GM to voluntarily buy back Volts
12-01-11, 02:54 PM
#1
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GM to voluntarily buy back Volts
http://content.usatoday.com/communit...-crash-fires/1
General Motors will buy a Chevrolet Volt back from any owner who is afraid the plug-in extended-range electric car will catch fire, the company's CEO told the Associated Press today.
CEO Dan Akerson insisted that the cars are safe, but said the company will purchase the Volts because it wants to keep customers happy. That moves goes well beyond the policy announced Monday in which GM offered loaner cars to any customers fearful of fires in their Volts.
Three fires have broken out in Volts after side-impact crash tests done by the federal government.
Reports Tom Krisher of the AP:
Akerson said that if necessary, GM will recall the more than 6,000 Volts now on the road in the U.S. and repair them once the company and federal safety regulators figure out what caused the fires.
"If we find that is the solution, we will retrofit every one of them," Akerson said. "We'll make it right."
The fires happened seven days to three weeks after tests performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. And GM has said there's no threat of fires immediately after crashes. GM also has said that no Volts involved in real-world crashes have caught fire.
Still, NHTSA has opened an investigation into the fires and has asked other companies that make electric cars for battery testing data. NHTSA said the safety testing hasn't raised concerns about electric vehicles other than the Volt.
"The fire broke out seven days later. Not seven minutes. Not seven seconds," Akerson said, adding that the company wants to fix the problem so people continue to have faith in Volts and other advanced-technology cars. The company is notified of any Volt crash through its OnStar safety system and dispatches a team within 48 hours to drain the battery, preventing fires, he said.
"I think in the interest of General Motors, the industry, the electrification of the car, it's best to get it right now than when you have — instead of 6,000 — 60,000 or 600,000 cars on the road," he said.
The NHTSA testing, Akerson said, intruded into the Volt's battery pack by four to five inches, beyond the normal testing standard of about two inches. Then the cars were rotated 360 degrees to simulate a rollover crash. He said anytime there's a new technology introduced like the Volt, problems will arise. GM is dedicated to fixing them.
He conceded that the fires may cause some potential buyers to shy away from the Volt:
But he added that GM is trying to get the message out that they happened only after extreme tests. Akerson also stressed that standard gas engine cars also have problems with fires after crashes.
The Volt can go about 35 miles on battery power before a small gasoline generator kicks in to keep the car running. The car can be recharged with a standard home electrical outlet.
The Nissan Leaf, a fully electric car and the Volt's main competitor, has not had any similar fires after crash tests or real-world crashes, Nissan said.
The Leaf battery is cooled by air rather than a liquid used to cool the Volt battery.
Akerson said investigators are looking at spilled coolant as one possible cause of the fires, although he said the coolant itself did not catch fire. Investigators are looking at everything from circuit boards to the way the battery cells are packaged into the Volt's larger T-shaped battery pack, he said.
Investigators have some promising leads but no conclusions yet, Akerson said.
GM doesn't expect many Volt owners to return their cars, given feedback from customers thus far, said spokesman Rob Peterson.
Earlier this week GM offered loaner cars to all Volt owners until the cause of the fires is found and fixed. So far, Akerson said 16 Volt owners have inquired and only two have taken the loaners.
General Motors will buy a Chevrolet Volt back from any owner who is afraid the plug-in extended-range electric car will catch fire, the company's CEO told the Associated Press today.
CEO Dan Akerson insisted that the cars are safe, but said the company will purchase the Volts because it wants to keep customers happy. That moves goes well beyond the policy announced Monday in which GM offered loaner cars to any customers fearful of fires in their Volts.
Three fires have broken out in Volts after side-impact crash tests done by the federal government.
Reports Tom Krisher of the AP:
Akerson said that if necessary, GM will recall the more than 6,000 Volts now on the road in the U.S. and repair them once the company and federal safety regulators figure out what caused the fires.
"If we find that is the solution, we will retrofit every one of them," Akerson said. "We'll make it right."
The fires happened seven days to three weeks after tests performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. And GM has said there's no threat of fires immediately after crashes. GM also has said that no Volts involved in real-world crashes have caught fire.
Still, NHTSA has opened an investigation into the fires and has asked other companies that make electric cars for battery testing data. NHTSA said the safety testing hasn't raised concerns about electric vehicles other than the Volt.
"The fire broke out seven days later. Not seven minutes. Not seven seconds," Akerson said, adding that the company wants to fix the problem so people continue to have faith in Volts and other advanced-technology cars. The company is notified of any Volt crash through its OnStar safety system and dispatches a team within 48 hours to drain the battery, preventing fires, he said.
"I think in the interest of General Motors, the industry, the electrification of the car, it's best to get it right now than when you have — instead of 6,000 — 60,000 or 600,000 cars on the road," he said.
The NHTSA testing, Akerson said, intruded into the Volt's battery pack by four to five inches, beyond the normal testing standard of about two inches. Then the cars were rotated 360 degrees to simulate a rollover crash. He said anytime there's a new technology introduced like the Volt, problems will arise. GM is dedicated to fixing them.
