« | »

GM Will Buy Back Volts From Scared Owners

From an irony proof Associated Press:

GM willing to buy back Volts

December 1, 2011

NEW YORK (AP) — General Motors will buy Chevrolet Volts back from any owner who is afraid the electric cars will catch fire, the company’s CEO said Thursday.

In an exclusive interview with The Associated Press, CEO Dan Akerson insisted that the cars are safe, but said the company will purchase the Volts because it wants to keep customers happy. Three fires have broken out in Volts after side-impact crash tests done by the federal government.

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…

This is an innovative way to sell cars. We don’t recall Ford doing this with the Edsel. Or even the Pinto.

But lest we forget, this is the car that is supposed to save General Motors. Also, lest we forget, it is a car that GM did not want to actually produce. Mr. Obama made them make them.

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.

Isn’t it a bit of a conflict of interest to have the federal government investigate a company that is owned by the federal government? Especially, when the car in question is a symbol of that government?

But, of course, we have nothing to worry about from the Obama administration. They would never lie about such an important ‘green’ project made by the UAW.

"The fire broke out seven days later. Not seven minutes. Not seven seconds," Akerson said.

That is reassuring, isn’t it? So it might burn down your house when you aren’t at home.

[A]dding 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 with 48 hours to drain the battery, preventing fires, he said

Luckily there are only a few hundred Volts on the road, or these people could be very busy. Still, remember how Obama likes to extoll the virtues of car batteries?

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.

Given the tiny number of Volts sold, this is quite a high percentage. And this was even before GM made their offer public.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, December 2nd, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

17 Responses to “GM Will Buy Back Volts From Scared Owners”

  1. GetBackJack says:

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/hybrids/the-straight-story-on-the-chevy-volt-battery-fire-6601217

    “GM contends the fire happened because the prototype test vehicle’s programming was incomplete. All production Volts have programming that GM put in place last July to “depower” the battery after a crash, dissipating any remaining charge and rendering the battery inert. The test car didn’t have that.”

  2. Mithrandir says:

    The private sector community can invent 100s of cool iphone apps, 1000s of FREE add-ons for firefox, all sorts of freeware for video or audio editing and conversions…

    …..the government invents a car that catches on fire.

  3. River0 says:

    The tyranny of incompetence and corruption metastasizes like a cancer throughout the nation. This is shockingly un-American, to allow a product into the marketplace without the most basic and foreseeable safeguards in place. An automatic shutoff of the kind described is so rudimentary that it’s almost ridiculous. Autos crash! Batteries must be discharged! It’s a simple operation!

    “The company is notified of any Volt crash through its OnStar safety system and dispatches a team with 48 hours to drain the battery, preventing fires, he said…”

    “Dispatches a team…”! That’s astonishingly costly to the company.

    General Motors is famous for suicidal blunders like this. Does anyone remember the disastrous diesel engine fiasco of 1978 through ’82? Every single diesel engine failed. It cost GM three billion dollars – by their estimation.

  4. Dupree says:

    So what happens if I don’t want to pay for an Onstar subscription? I just burn to death?

    • Kachonka says:

      The onstar in all the new vehicles is always enabled. If you do not subscribe, your personal access to the system is denied, however their access is always live. They can still shut off your vehicle, track you, get crash info, monitor your system, lock/unlock your doors for a fee, etc…

    • Dupree says:

      So all I have to do is let Government Motors track my every road trip to avoid burning to death. I feel SO much better…

  5. yadayada says:

    was nbc video taping the cars after the test crashes?

  6. JohnMG says:

    GM will take care of the problem regardless of the cost. After all, they are ‘too big to fail”, and the cost issue is a non-issue for them since it is our money (taxpayers) with which they’re correcting the problem.

    How appropriate that the new “DictatOr-in-Chief” should introduce the masses to his version of the peoples car…….the VOLTS wagon. Now shut up and eat your peas!

    • proreason says:

      get em while they last for only 39,900

      You’ll love it when gas is ten bucks a gallon. Replacing the 5K battery will feel like a bargain. 500 extra disposal fee. View it as an offering to mother earth.

  7. wirenut says:

    For the most part, I’ll put my faith in the Lord. All else seems to fail. If this brand of incomptence ever reaches our ability to produce quality ammunition, God help us all.

  8. xdannyh says:

    Not to mention that the batteries are made overseas…..goodbye american jobs….and they don’t have to take them back…The US is stuck with disposal…..Way to Go O blah blah.

  9. GetBackJack says:

    I HATE – and I do mean despise like nothing I can describe politely – anything where government sticks it’s unholy nose where it isn’t meant to be.

    Trust me on this.

    That said, reading about the early days of figuring out electricity as we know it today is, forgive the obvious, shocking. The instant immolations, hands and even arms vaporized clean off, buildings erupting in pyro-technic horrors, roman candle human beings, babies electrocuted at the socket … jeebus, the Past is littered with a litany of death and destruction when it comes to electricity.

    Thank God my forebears were made of sterner stuff than Americans today, or we’d still be living off whale oil and buffalo chips.

  10. mr_bill says:

    The real story here isn’t that it catches fire, I expected that from the beginning. There is no way you can convince me that it is safe to have that amount of electric current in a crashed car. I would be afraid to touch the thing to get out of it after a crash. The thing that I find fascinating about this article is that GM claims to have sold 6000 Doltswagons. Anybody remember the Pontiac Aztec, the car that was also a tent? That stunning display of poor decision-making somehow managed to sell about 18000 units a year before it was scrapped (because they were losing money on each one). 18000 units is nothing in the auto industry, it is certainly a long way away from the volume necessary to be profitable. Yet here is GM selling an incendiary device with no hope of ever turning a profit on it.

    • JohnMG says:

      Unless, of course, you make a barbeque grill out of the thing………..or sell them to the terrorists in Iraq as mobile IED’s.

    • proreason says:

      Profit, who needs that? Many countries operate for decades by showering their citizens instead with the profits the capitalists would have made.

      The USSR, Cuba, Eastern Europe from about 1945 until about 1990, Red China until about 1995, dozens of African and Middle Eastern countries. All examples of countries operating without profits.

  11. wirenut says:

    Good one John! Muslim Road Rage, and a chance for a tailgate party. Nice! I’ll stuff my cars trunk with pork “brat’s” and a blastproof beer cooler. Game-on dude. Hope I run into you soon. Bring your own “CFL” if it’s after dark. Haw!

  12. wirenut says:

    Pro, I think we need to redefine the word, “Profit”. Failed states have come and gone. If only “they” would have turned their people lose. To create, to explore, to be human. That, was our founder’s promise to all mankind. To be free, as God intended. That is the profit I have enjoyed here in the last 53yrs. That very same profit, came at a very high price. Look what this Nation has done to profit the world, from running water, to a man on the moon, to saving man from man . Profit is not a dirty word, if done honestly.
    Profit has come under attack lately. Now it means, “what’s allowed by others”, other’s meaning government. They may try to break my bank and my will, but I will profit from our past.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »