Feb 6, 3:53 pm, jon_banquer > wrote:
>
> >http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...tric-hydrogen-...
>
> > "Vice Chairman Takeshi Uchiyamada, the "father of the Prius" who
> > helped put hybrids on the map, said he believes fuel-cell vehicles
> > hold far more promise than battery electric cars.
>
> > "Because of its shortcomings — driving range, cost and recharging time
> > — the electric vehicle is not a viable replacement for most
> > conventional cars," said Uchiyamada. "We need something entirely new."
>
> Nothing like stating the blindingly obvious and then representing it
> as if it's some sort of revelation.
> ==================================================
>
> The Q is: *are fuel cells a (develop-able) answer? *Dunno.
>
> Keep in mind, the new Prius "c" (sposedly for "city") gets 68 mpg (according
> to lightfooted drivers). *Which means Moi would proly get 80 mpg....
> helium-foot. * lol
> The "c" is the smallest in the prius line.
>
> That's VERY significant, for high-mileage drivers. *Low price, as well --
> $18K, for the base, not that much more various trim levels. *Don't know how
> battery cost/lifetime factors in, tho.
>
> Electrics have indeed been disappointing, tho -- not much better than the
> Ranger EV's, from way back, which had 30-40 electric-only mile ranges, using
> lead-acid banks.
> Part of the "failure", I think, is the refusal to limit hp, and the
> incomprehensible *weight* to these effing cars. *Whazzup wit dat?
> . *VW beetles did fine with between 36 and 54 hp, under 2,000 lbs -- 54
> being the hot-rod bug -- in 1974!!! *Also their minivan/bus.
>
> Also, part of the "failure" is of our own making, ie urban sprawl, where
> commutes are 30-100 miles, one way.
> The Leaf, et al, could reliably handle 50 mile commutes (one way), but you'd
> need charging stations at the yob.
>
> The Tesla, tho, seems to have surmounted much of these limitations -- if
> it's not all hype. *And then, who can afford them?
>
> Urban planners, in general, condemn urban sprawl. *PBS had an inneresting
> documentary on this, focusing on PA, and featuring Bri'ish "solutions to
> space".
> Manhattan, and the 5 *boroughs, has a large-scale solution ito public trans,
> but now you gotta be a multi-millionaire to partake -- unless, of course,
> you are a drug dealer, living with his mom on Sectoin 8..
> No good (city planning) deed goes unpunished, eh?
>
> As an inneresting tangent to this, energy-wise, altho subways have
> "regenerative brakes", that regenerated electricity is NOT fet back to the
> grid, but goes up the proverbial chimbley, through resistor banks.
> If that energy was grid-bound, the NYC subways could power a city of approx
> 200,000 homes, as the energy from a braking train is fairly incredible.
> --
> EA
>
> Tom

I think there is frustration on many levels. The "father of the
Prius", who is very well regarded in the automotive industry, is being
honest in a very refreshing way.

It should also be obvious by now that the Chevy Volt is a ****ing scam
and was used by GM to screw over US taxpayers.

