Chevy Volt sales triple in 2012.

[Cincinnati_Kid]

I've never understood the visceral hatred of this vehicle and the very clumsy disinformation campaign about it. Clearly a lot of it is whipped up by Fox , Limbaugh et al. in an anti Obama fervor. I am absolutely convinced that if a republican was in the white house, the Volt would be the official car of the right wing. It's American made [[well assembled here anyway) and it's a pretty great piece of technology that is a giant middle finger to OPEC...what's not to love?

Now, whether we are just trading one evil for another [[oil production vs. battery production) remains to be seen. But I'm hopeful it's just a start and the next versions improve on the concept.

Is it for everyone? Clearly not. However, from everyone I've talked to that actually owns [[or leases) one, they love it.

Actually I like the Volt. I'm just saying it's too expensive for my taste and I can't justify paying that much money for it. If they can find a way to lower the price substantially, I'm all in. On the other hand, I understand technology comes with a price.

[RedeemerKid]

Great advancement on what level? Weight its the killer of all electric vehicles and in today's market with all the amenities demanded performance will never be what it should be plus battery technology has not progressed much in the last 100 years. The designs being offered have all been tried in the last 100 years and failed! Why do we keep banging our heads into the wall for a type of vehicle that has been a proven money loser for the last 100 plus years? I cannot wait until these very expensive batteries start failing and the enormous replacement costs plus ecological problems inherent with them rear their ugly heads! Also for those whose laptop batteries have been a big headache your car's battery is pretty much the same technology. Good luck dealing with that!

Quite simply, they are advancements on the level of using less, trending toward zero, fossil fuel.

In the case of the Volt, the batteries are recyclable upon the end of their useful life in the vehicle. Replacement cost for a Volt battery is still a bit of an unknown as it is difficult to predict where cost and efficiency will be at the end of the life of these batteries.

But here is one intelligently thought out analysis:

http://mikewitteman.blogspot.com/201...y-in-2020.html

All that being said, I think it's odd that someone can still characterize battery powered vehicles of today as being not really any different or better than those of the last 100 years. At a minimum, you seem just convinced that electricity is the wrong pursuit of technology. Then what is the correct one? The status-quo of fossil fuels with greater efficiencies in MPG? Hydrogen fuel cell? What do you know that Ford, GM, Toyota and the others don't know?

[p69rrh51]

Quite simply, they are advancements on the level of using less, trending toward zero, fossil fuel.

In the case of the Volt, the batteries are recyclable upon the end of their useful life in the vehicle. Replacement cost for a Volt battery is still a bit of an unknown as it is difficult to predict where cost and efficiency will be at the end of the life of these batteries.

But here is one intelligently thought out analysis:

http://mikewitteman.blogspot.com/201...y-in-2020.html

All that being said, I think it's odd that someone can still characterize battery powered vehicles of today as being not really any different or better than those of the last 100 years. At a minimum, you seem just convinced that electricity is the wrong pursuit of technology. Then what is the correct one? The status-quo of fossil fuels with greater efficiencies in MPG? Hydrogen fuel cell? What do you know that Ford, GM, Toyota and the others don't know?

Let's see Detroit Electrics were getting 70 miles plus on a charge in 1915. You are going to tell me today's technology is better when the Volt only gets 38 miles on a charge? This crap has been tried for years and failed. The question why use less fossil fuels? By the way fossil fuels are required to make electricity so are we really using less fossil fuel[[something the electric proponents fail to tell anyone)? We have been told we are running out but nobody can ever seem to tell us when, but they do get to keep their overpaying jobs by telling us what we need to do. As for the large auto manufacturers I would bet that if they did not have this agenda rammed down their throats they would not have anything to do with electric cars.
As for the type of engine diesels are the way to go. Great gas mileage, good performance, can run on synthetic fuels and with the environmental and computer controls are quite clean.
Last I have thrown out at least 1,000+ laptop batteries in the last 5 years, they are bane of my existence. I get at least 10-15 calls a week asking for replacements-mostly on laptops 4 years or newer. Every customer complains about the battery life on their computer. So yes I have intimate knowledge of how shitty battery technology is!

[DetroitPlanner]

Try taking your Detroit Electric up to the UP for a long weekend, then tell us that it is Superior to the Volt.

You have thrown out 1,000 laptop batteries? Wow someone like you should consider a desktop!

