MrEnergyCzar

As a pro-Volt advocate, I can see nothing wrong of significance in the regulation of vehicle safety. However, I think this is an unhealthy relationship, and the government should divest itself of General Motors.

But I share with others the dislike of using the Volt for a political pawn – it has enough problems (costs way too much) without hindering its meager sales prospects.

You say “Nissan doesn’t have these problems.” What problems? The Volt is safe. The issue in the government tests was only in unrealistic conditions.

I’m also not sure how coming out with an electric-only vehicle would have been better. It was the battery that leaked and eventually started a fire. When a gasoline-powered vehicle wrecks, the first thing you so is drain the fuel to prevent fire. With an electric car, you should likewise discharge the battery. The Fed’s didn’t, and a fire (eventually) started. Our battery technology is not significantly different than Nissan’s.

As for GM’s engineers, say what you will, but we are known in the auto industry as being top notch. And our upper management, despite this not being a safety issue, reacted quickly to counter any concern people might have. We even offered to buy Volts back, which most customers realized was unnecessary.

As for the Volt not being worth $40,000, it depends on how you measure worth: value to the customer or its price vs. its cost to build. Everyone in the auto industry knows that it takes far more than $40,000 to build a Volt, so GM loses money on each one (I’d wager Nissan loses money on every Leaf, too).