"jon_banquer" > wrote in message
...
On Feb 6, 10:11 pm, "Existential Angst" > wrote:
> "brewertr" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Feb 6, 3:53 pm, jon_banquer > wrote:
>
> >http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...tric-hydrogen-...
>
> > "Vice Chairman Takeshi Uchiyamada, the "father of the Prius" who
> > helped put hybrids on the map, said he believes fuel-cell vehicles
> > hold far more promise than battery electric cars.
>
> > "Because of its shortcomings — driving range, cost and recharging time
> > — the electric vehicle is not a viable replacement for most
> > conventional cars," said Uchiyamada. "We need something entirely new."
>
> Nothing like stating the blindingly obvious and then representing it
> as if it's some sort of revelation.
> ==================================================
>
> The Q is: are fuel cells a (develop-able) answer? Dunno.
>
> Keep in mind, the new Prius "c" (sposedly for "city") gets 68 mpg
> (according
> to lightfooted drivers). Which means Moi would proly get 80 mpg....
> helium-foot. lol
> The "c" is the smallest in the prius line.
>
> That's VERY significant, for high-mileage drivers. Low price, as well --
> $18K, for the base, not that much more various trim levels. Don't know how
> battery cost/lifetime factors in, tho.
>
> Electrics have indeed been disappointing, tho -- not much better than the
> Ranger EV's, from way back, which had 30-40 electric-only mile ranges,
> using
> lead-acid banks.
> Part of the "failure", I think, is the refusal to limit hp, and the
> incomprehensible *weight* to these effing cars. Whazzup wit dat?
> . VW beetles did fine with between 36 and 54 hp, under 2,000 lbs -- 54
> being the hot-rod bug -- in 1974!!! Also their minivan/bus.
>
> Also, part of the "failure" is of our own making, ie urban sprawl, where
> commutes are 30-100 miles, one way.
> The Leaf, et al, could reliably handle 50 mile commutes (one way), but
> you'd
> need charging stations at the yob.
>
> The Tesla, tho, seems to have surmounted much of these limitations -- if
> it's not all hype. And then, who can afford them?
>
> Urban planners, in general, condemn urban sprawl. PBS had an inneresting
> documentary on this, focusing on PA, and featuring Bri'ish "solutions to
> space".
> Manhattan, and the 5 boroughs, has a large-scale solution ito public
> trans,
> but now you gotta be a multi-millionaire to partake -- unless, of course,
> you are a drug dealer, living with his mom on Sectoin 8..
> No good (city planning) deed goes unpunished, eh?
>
> As an inneresting tangent to this, energy-wise, altho subways have
> "regenerative brakes", that regenerated electricity is NOT fet back to the
> grid, but goes up the proverbial chimbley, through resistor banks.
> If that energy was grid-bound, the NYC subways could power a city of
> approx
> 200,000 homes, as the energy from a braking train is fairly incredible.
> --
> EA
>
> Tom

I think there is frustration on many levels. The "father of the
Prius", who is very well regarded in the automotive industry, is being
honest in a very refreshing way.
================================================== =======

Let's hope he's right, about a successful fuel cell. His opinion certainly
has cred.


It should also be obvious by now that the Chevy Volt is a ****ing scam
and was used by GM to screw over US taxpayers.
================================================== ====

It f'sure is obscenely overpriced -- gas would have to go to $20/gal for
that thing to break even.

BUT -- it appears to be well-designed, patterned after Diesel Electric
locomotives, except the Volt has the additoinal option of batteries-only.

Imo, if you are going to burn gas, using the gas to power a generator and
only a generator, with electric traction motors, is proly the way to do
it -- as the Volt does. Offers a lot of versatility, simplicity.
But not at $45,000, when you can buy a fuel efficient Honder Fit for close
to $15K, or a 68 mpg Prius c for $18K.
The Leaf is not much of a better bargain, with more limitations.

I just don't understand how something so simple -- a fukn battery and an
electric motor that a 5 year old could put together (in model form) -- can
be made so expensive.

The difference in machining/mfr'g cost of an IC engine compared to an
electric motor is proly a ratio of 100 to 1. Or more. And then, no
transmission in an electric, for an infinity-to-1 ratio of cost.
Yet that **** Leaf is almost $35,000.
--
EA

On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 01:11:23 -0500, "Existential Angst"
> wrote:


>Electrics have indeed been disappointing, tho -- not much better than the
>Ranger EV's, from way back, which had 30-40 electric-only mile ranges, using
>lead-acid banks.

My main ride for the last 5 months has been a Volt. Too many longer
drives lately have made my EV portion less than 50%, which equates to
about 60mpg. When my driving habits settle down it should be more like
90mpg. It will never be fully EV for me but it is for many other
owners though.

>Part of the "failure", I think, is the refusal to limit hp,

Take a Volt for a spin. It's no racecar but I love that silent
electric torque launch and it still surprises me sometimes when
passing at highway speeds. My last car was a V6 Camry which did have
about 100 more hp which I thought I'd miss. But I don't because the
smooth torquey nature of electric drive makes up for it. I've
surprised a few asswipes at stop lights which ****es off my wife. My
excuse is oh sorry I didn't mean to take off quite so fast, it's a
sensitive pedal. That story is still working although I may be
chalking up a higher number of eye rolls from her than usual.

> and the
>incomprehensible *weight* to these effing cars. Whazzup wit dat?

The Volt is about 3500. About 400 of that is the battery. It's a nice
car to drive and the weight is part of what prevents it feeling cheap.
I love the electric smoothness and the low CG and flat cornering.

>. VW beetles did fine with between 36 and 54 hp, under 2,000 lbs -- 54
>being the hot-rod bug -- in 1974!!! Also their minivan/bus.