[RedeemerKid]

Let's see Detroit Electrics were getting 70 miles plus on a charge in 1915. You are going to tell me today's technology is better when the Volt only gets 38 miles on a charge? This crap has been tried for years and failed. The question why use less fossil fuels? By the way fossil fuels are required to make electricity so are we really using less fossil fuel[[something the electric proponents fail to tell anyone)? We have been told we are running out but nobody can ever seem to tell us when, but they do get to keep their overpaying jobs by telling us what we need to do. As for the large auto manufacturers I would bet that if they did not have this agenda rammed down their throats they would not have anything to do with electric cars.
As for the type of engine diesels are the way to go. Great gas mileage, good performance, can run on synthetic fuels and with the environmental and computer controls are quite clean.
Last I have thrown out at least 1,000+ laptop batteries in the last 5 years, they are bane of my existence. I get at least 10-15 calls a week asking for replacements-mostly on laptops 4 years or newer. Every customer complains about the battery life on their computer. So yes I have intimate knowledge of how shitty battery technology is!

I am unsure what the 1915 Detroit Electric was equipped with, but I would suspect that it lacked some things that are standard or even required features of a vehicle today, which also draw current.

If you took the Volt battery technology, and configured it to a 1915 Detroit Electric, with nothing incremental drawing current, would it still get a 70 mile range? Would it still top out at 28 MPH on a flat straightaway? Or would it get perhaps higher speed, and longer range? I wonder.

What if someone just build a golf cart with a Volt battery configured to it? How far would it go between charges? How fast could it be built to go without adding any other current-drawing features?

I just don't think you can compare a 1915 electric vehicle to a 2013 electric vehicle.

I also don't think the electric powered technology is being forced upon anyone as much as you suggest. If diesel were the better alternative for efficiency, affordability, and performance, then it would also be the better alternative for a manufacturer to make money selling cars. Auto manufacturers like to make money selling cars. Some major player would be making it the primary forward innovation of their future.

[p69rrh51]

I am unsure what the 1915 Detroit Electric was equipped with, but I would suspect that it lacked some things that are standard or even required features of a vehicle today, which also draw current.

If you took the Volt battery technology, and configured it to a 1915 Detroit Electric, with nothing incremental drawing current, would it still get a 70 mile range? Would it still top out at 28 MPH on a flat straightaway? Or would it get perhaps higher speed, and longer range? I wonder.

What if someone just build a golf cart with a Volt battery configured to it? How far would it go between charges? How fast could it be built to go without adding any other current-drawing features?

I just don't think you can compare a 1915 electric vehicle to a 2013 electric vehicle.

I also don't think the electric powered technology is being forced upon anyone as much as you suggest. If diesel were the better alternative for efficiency, affordability, and performance, then it would also be the better alternative for a manufacturer to make money selling cars. Auto manufacturers like to make money selling cars. Some major player would be making it the primary forward innovation of their future.

You seem to think all this technology is new-guess what its not! In fact the Volt is based on pre-1900 technology with some smoke and mirrors to make it look new. Whats worse a company with over 90 years experience building the exact same product volunteered to assist in the Volt's development and GM told them to get lost! I cannot understand that at all. If GM really wanted to make a good product don't you think they would go to the experts especially when that company was part of GM at one time?
As I said earlier WEIGHT is the car's biggest problem and always will be, todays demands for comfort will always hamper electric cars. Yes you can compare the Detroit Electric was getting better performance with a more advanced design than the Volt, but of course a less effective battery! All this info has been available for years and yes battery technology has progressed in baby steps but not enough for a call to have us all use an electric car!
As for making money you already answered the question there in no money in the Volt GM is being forced by an agenda to make a car they have no interest in.
As for diesels the american public has a perceived notion that they are dirty[[which they are not anymore). Better information and of course better diesels built by Detroit[[they do not have the best track record with passenger diesels) would be far more profitable than a technology that has absolutely no up side,.

[oladub]

I've never understood the visceral hatred of this vehicle and the very clumsy disinformation campaign about it. Clearly a lot of it is whipped up by Fox , Limbaugh et al. in an anti Obama fervor. I am absolutely convinced that if a republican was in the white house, the Volt would be the official car of the right wing. It's American made [[well assembled here anyway) and it's a pretty great piece of technology that is a giant middle finger to OPEC...what's not to love?

Now, whether we are just trading one evil for another [[oil production vs. battery production) remains to be seen. But I'm hopeful it's just a start and the next versions improve on the concept.

