Internally, we at work debated the merits of the production Volt quite a bit when it emerged and, gotta say, the most negative comments came from those who would not be seen in an overtly “green” vehicle if it was the last taxi at the station, if only for what they perceive to be “politically-charged” reasons (as in, all Prius owners must be…)

Personally, I am not that shocked or disappointed that the production Volt is a more mainstream-use kind of car, with the market for 4-door sedans in this size-class being much more robust (especially lately) than that for more specialty cars. There’s an adage that specialty cars sell for 2 years and, then, require significant support to maintain volume as buyers have, by then, moved on the “next big thing”. Perhaps, at the beginning, “green” cars could have fit this pattern but, given the mad-cat success of Prius (especially), it can be said that these cars are more mainstream… therefore, rather than go for the original Insight (or, hell, EV-1) positioning of limited use “specialty car”, I think they’ve made the right decision to make sure that Volt fits the packaging expectations of the mainstream buyers. Insight, in particular, despite being an incredibly high mileage example of HEVs, never sold very well at all. It’s clear that Honda, in straddling the Prius with the “out there” Insight and the “one of 350,000″ Civic, failed where Toyota succeeded… Combine the two executions (as they are apparently about to do with the “new” Insight) and they might have experienced more success.

Mention was made about detailing; I think that’s where the “advanced” or “different” look can be made to work with this more mainstream car. In fact, as I think about it, this is very Product Design (vs. Trans Design) of GM and, in that regard, I think it’s cool and could see this as GM’s first big success in Asian markets… Ironically enough, given that their previous failed Suzuki-Chevy entry in Japan was given the name Cruze… and the production Volt is apparently based on the NEW Cruze. Regardless, I could see the detailing on this car working especially well in the confines of the uber-stylish Tokyo apartment dweller market, perhaps only held down by somewhat large exterior dimensions.

So, I love it, right? Not so fast… I think it’s well executed, given what they were obviously aiming for. However, I can’t totally let them go without voicing disappointment with the one area, relative to the concept VOLT, where I think a great opportunity was lost.

See, when I saw the original concept, though I could understand people seeing “sporty”, I saw revolutionary package. Given the powertrain-agnostic nature of the concept (and, apparently, the production) Volt, I totally understood the short overhangs/low cowls/wheels-at-the-corners look of the car and I had high hopes that the production vehicle would introduce what I’ve thought would happen with just this kind of revolutionary drivetrain development: A new blueprint for what cars can be, which happened to be part of GM’s message with the earlier Autonomy, as a matter of fact.

I’m sophisticated enough (if I can call myself that) to know the value of adapting Cruze (Delta platform?) as a donor for Volt. Given GM’s financial position these days, it makes perfect sense for them to crib existing programs to save money on a money-loser like this.

However, have to say that, in a perfect world, there wouldn’t have been a long schnozz of a front overhang (for what, exactly, if this is a Range-enhancing Electric Vehicle). Unfortunate, I say, because I think we’re going to see other OEMs take the lead where GM might have smashed them with an obviously revolutionary product for those consumers who won’t know any better and only know what they see/ like when they see it. Back to the point of whether or not the original concept was “sporty”, when I asked friends what made it look “sporty” to them, it almost always defaulted to proportions & stance, less to the detailing. And, yes, the proportions & stance are where this concept, to my eye, communicated the real revolutionary nature of the drivetrain concept design-wise.

Speaking of stance, I have to say that one thing I am surprised by with the production vehicle is the apparent tread-width of the tires. Does anybody else think that the tires shown on the production vehicle look beefy beyond what you might expect on a low-drag vehicle? If these really are optimized for low rolling resistance/ low aero drag, then somebody has revolutionized tire technology and I want a set of these tires on my Mazda3…

That’s all… I know it’s a long post and, as my first post, I hope it doesn’t turn the audience off of me or engender a “Oh, God,… here comes Pete again… shut the doors or put in the earplugs…” reaction.

Take care