Apples and oranges. Bugs are absolute POS compared to a Volt or even a
Prius. But if you want small and can do without features then take
that bug logic all the way to its natural conclusion.
http://gizmodo.com/5982007/the-small...painfully-tiny

>Also, part of the "failure" is of our own making, ie urban sprawl, where
>commutes are 30-100 miles, one way.

So what? When the Volt runs out of battery you just keep going and
usually don't notice the changeover to ICE.

>The Leaf, et al, could reliably handle 50 mile commutes (one way), but you'd
>need charging stations at the yob.

Pure electrics should be great for many as commuter vehicles or second
vehicles.

>The Tesla, tho, seems to have surmounted much of these limitations -- if
>it's not all hype. And then, who can afford them?

The Volt will be a long payoff for me. But at least it has a payoff,
unlike a boat or a quad or a million other things. Besides I already
have lots of toys and I'm enjoying that for a change I did something
about fuel costs other than whining. My next project is making my home
(including the car) net-zero. Many of my friends could afford to do
similar but the simple fact is that to a man they'd rather spend their
money on truly useless crap. I don't eat out much but recently we had
dinner with some friends who do. About $75 per couple which isn't hard
to do these days. During dinner my friend says he can't justify buying
LED light bulbs. Yeah a $20 entree makes perfect sense to him but a
$20 lightbulb, forget it. Let's face it, the tech and the cost of
electrics can already fill the bill for many people like me and most
of my middle class friends. The real problem is that most of us prefer
to use our disposable income on baubles while putting the cost of
doing anything about the environment onto future generations. That's
never going to change and tech can't fix it.

>And then, who can afford them?

Well, definitely not the chair bound, that's for sure. Add electric
cars to the endless list of things that the pimpletons, gunners,
bonkers, etc will never be able to afford. But my qawd they will never
run out of hours to bless the world with their tunnel vision about
every stupid ****ing notion that comes into their heads. Maybe they're
practising for the day when they'll get paid for every post. Which
will be the day AFTER the great cull I guess.

On Feb 7, 8:44*am, whoyakidding's ghost >
wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 01:11:23 -0500, "Existential Angst"
>
> > wrote:
> >Electrics have indeed been disappointing, tho -- not much better than the
> >Ranger EV's, from way back, which had 30-40 electric-only mile ranges, using
> >lead-acid banks.
>
> My main ride for the last 5 months has been a Volt. Too many longer
> drives lately have made my EV portion less than 50%, which equates to
> about 60mpg. When my driving habits settle down it should be more like
> 90mpg. It will never be fully EV for me but it is for many other
> owners though.
>
> >Part of the "failure", I think, is the refusal to limit hp,
>
> Take a Volt for a spin. It's no racecar but I love that silent
> electric torque launch and it still surprises me sometimes when
> passing at highway speeds. My last car was a V6 Camry which did have
> about 100 more hp which I thought I'd miss. But I don't because the
> smooth torquey nature of electric drive makes up for it. I've
> surprised a few asswipes at stop lights which ****es off my wife. My
> excuse is oh sorry I didn't mean to take off quite so fast, it's a
> sensitive pedal. That story is still working although I may be
> chalking up a higher number of eye rolls from her than usual.
>
> > and the
> >incomprehensible *weight* to these effing cars. *Whazzup wit dat?
>
> The Volt is about 3500. About 400 of that is the battery. It's a nice
> car to drive and the weight is part of what prevents it feeling cheap.
> I love the electric smoothness and the low CG and flat cornering.
>
> >. *VW beetles did fine with between 36 and 54 hp, under 2,000 lbs -- 54
> >being the hot-rod bug -- in 1974!!! *Also their minivan/bus.
>
> Apples and oranges. Bugs are absolute POS compared to a Volt or even a
> Prius. But if you want small and can do without features then take
> that bug logic all the way to its natural conclusion.http://gizmodo.com/5982007/the-small...d-is-painfully...
>
> >Also, part of the "failure" is of our own making, ie urban sprawl, where
> >commutes are 30-100 miles, one way.
>
> So what? When the Volt runs out of battery you just keep going and
> usually don't notice the changeover to ICE.
>
> >The Leaf, et al, could reliably handle 50 mile commutes (one way), but you'd
> >need charging stations at the yob.
>
> Pure electrics should be great for many as commuter vehicles or second
> vehicles.
>
> >The Tesla, tho, seems to have surmounted much of these limitations -- if
> >it's not all hype. *And then, who can afford them?
>
> The Volt will be a long payoff for me. But at least it has a payoff,
> unlike a boat or a quad or a million other things. Besides I already
> have lots of toys and I'm enjoying that for a change I did something
> about fuel costs other than whining. My next project is making my home
> (including the car) net-zero. Many of my friends could afford to do
> similar but the simple fact is that to a man they'd rather spend their
> money on truly useless crap. I don't eat out much but recently we had
> dinner with some friends who do. About $75 per couple which isn't hard
> to do these days. During dinner my friend says he can't justify buying
> LED light bulbs. Yeah a $20 entree makes perfect sense to him but a
> $20 lightbulb, forget it. Let's face it, the tech and the cost of
> electrics can already fill the bill for many people like me and most
> of my middle class friends. The real problem is that most of us prefer
> to use our disposable income on baubles while putting the cost of
> doing anything about the environment onto future generations. That's
> never going to change and tech can't fix it.
>
> >And then, who can afford them?
>
> Well, definitely not the chair bound, that's for sure. Add electric
> cars to the endless list of things that the pimpletons, gunners,
> bonkers, etc will never be able to afford. But my qawd they will never
> run out of hours to bless the world with their tunnel vision about
> every stupid ****ing notion that comes into their heads. Maybe they're
> practising for the day when they'll get paid for every post. Which
> will be the day AFTER the great cull I guess.