Is it for everyone? Clearly not. However, from everyone I've talked to that actually owns [[or leases) one, they love it.

bailey, I totally agree with you. This is odd behavior. After all, even if someone like me disagrees with the bailouts, the money has been spent and this new technology now exists so we might as well embrace it. These people can't put the genie back in the box because if they do, Asians will develop the technology. Already, GM is planning on either same size batteries capable of more range or smaller lighter batteries with the same range. this technology is developing mush faster than advances in internal combustion engines. Why do these luddites want to keep sending away our money to buy oil from our enemies anyway? The best national defense is reducing the needs for conflict.
___

There may also be a new market for depleted Volt batteries. They can be stacked and used as reserve batteries for hospitals and businesses. This gives them $ value to offset the cost of replacement batteries. Let's say that Volt batteries degrade 5% a year. After eight years of use, they would still have 40% of their charge capacity or an estimated 15.2 miles of charge instead of the new battery 38 miles of charge. There is still an almost unused charging motor in the Volt that takes over after 15.2 miles and also has high miles per gallon. Anyway, if the owner chooses to upgrade to a new battery, the old one still has a lot of value stacked with other such batteries.

[p69rrh51]

bailey, I totally agree with you. This is odd behavior. After all, even if someone like me disagrees with the bailouts, the money has been spent and this new technology now exists so we might as well embrace it. These people can't put the genie back in the box because if they do, Asians will develop the technology. Already, GM is planning on either same size batteries capable of more range or smaller lighter batteries with the same range. this technology is developing mush faster than advances in internal combustion engines. Why do these luddites want to keep sending away our money to buy oil from our enemies anyway? The best national defense is reducing the needs for conflict.

I am all for reducing dependence on foreign energy. but in the last 40 plus years I have been hearing that we will get smaller more efficient batteries and so far nothing has happened. I like that GM is "planning" on smaller batteries but will they actually be able to deliver I highly doubt it. Everyone thinks this is all new technology but for the last hundred years researchers have been trying to improve battery performance including the Asians with little success! I could care less about who is backing the venture but from an economic standpoint it is an utter waste of time and materials!
Also the technology for batteries should be progressing more rapidly than the internal combustion engine. IC engines have been around for almost 130 years and there are not to many things to learn about how it operates! I would be disappointed if battery research was going slower. As for money going overseas you should worry about where the drug money goes and not where the oil money goes.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

So which one is more your taste?

Volt or Ampera?

Ampera. But then I always like GM's European styling better.

[RedeemerKid]

You seem to think all this technology is new-guess what its not! In fact the Volt is based on pre-1900 technology with some smoke and mirrors to make it look new. Whats worse a company with over 90 years experience building the exact same product volunteered to assist in the Volt's development and GM told them to get lost! I cannot understand that at all. If GM really wanted to make a good product don't you think they would go to the experts especially when that company was part of GM at one time?
As I said earlier WEIGHT is the car's biggest problem and always will be, todays demands for comfort will always hamper electric cars. Yes you can compare the Detroit Electric was getting better performance with a more advanced design than the Volt, but of course a less effective battery! All this info has been available for years and yes battery technology has progressed in baby steps but not enough for a call to have us all use an electric car!
As for making money you already answered the question there in no money in the Volt GM is being forced by an agenda to make a car they have no interest in.
As for diesels the american public has a perceived notion that they are dirty[[which they are not anymore). Better information and of course better diesels built by Detroit[[they do not have the best track record with passenger diesels) would be far more profitable than a technology that has absolutely no up side,.

I don't have the appetite to challenge all of this but:

1) GM's own Locomotive division team had cross-pollinated the technology team that developed the Volt concept. So that kind of expertise was in-house. Many came from other similar companies and industries with years of experience as well.

2) I disagree that Detroit Electric was getting "better performance". It isn't an apples to apples comparison. The required current draw on the two vehicles, aside from powertrain functionality are vastly incomparable. All told, the Volt technology, in its totality, is light years ahead of the 1915 Detroit Electric. All the comforts, requirements, and consumer demands of of 21st century vehicle in an almost purely electric powertrain. I find it amazing and fascinating.

3) To suggest by your wisdom that so many manufacturers are pursuing electric power and ignoring where the real money making opportunity is [[Diesel) is nothing short of irrational in my modest opinion, and borders on what seems like narcissism. Send your resume and Diesel powered vehicles business case to GM/Ford/Chrysler/Honda/Toyota/etc.... They'll put you right in charge of alternate energy vehicles, scrap all the EV programs, and the stock will soar.

