Green Update: The Volt’s Troubles *UPDATED

January 24th, 2012

Chevy Volt, front

*UPDATE: Some House Republicans charged in a Wednesday hearing that NHTSA delayed investigating the Volt’s battery fire, basically to protect General Motors, the Volt’s reputation, and President Obama’s reelection campaign. Dan Akerson, GM’s chief, and David Strickland, NHTSA Administrator, bore the brunt of the contemptuous assertions of Darrell Issa, R-Cal., who typically holds hearings where there is always smoke but no fire. Akerson called the Volt entirely “safe, a marvelous machine,” and drove one to the hearing. He also said the car was not designed “to be a political punching bag, and, sadly, that is what it has become.”

We might as well say it out loud: The Chevy Volt has been a fiasco for GM.

Now dealers are refusing to take on more Volts, even though NHTSA has given the car a clean bill of health after investigating battery fires supposedly caused in side-impact crashes. Volts are no more prone to such fires than other cars.

Just as Volt sales were beginning to improve (slightly), somebody cried “Fire!” in a crowded theater, and that has really put the kibosh on sales. Once again, GM has had to backwater on its sales targets, now saying it will simply build as many cars as customers will buy.

The pace and frequency of anti-Volt stories has been picking up, as some find it a timely excuse to bash the Obama administration for backing the car in the first place. But the political problems with the Volt are fleabites; the real wounds were caused by GM’s complete failure in marketing the car.

The company put out ridiculous fuel economy claims at the beginning, then it backwatered. Its sales goals were wildly optimistic. The car cost too much. GM claimed its technology was totally unique, when it was in fact a plug-in hybrid variant. The Volt’s EPA ratings were disappointing. The car’s styling is bland. There was no proper campaign to educate the target audience. Problems with infrastructure and charging were not addressed.

Meanwhile, competitors were developing more fuel-efficient gasoline engines to power cars with as good or better performance at a lower price.

GM has once again become the world’s largest car-seller (over 9 million worldwide in 2011), yet it has sold fewer than 8,000 Volts over the life of the car (13 months). The company has a tremendous investment in the Volt—in both dollars and prestige—that it can ill afford to lose.

A recent article claims that since expensive ($40K-plus) hybrids are selling in low numbers—though it quotes only December 2011 figures—electrics and hybrids are the biggest failures ever for the auto biz. This is more “fire in the theater” baloney.

Fisker KarmaWhat you can say with confidence is that the public is growing less interested in buying plug-in cars—with strong interest down from 44 percent in 2010 to 40 percent in 2011. Which is not to say that their interest is gone forever.

Despite a lot of fumbles and setbacks, Fisker has done a remarkable job of keeping its Karma dealers and buyers. It is still on track to sell at least 5,000 cars in 2012. GM still needs to learn basic skills in customer management and educating potential Volt buyers. If those buyers don’t spread the gospel, who will? The Volt is not dead, but GM should be desperate to get it off life support.

Will the Volt come back in terms of sales? Why, or why not?

—jgoods

Find Used Cars in Your Area at CarGurus

Used Chevrolet Volt

Be Sociable, Share!

  1. jgoods
    January 26th, 2012 at 17:22 | #1

    @ Randy
    I used Fisker not as an example of EV success but, as I said, of doing “a remarkable job of keeping its Karma dealers and buyers.” Only 5 percent of buyers have asked for deposits back, despite all the company’s trials and missteps. And, as has been stated over and over, the battery fire business is at best an excuse to beat the car with, though it’s been exonerated. See today’s UPDATE.

  2. Randy
    January 26th, 2012 at 08:48 | #2

    But I can say I’m confused why Fisker is an example of EV success when they’ve sold only half as many EV’s as Chevy. They are having exactly the same problem as Chevy– battery and electrical fires and driving range that is not what is advertised.

  3. Randy
    January 24th, 2012 at 17:50 | #3

    Once again, GM does what made it a bankrupt company in the first place– It spends huge amounts of money to develop and market niche vehicle with effectively NO market penetration.s

    Now lets looks at a hybrid winner, Toyota. You can buy a Prius in the low 20’s that will get an honest 45+ mileage, and it’s a car that is fully equipped and has that Toyota quality (unlike GM, which shipped some new cars without brake pads recently).

    In the meantime, GM (and Ford, too) pushes some very weak and overpriced hybrids that few are dumb enough to buy. Any company that pushes things like starter/generator “hybrid” is crooked.

    Now add VW to the mix, which is aggressively marketing a wide range of Diesels with excellent drivability and good mileage. Although the VW’s are moderately pricey, they are solidly built and nicely appointed.

  4. Jim Redd
    January 24th, 2012 at 15:10 | #4

    Why would anyone buy this car? The only reason I can see is to use it for its strict EV capabilities, but that makes it one pricey golf cart. No thanks.

  1. August 13th, 2012 at 05:00 | #1