Reality:

http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoram...182043143.html

"whoyakidding's ghost" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 01:11:23 -0500, "Existential Angst"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Electrics have indeed been disappointing, tho -- not much better than the
>>Ranger EV's, from way back, which had 30-40 electric-only mile ranges,
>>using
>>lead-acid banks.
>
> My main ride for the last 5 months has been a Volt. Too many longer
> drives lately have made my EV portion less than 50%, which equates to
> about 60mpg.

60 mpg is not shabby.

When my driving habits settle down it should be more like
> 90mpg. It will never be fully EV for me but it is for many other
> owners though.

On full ICE mode, no electric contribution whatsoever, what do you think
your mpg's would be?


>
>>Part of the "failure", I think, is the refusal to limit hp,
>
> Take a Volt for a spin. It's no racecar but I love that silent
> electric torque launch and it still surprises me sometimes when
> passing at highway speeds. My last car was a V6 Camry which did have
> about 100 more hp which I thought I'd miss. But I don't because the
> smooth torquey nature of electric drive makes up for it. I've
> surprised a few asswipes at stop lights which ****es off my wife. My
> excuse is oh sorry I didn't mean to take off quite so fast, it's a
> sensitive pedal. That story is still working although I may be
> chalking up a higher number of eye rolls from her than usual.
>
>> and the
>>incomprehensible *weight* to these effing cars. Whazzup wit dat?
>
> The Volt is about 3500. About 400 of that is the battery. It's a nice
> car to drive and the weight is part of what prevents it feeling cheap.
> I love the electric smoothness and the low CG and flat cornering.
>
>>. VW beetles did fine with between 36 and 54 hp, under 2,000 lbs -- 54
>>being the hot-rod bug -- in 1974!!! Also their minivan/bus.
>
> Apples and oranges. Bugs are absolute POS compared to a Volt or even a
> Prius. But if you want small and can do without features then take
> that bug logic all the way to its natural conclusion.
> http://gizmodo.com/5982007/the-small...painfully-tiny
>

The point was, the insistence on triple-digit hp is not doing the "energy
cause" any favors.
Nor is the bloated poundage of vehicles.



>>Also, part of the "failure" is of our own making, ie urban sprawl, where
>>commutes are 30-100 miles, one way.
>
> So what? When the Volt runs out of battery you just keep going and
> usually don't notice the changeover to ICE.
>
>>The Leaf, et al, could reliably handle 50 mile commutes (one way), but
>>you'd
>>need charging stations at the yob.
>
> Pure electrics should be great for many as commuter vehicles or second
> vehicles.
>
>>The Tesla, tho, seems to have surmounted much of these limitations -- if
>>it's not all hype. And then, who can afford them?
>
> The Volt will be a long payoff for me. But at least it has a payoff,
> unlike a boat or a quad or a million other things. Besides I already
> have lots of toys and I'm enjoying that for a change I did something
> about fuel costs other than whining. My next project is making my home
> (including the car) net-zero. Many of my friends could afford to do
> similar but the simple fact is that to a man they'd rather spend their
> money on truly useless crap. I don't eat out much but recently we had
> dinner with some friends who do. About $75 per couple which isn't hard
> to do these days. During dinner my friend says he can't justify buying
> LED light bulbs. Yeah a $20 entree makes perfect sense to him but a
> $20 lightbulb, forget it. Let's face it, the tech and the cost of
> electrics can already fill the bill for many people like me and most
> of my middle class friends. The real problem is that most of us prefer
> to use our disposable income on baubles while putting the cost of
> doing anything about the environment onto future generations. That's
> never going to change and tech can't fix it.