I've got a busy rest of the day. Nice chatting with everyone. The final word can be someone else's.

[DetroitPlanner]

Ampera. But then I always like GM's European styling better.

You have obviously never driven or had to find a rented Opel Astra in a Carpark!

[p69rrh51]

I don't have the appetite to challenge all of this but:

1) GM's own Locomotive division team had cross-pollinated the technology team that developed the Volt concept. So that kind of expertise was in-house. Many came from other similar companies and industries with years of experience as well.

2) I disagree that Detroit Electric was getting "better performance". It isn't an apples to apples comparison. The required current draw on the two vehicles, aside from powertrain functionality are vastly incomparable. All told, the Volt technology, in its totality, is light years ahead of the 1915 Detroit Electric. All the comforts, requirements, and consumer demands of of 21st century vehicle in an almost purely electric powertrain. I find it amazing and fascinating.

3) To suggest by your wisdom that so many manufacturers are pursuing electric power and ignoring where the real money making opportunity is [[Diesel) is nothing short of irrational in my modest opinion, and borders on what seems like narcissism. Send your resume and Diesel powered vehicles business case to GM/Ford/Chrysler/Honda/Toyota/etc.... They'll put you right in charge of alternate energy vehicles, scrap all the EV programs, and the stock will soar.

I've got a busy rest of the day. Nice chatting with everyone. The final word can be someone else's.

Leave when all you give is misinformation what are we to think? Oh by the way EMC is owned by Caterpillar not GM who sold it off in 2005. GM currently does not own a locomotive manufacturer.

[oladub]

I am all for reducing dependence on foreign energy. but in the last 40 plus years I have been hearing that we will get smaller more efficient batteries and so far nothing has happened. I like that GM is "planning" on smaller batteries but will they actually be able to deliver I highly doubt it. Everyone thinks this is all new technology but for the last hundred years researchers have been trying to improve battery performance including the Asians with little success! I could care less about who is backing the venture but from an economic standpoint it is an utter waste of time and materials!
Also the technology for batteries should be progressing more rapidly than the internal combustion engine. IC engines have been around for almost 130 years and there are not to many things to learn about how it operates! I would be disappointed if battery research was going slower. As for money going overseas you should worry about where the drug money goes and not where the oil money goes.

As a result of its improved battery chemistry, the 2013 model year Volt increased its EPA's rated all-electric range to 38 miles up from 35miles in its 2011/2012 model. That's an 8.5% increase and good progress and no price increase as far as I know; more than just "planning". see- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt#Battery

This thread isn't about drug money or my relative concerns.

[Novine]

"I am all for reducing dependence on foreign energy. but in the last 40 plus years I have been hearing that we will get smaller more efficient batteries and so far nothing has happened."

You went off the deep end [[again) on this point. Go find some 40 year old batteries and show us how they were just as small and efficient as the batteries used in a wide variety of devices and vehicles today.

[p69rrh51]

"I am all for reducing dependence on foreign energy. but in the last 40 plus years I have been hearing that we will get smaller more efficient batteries and so far nothing has happened."

You went off the deep end [[again) on this point. Go find some 40 year old batteries and show us how they were just as small and efficient as the batteries used in a wide variety of devices and vehicles today.

I am painfully awhere of battery technology if you cared to read earlier threads. The same technology goes into the lousy dead laptop batteries I have piled up around my shop[[most of them are less than 5 years old). Like I said baby steps, but then there is nowhere to go but up when you are starting at zero! When it is all said and done the basic technology has NOT changed in over 100 years and the cars today are less technically advanced[[in the engine design and layout) the their 100 year old predecessors. All that's been done is eeking out a few more minutes of life from the battery.
I do get a kick that a perfectly viable, considerably less costly alternative[[with similar benefits to electricity) has been suggested and everyone just dismisses it.

[DetroitPlanner]

This thread isn't about drug money or my relative concerns.

I knew that John Delorean had to be part of a Detroit Yes thread eventually!! He surfaces with the Volt!! I wonder what Doc Brown would have to say?