He conceded that the fires may cause some potential buyers to shy away from the Volt:
But he added that GM is trying to get the message out that they happened only after extreme tests. Akerson also stressed that standard gas engine cars also have problems with fires after crashes.
The Volt can go about 35 miles on battery power before a small gasoline generator kicks in to keep the car running. The car can be recharged with a standard home electrical outlet.
The Nissan Leaf, a fully electric car and the Volt's main competitor, has not had any similar fires after crash tests or real-world crashes, Nissan said.
The Leaf battery is cooled by air rather than a liquid used to cool the Volt battery.
Akerson said investigators are looking at spilled coolant as one possible cause of the fires, although he said the coolant itself did not catch fire. Investigators are looking at everything from circuit boards to the way the battery cells are packaged into the Volt's larger T-shaped battery pack, he said.
Investigators have some promising leads but no conclusions yet, Akerson said.
GM doesn't expect many Volt owners to return their cars, given feedback from customers thus far, said spokesman Rob Peterson.
Earlier this week GM offered loaner cars to all Volt owners until the cause of the fires is found and fixed. So far, Akerson said 16 Volt owners have inquired and only two have taken the loaners.
12-01-11, 02:58 PM
#2
There was a report earlier today that GM is redesigning the battery for the Volt. There was also a rumor that sales will be suspended. An analyst reported that GM is in full spin control trying to keep this from getting out of hand. They don't expect many folks to take them up on the buyback and hope to silence all the press coverage with this latest offer.
12-01-11, 03:10 PM
#3
There was a report earlier today that GM is redesigning the battery for the Volt. There was also a rumor that sales will be suspended. An analyst reported that GM is in full spin control trying to keep this from getting out of hand. They don't expect many folks to take them up on the buyback and hope to silence all the press coverage with this latest offer.
12-01-11, 04:35 PM
#4
Lexus Test Driver
Sorry to say but this sounds like their old antics of the 80/90/00's.
Also, this is another bit of proof Volt sales are not good. If they were strong, GM would not be able offer owers immediate loaners/replacements.
Also, this is another bit of proof Volt sales are not good. If they were strong, GM would not be able offer owers immediate loaners/replacements.
12-01-11, 05:34 PM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
GM just doesn't want you to have an electric based car. First they crushed them, now they are buying them back. 
Honestly this is typical of GM, not enough durability testing, they've been doing this for as long as I can remember.
Honestly this is typical of GM, not enough durability testing, they've been doing this for as long as I can remember.
12-01-11, 05:38 PM
#7
Lexus Test Driver
Trending Topics
12-01-11, 05:41 PM
#8
Driver
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: GA
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well when you are one of the first to produce a vehicle like this it takes awhile to R&D. Look at the leaf.
12-01-11, 06:14 PM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
GM wanted to be a technology leader, so they went with the advanced batteries. There is a reason Toyota has stuck to the "old" style battery packs so far, they've insisted all along that without proper testing and careful design and manufacturing, lithium-ion storage was potentially dangerous and a fire hazard.
12-01-11, 07:23 PM
#10
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Volts are still for sale. How can they continue to sell a car that they have a standing buyback offer on? That seems like a real corporate integrity problem. If a car is eligible for buyback, whether voluntary or involuntary, shouldn't they stop selling it until they can correct the problems? Alternatively, if their position is that nothing is wrong with the car and they are going to keep selling them, why offer to buy it back at all? I just don't see any situation where the correct decision is to continue to sell the car and offer to buy it back at the same time. GM's answer is that they are trying to accommodate frightened customers, but there is no way that a company would offer to buy back a quarter of a billion dollars worth of claimed non-defective products out of the goodness of their heart. Something is really fishy about this whole situation.
12-01-11, 07:32 PM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
GM wanted to be a technology leader, so they went with the advanced batteries. There is a reason Toyota has stuck to the "old" style battery packs so far, they've insisted all along that without proper testing and careful design and manufacturing, lithium-ion storage was potentially dangerous and a fire hazard.
12-01-11, 09:16 PM
#13
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
gm can afford to do this because they'd only have to buy back 50 cars. 
12-01-11, 11:24 PM
#14
Lexus Champion
This is sad to hear especially on a car that has been in development for sooo long. They made it seem like they tested the crap out of the car even to the point where they released videos of torture testing the car and what not...
12-02-11, 12:15 AM
#15
Out of Warranty
This issue has the fine scent of week-old fish about it. The cars in question were being tested, as I understand it, in a side impact at a high rate of speed.
- Thus far the fires have occurred some time after the collision itself, long after the driver exited or was extricated from the car. A car so badly wrecked wouldn't be in the owner's garage, but at a dealership for repair. Therefore, any risk associated with the hybrid battery would not concern the owner/driver, but possibly could be a problem for the dealer/shop if the battery were not correctly discharged.
- Should the Volt sustain the kind of damage the test vehicles did in a collision, from all accounts the driver and passengers would have sustained such extensive and life-threatening injuries that a slowly developing fire would be the least of their concerns.