Bleeve me, ahm not argering in favor of our species.
I do wonder about the Tesla tho. That car seems to have broken thru some
mileage barriers, but it's tough to separate hype from price from reality.
--
EA



>
>>And then, who can afford them?
>
> Well, definitely not the chair bound, that's for sure. Add electric
> cars to the endless list of things that the pimpletons, gunners,
> bonkers, etc will never be able to afford. But my qawd they will never
> run out of hours to bless the world with their tunnel vision about
> every stupid ****ing notion that comes into their heads. Maybe they're
> practising for the day when they'll get paid for every post. Which
> will be the day AFTER the great cull I guess.

On 2013-02-07, whoyakidding's ghost > wrote:
> to use our disposable income on baubles while putting the cost of
> doing anything about the environment onto future generations. That's
> never going to change and tech can't fix it.

I for one don't give a rat's ass about "the environment." I still use
incandescent light bulbs and drive a vehicle that gets about 14 mpg
on a good day. And loving it.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Feb 8, 8:45*pm, Roger Blake > wrote:
> On 2013-02-07, whoyakidding's ghost > wrote:
>
> > to use our disposable income on baubles while putting the cost of
> > doing anything about the environment onto future generations. That's
> > never going to change and tech can't fix it.
>
> I for one don't give a rat's ass about "the environment." I still use
> incandescent light bulbs and drive a vehicle that gets about 14 mpg
> on a good day. And loving it.
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> * Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)
>
> * "Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
> * *protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
> * *an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
> * *resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I for one don't give a rat's ass about "the environment." "

The world is filled with assholes. You're one of them.

On Friday, February 8, 2013 11:00:55 PM UTC-6, jon_banquer wrote:
> On Feb 8, 8:45*pm, Roger Blake > wrote:
>
> > On 2013-02-07, whoyakidding's ghost > wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > to use our disposable income on baubles while putting the cost of
>
> > > doing anything about the environment onto future generations. That's
>
> > > never going to change and tech can't fix it.
>
> >
>
> > I for one don't give a rat's ass about "the environment." I still use
>
> > incandescent light bulbs and drive a vehicle that gets about 14 mpg
>
> > on a good day. And loving it.
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > * Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)
>
> >
>
> > * "Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
>
> > * *protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
>
> > * *an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
>
> > * *resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
>
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> "I for one don't give a rat's ass about "the environment." "
>
>
>
> The world is filled with assholes. You're one of them.

Google,,, Electric cars a hundred years ago (lowtechmagazine.com Overview of electric cars)

On Fri, 8 Feb 2013 17:18:02 -0500, "Existential Angst"
> wrote:

>"whoyakidding's ghost" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 01:11:23 -0500, "Existential Angst"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Electrics have indeed been disappointing, tho -- not much better than the
>>>Ranger EV's, from way back, which had 30-40 electric-only mile ranges,
>>>using
>>>lead-acid banks.
>>
>> My main ride for the last 5 months has been a Volt. Too many longer
>> drives lately have made my EV portion less than 50%, which equates to
>> about 60mpg.
>
>60 mpg is not shabby.

Especially considering that it's NOT a flyweight gutless econobox.
It's a really nice car and it's a pleasure to drive. But 60 is nothing
for a Volt. Check out the site below to see people getting 5000 or
better.

It's a shame that more of the people who can afford it, don't step up
and support the tech.

>When my driving habits settle down it should be more like
>> 90mpg. It will never be fully EV for me but it is for many other
>> owners though.
>
>On full ICE mode, no electric contribution whatsoever, what do you think
>your mpg's would be?

It's about 40. Unless it's in "mountain mode", where it can be
increasing battery state of charge while driving on ICE power. That's
inefficient but I've used it a couple times on extended trips to
ensure that the battery is sufficiently charged at the destination to
allow friends to drive the car on battery alone.

http://www.voltstats.net/ At that website you can view mileage stats
from hundreds of Volt owners. Click on the top of the columns to
resort by category. A Volt shopper can estimate his projected EV
percentage, sort by percentage, and then see the stats of current
owners with a similar EV percentage.