[ndavies]

Just to bring some facts into this discussion. [[Instead of wild speculation on p69rrh51s part) The Detroit electric cars had a top speed of 25 MPH. Try taking that on a freeway. The coefficient of drag goes up exponentially with speed. So travelling at 70 requires far more energy than driving at 25 MPH. I'm sure it weighs far less than a modern car. It doesn't have any of the safety systems we expect on a modern car. It doesn't have any of the creature comforts we require in a modern car.

A modern version of the lead acid batteries the Detroit electric car has an energy storage density of 30-40 Wh/Kg. The batteries used in the volt are lithium ion batteries, They have an energy storage capacity of 150-200 Wh/Kg The volt can store 16.5 KWh. At the minimum spec that is a 110kg battery, Using the Lead acid batteries in a Detroit electric car it would take a 415 kg battery to give the same distance. That is a 400% inprovement over even a modern lead acid battery. I doubt the detroit electric car batteries would even come close to a modern lead acid battery.

You are comparing apples to oranges. The volt was designed with small batteries since it it capable of recharging the batteries on its own. The mileage performance from the volt mainly comes from the fact you can run it's gasoline motor at it's precise optimal fuel efficeincy all the time. The engine can run at it's most efficient RPM all the time. It does not have to slow down or speed up with the car. Sure the electric range could be greatly increased if you put in as many Kgs of batteries as was contained in the Detroit eletcric Car. that wasn't the Volts design criteria.

[oladub]

I knew that John Delorean had to be part of a Detroit Yes thread eventually!! He surfaces with the Volt!! I wonder what Doc Brown would have to say?

Not sure what you are referencing. My reply was in response to the last sentence in post #33.

[p69rrh51]

Just to bring some facts into this discussion. [[Instead of wild speculation on p69rrh51s part) The Detroit electric cars had a top speed of 25 MPH. Try taking that on a freeway. The coefficient of drag goes up exponentially with speed. So travelling at 70 requires far more energy than driving at 25 MPH. I'm sure it weighs far less than a modern car. It doesn't have any of the safety systems we expect on a modern car. It doesn't have any of the creature comforts we require in a modern car.

A modern version of the lead acid batteries the Detroit electric car has an energy storage density of 30-40 Wh/Kg. The batteries used in the volt are lithium ion batteries, They have an energy storage capacity of 150-200 Wh/Kg The volt can store 16.5 KWh. At the minimum spec that is a 110kg battery, Using the Lead acid batteries in a Detroit electric car it would take a 415 kg battery to give the same distance. That is a 400% inprovement over even a modern lead acid battery. I doubt the detroit electric car batteries would even come close to a modern lead acid battery.

You are comparing apples to oranges. The volt was designed with small batteries since it it capable of recharging the batteries on its own. The mileage performance from the volt mainly comes from the fact you can run it's gasoline motor at it's precise optimal fuel efficeincy all the time. The engine can run at it's most efficient RPM all the time. It does not have to slow down or speed up with the car. Sure the electric range could be greatly increased if you put in as many Kgs of batteries as was contained in the Detroit eletcric Car. that wasn't the Volts design criteria.

No wild speculation here. Ferdinand Porsche designed a more advanced system in 1900, and his cars were achieving 50-70 miles are a charge. Yes they could not go as fast but as stated earlier his designs are the basis for most diesel electric locomotives. Even Porsche saw the light that electric cars would never be practical and went to IC engines in 1905. This stuff isn't new but it is expensive and can be replaced more effectively by an engine that meets all the requirements for a fraction of the cost-something nobody on here wants to admit to.
What is really sad is with all the "improvements" the current cars do not go as far on a charge as cars over 100 years old no matter how much energy is required to power the car.

[DetroitPlanner]

Not sure what you are referencing. My reply was in response to the last sentence in post #33.

Light humor for us old enough to remember Delorean.

[Pickford-Bentler]

The Detroit electric cars had a top speed of 25 MPH. Try taking that on a freeway. The coefficient of drag goes up exponentially with speed. So travelling at 70 requires far more energy than driving at 25 MPH.

