Talk:Chevrolet Volt

photo caption non-reference

In regard to the photo caption: "Chevrolet Volt after being subjected to the NCAP pole test on May 12, 2011 at the MGA test facility." What is "NCAP" or "MGA"? 17:39, 7 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Too Old (talk • contribs)

NCAP is now linked to [[NHTSA NCAP]. MGA is shorthand for MGA Research - a company that is contracted to do some of the testing for NCAP. I have altered the article to reflect this.  Stepho  talk  21:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Production and sales - United States

In the article, it is said "[d]eliveries in Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Washington were expected for the third quarter of 2011". I tried to update it since it is now 2012. Unfortunately, I failed to find any reports about when the actual deliveries in those states started. I hope it can be a bit more up-to-date. Thanks.---Now wiki (talk) 19:41, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced outrage

Why do you have to wait until the very end of the article to find out that it only takes you a mere 26 years to recover the added cost of buying this lemon. Is this an unpaid Chevy ad for a car they can't sell on it's own merits? Also, why should taxpayers subsidize purchase of this lemon to the tune of a $7500 Tax Credit? This is an outrage! The-Expose-inator (talk) 21:48, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh come on, how many people with actual money in their pockets will ever look at wiki in order to decide which car to buy? This article is written by, and for, anoraks. Well, one anorak in particular, pretty much. Greglocock (talk) 22:12, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Wow Greg, that's just hurtful. I take it then that you consider yourself wikipedia's annointed Anorak hunter? From what I can see the article is for the most part quite factual and encylopedic albeit a bit convoluted despite various editorial efforts (no comment to the weak politcal rantings of the Expose-inator )WopOnTour (talk) 20:58, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

@The-Expose-inator, quit your complaining. The Volt is a fine car, it is by no means a 'lemon'. Buy the car used, maybe 10 years from now and then the cost goes way down. Replacement battery packs will most likely be cheaper by then too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.76.47.120 (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Lede

Looking for a concensus to remove the entire 3rd paragraph from the lede. ALL of these items are covered in detail elsewhere in the article WopOnTour (talk) 05:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

The lede is /supposed/ to summarise the article. As such /everything/ in the lede is supposed to be discussed in more detail in the article. quote from MoS "Significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article." However I agree, the special abilities badges and so on are probably of interest only to anoraks and the thousands of prospective $40000 car buyers that use wiki to help decide which car to buy. Greglocock (talk) 05:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I disagree with the proposal to trim the 3rd paragraph from the lead. Notable/significant facts should be summarized in the lead, and the Volt/Ampera has won all important awards in the auto industry. Also, and as per NPOV, criticism and controversy has been significant, particularly regarding the fires during testing (I already added the requested citations, actually, this was already supported by reliable sources in the "Controversies and criticism" section, but I expanded with more recent sources).

Furthermore, during the GA process, the content of the lead was an important issue for the reviewer. Check here under the heading LEAD for the discussion about having citations or not in the lead, and "Remaining issues - LEAD", where the reviewer complained that the "Controversies and criticism" was a rather large portion of the article to seemingly be omitted from the LEAD. Follow this thread to see why this paragraph is too short to my taste, particularly when discussion controversial issues and trying to keep NPOV.--Mariordo (talk) 03:02, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

The anorak has spoken. I'm sorry the battery fire thing is no longer interesting, or notable. Various organisations screwed up a bit (not much but enough) and they fixed the screwups. If, down the track, Volts start exploding in flames in large numbers then it may be notable again. Given the low sales numbers that seems unlikely. As for the special achievement badges, well, if it makes your silly counter-science project seem better, that's nice dear. Greglocock (talk) 03:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Gregloccok, I know you are an experienced editor, so would you be so kind to avoide incivility and personal attacks, there is no need to make personal remarks about editors or be agresive, just comment on content, not on the contributor. And please re-check notability, which is not temporary: once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage. Let's try to focus on the discussion at hand. Do you have anything to say about the GA reviewer recommendations for the lead?--Mariordo (talk) 04:01, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, as I said, the fires aren't interesting or notable /NOW/ and the elephant stamps never were and aren't now either. It is ludicrous to imagine that a pair of anoraks can decide what goes into the lede and once it is in it stays there for ever more. Personally, I don't really mind how stupid this article looks, and if you want to stuff every single positive statement ever made about the car even by people who have never driven it into the lede, that is your privilege. But if I am asked to comment, then I shall. And I was. So I have. Incidententally using GA status as a way of suppressing change is the most ridiculous abuse of wiki procedures I have seen in a long time.Greglocock (talk) 04:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

OK After reading the lede over a couple times I guess I'm fine with it. Greg, the notable mention of the NHTSA fires is still in the lede, so I don't know what your complaint is. I can Assure you I have logged near 10,000 miles either driving the Volt, or sitting in the passenger seat collecting data.Since its recently been announced that 49 dealers in Austrailia will soon be selling the Volt, we'll leave it up to you to add that to the article.Maybe take one for a drive... WopOnTour (talk) 17:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Operating cost and payback period

This section of the article apparently references a 2011 Consumer Reports article on the Volt. However I see no link to any references that would permit the reader to access and if neccessary read and interpret the details of this report. So to me, unless someone can locate this article, and provide references, these statements are essentially unreferenced and could be removed.WopOnTour (talk) 05:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

The whole paragraph is supported by citation No. 89 (located at the end of the para), which directs here: http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2011/12/leaf-volt-tests-show-electric-cars-cost-less-per-mile-to-operate.html. I think your complaint is unfounded.--Mariordo (talk) 14:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

How about mentioning that there are online tools, such as this: http://www.digifixpix.com/volt/volt_calc.asp that allow users to customize the TCO to their specific? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1998:2103:1A00:558E:37D9:67AB:79C1 (talk) 19:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC) Or this: http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/hybrid_calculator or this http://www.yourmoneypage.com/auto/hybrid_comp.php — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.235.115.167 (talk) 20:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I am concerned that this article has turned into a consumer report - including far too much detail about prices in every single market, down to year-by-year pricing for US! I feel that the article has lost perspective, and needs a third party editor to get back to the key topics. I attempted a consolidation edit a few months back which seemed to help, but the minutiae of detail has come back again like a rash. Veering into WP:NOTHOW and WP:NOPRICES amongst others. Warren (talk) 00:20, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree that more info about prices would be too much. However, the merit of having content related to pricing (as it is today) is due to the high premium price of the Volt and plug-in electric cars in general due to the cost of the battery pack. The relevance/notability of the pricing info can be checked just by googling, every specialized magazine and news auto section deals with the subject. Finally, I do not think that more pricing content was added after the trimming you did.--Mariordo (talk) 00:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Plans for a more efficient generator/prime mover?

The 2013 Volt still has the OTTO cycle engine that is also found in the Chevy Cruze/Sonic (without the turbo), when will they upgrade the engine to an Atkinson or HCCI engine? This will be necessary in order for it to approach Prius like MPG on long highway trips.