Chevy: bad at math

Okay, all of a sudden there's this blitz of publicity surrounding the Chevy Volt and how it gets 230 miles per gallon.

I have two main reactions:

• How do you rate MPG for a car that is has an electric motor (with a combustion assist)?
• 230 MPG? What a load of crap.

The early pressers on the Volt stressed how its batteries had a 40 mile range. So, if your round trip under 20 miles, you don't use gas.

How does that translate to MPG? Unlimited?

The good folks over at Good Math, Bad Math take Chevy to task over this, but you wonder how even Rachel Maddow can get looped into this garbage. (To her credit, she questioned the figure and had an automotive expert on her show to discuss it - but the idiocy of using MPG for all electric usage was not given the beating it deserved).


The way I see it, they need a new rating standard.

MPG might as well be read as MPG(of gas).

It's a burn rate.

Up to the maximum range of the batteries, the Chevy Volt has no burn rate.

That's a stat.

It's all-electric range is 40 Miles.

It's time to recharge a fully depleted battery (using a standard plug) is another stat.

When the Volt runs out of batteries and engages the combustion engine - it has a burn rate like any other car.

That's a stat, too.

So if you're running a car like a volt - give me the

• All-electric range (40 miles)
  
• Recharge time (8-10 hours) and the
• combustion MPG

You might also throw in the average maximum distance the vehicle could drive at highway speeds if it started with batteries/gas tank that were filled to capacity.

Call that Crusing Range.

Then I have a picture of what I'm dealing with.

I'm excited about the Volt - I think it's great that they're trying this (I think it's stupid that they plan to sell the cars at a loss - once again GM's brain trust shows its quality)

But this made-for-PR BS that they are running with now, it's gotta stop.