A car with the "superior" aerodynamics shown circa 1900 would arguably have a drag coefficient somewhere higher than a H2 but lower than a box - about 0.80. The Volt has a drag coefficient of 0.28. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automob...g_coefficients The drag force on a vehicle is proportional to the square of velocity: http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/drageq.html The work energy required to move the vehicle against the drag force is the integral of the of the force with respect to the distance. IOW, the power consumption from a battery required to move a vehicle through a viscous medium such as air is proportional to the cube of velocity. This points to a problem with relying on an EV without a gasoline engine on board for long drives on a freeway. You hit the nail on the head. Gasoline engines become very inefficient when subject to the variable loads of the city driving cycle [[stop and go) in that the engine can not be kept on the sweet spot of a BSFC map. An EV takes advantage of stored energy produced by a heat engine at a powerhouse that is very efficiently produced. IOW, low speed stop and go is the advantage for an EV. At highway speeds, a gas or diesel engine can be optimally loaded and convert fuel energy to usable work as well a Con-Ed. Popular Science compared the Prius to a Jetta diesel and, although the Prius had the better overall fuel economy, the Jetta won on the highway. This is what is right about the Volt. They combine an EV mode [[charge depletion) with a hybrid mode [[charge sustaining). The Ampera has a feature that should be on the Volt. The driver can use a switch to disable charge depletion mode at will. For example, if I drive from DC to Baltimore, I would want to save the grid charge for where it works best - the city grid - instead of pissing away doing 75mph on I-95. I apologize for the crappy writing but the way this cite configures its text box sucks.

[RedeemerKid]

Leave when all you give is misinformation what are we to think? Oh by the way EMC is owned by Caterpillar not GM who sold it off in 2005. GM currently does not own a locomotive manufacturer.

Work on the Volt technology started prior to the sell off. At the time they sold it off, many existing GM employees had years of GM Locomotive experience. In fact, some GM Locomotive employees stayed with GM. The knowledge and understanding of that line of business didn't all walk out the door as you like to suggest.

Odd enough, the GM executive that started up OnStar [[way back in the 90's) and remained President of OnStar until 2008 or 2009 was brought into that job from GM Locomotive.

That's how the business world works. You work in this part of a company for a while, then this part, then another part, then when this part gets sold off, there remains a level of experience and knowledge.

If you like to characterize my time management decision to leave the useless conversation as "leaving when all I give is misinformation" so be it. In fact, call it a surrender if it makes you tingle. Whatever. Enjoy your victory.

[RedeemerKid]

What is really sad is with all the "improvements" the current cars do not go as far on a charge as cars over 100 years old no matter how much energy is required to power the car.

You understand that the electricity source [[battery) in the early 1900 vehicle was purely pushing the powertrain right?

You also understand that in today's world, the need for electricity is much broader in a vehicle, right?

How many charges/recharges could one get out of that 1915 battery before replacing it?

Batteries in the Volt are expected to last an average of 8 years depending on usage patterns.

Even cell phone batteries are light years better today [[in terms of holding a charge, ability to recharge, durability, memory effect, etc...) than they were in the mid 90's.

[Hermod]

No wild speculation here. Ferdinand Porsche designed a more advanced system in 1900, and his cars were achieving 50-70 miles are a charge. Yes they could not go as fast but as stated earlier his designs are the basis for most diesel electric locomotives. Even Porsche saw the light that electric cars would never be practical and went to IC engines in 1905. This stuff isn't new but it is expensive and can be replaced more effectively by an engine that meets all the requirements for a fraction of the cost-something nobody on here wants to admit to.
What is really sad is with all the "improvements" the current cars do not go as far on a charge as cars over 100 years old no matter how much energy is required to power the car.

I have to disagree here. The technology that is used in diesel-electric locomotives was developed by Frank Sprague for trolley cars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Sprague

A diesel electric locomotive is basically an electric trolley car that carries its own electric generator.

[Pickford-Bentler]

You understand that the electricity source [[battery) in the early 1900 vehicle was purely pushing the powertrain right?

You also understand that in today's world, the need for electricity is much broader in a vehicle, right?

How many charges/recharges could one get out of that 1915 battery before replacing it?

Batteries in the Volt are expected to last an average of 8 years depending on usage patterns.

Even cell phone batteries are light years better today [[in terms of holding a charge, ability to recharge, durability, memory effect, etc...) than they were in the mid 90's.

The Volt has a charge management system that keeps the battery between about 25% SOC and 75% SOC. Keeping lithium ion cells from cycling between full discharge and full charge significantly increases the life of the battery pack. The Volt battery also uses a fluid to either cool or heat the pack to keep the variance in temperature between cells to a minimum. This also extends life. GM did not just pull some cells of the shelf and slap them into a pack. All that said, the 16 kwh pack in the Volt uses only 8kwh for the 35 mile EPA measured electric range. The other 8kwh is a buffer. BTW, your posts are outstanding.