G.M.’s Electric Lemon

His main line of argument is the same criticism that's consistently leveled at Tesla: that it's too expensive to be a big seller. This is obvious. Batteries are still in their early days as the primary energy source in cars. Early technology is expensive (The original macintosh cost $5000, inflation adjusted). The obvious point of the Volt program was to develop technology and infrastructure for the future, not just to produce the first generation Volt. It's certainly fair to debate GM's efficiency in building electric vehicle capabilities, but the author of this article doesn't ever seriously acknowledge that GM has ambitions beyond just the first generation Volt.

A few smaller arguments I have:

For starters, G.M.’s vision turned into a car that costs $41,000 before relevant tax breaks

Bob Lutz said that the Volt would cost around $40,000 when he was on letterman a year ago, so the price shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who follows the industry. But as I already argued, we're in the early days of electric vehicles. Just like in the early days of personal computers, these cars will be bought by enthusiasts. As we've seen with every other new technology in history, price will come down over time.

And instead of the sleek coupe of 2007, it looks suspiciously similar to a Toyota Prius

It's a little difficult to take an automotive pundit seriously when he complains about a production model not looking like the concept. Frustrating as it may be, production models almost never look like the concept. This is nothing new. And the reason it looks like a Prius is physics. It turns out that there is an optimal shape for reducing aerodynamic drag, so cars that are built with fuel efficiency as a primary design goal will all be roughly the same shape. This also should not be a surprise to anyone who follows the auto industry.

It also requires premium gasoline

So what. It shouldn't use much of it anyway. For most owners this will not contribute significantly to the cost of running the vehicle.

seats only four people(the battery runs down the center of the car, preventing a rear bench)

I'm guessing most of the target market won't care about this. This is also the type of compromise that has to be made in early technology.

has less head and leg room than the $17,000 Chevrolet Cruze

So does a Lamborghini. People buying a Volt are not likely to be considering how much interior volume they get per dollar.

No wonder the Volt’s main competition, the Nissan Leaf, forgoes the additional combustion engine — and ends up costing $8,000 less as a result.

It also forgoes the ability to go on a road trip. Best case the leaf will have to recharge for 30 min every 80 miles. GM was trying to build something that could fully replace gas-only vehicles, Nissan wasn't.

So the future of General Motors (and the $50 billion taxpayer investment in it) now depends on a vehicle that costs $41,000 but offers the performance and interior space of a $15,000 economy car

The author should be embarrassed of making this statement. GM is a massive company who's business units range from car parts to medium-duty commercial trucks. The Volt is just one, albeit highly visible, program.

Yet G.M. seemingly has no plan for turning its low-volume “eco-flagship” into a mass-market icon like the Prius

A quote from Bob Lutz:

"The Volt technology is very exciting, but costs will have to come down before it can become generalized, and U.S. fuel prices will have to rise to world levels, meaning $5 or $6 per gallon,"

That seems to suggest that the plan is to develop the technology until prices can be brought down and fuel prices go up (a bit of a gamble, but it seems likely that fuel costs will increase eventually).

and some significant portion of the $14 billion loan G.M. got in 2008 for “retooling” its plants

By putting the word retooling in quotes he seems to be suggesting that GM wasn't retooling their plants. If that's his argument, he should state it directly and give a source.

There's no shortage of legitimate reasons to criticize GM, but calling the Volt a failure before it's even been released is nothing but pointless speculation.

So while it is pretty damn expensive, it's not necessarily worse than having one ICE car for long trips & one EV for commuting, especially considering that you'll only need to buy gas for trips over 40 miles. It's not going to hit too many people's sweet spot but there's some real potential.

  Nor did the government or G.M. decide to sell the Volt at a loss, which, paradoxically, might have been the best hope for making it profitable.

The Volt definitely has faults, but it's a brand-spanking-new technology - what do people expect?

This is a powerful formula, and if the car is halfway reasonable GM is going to be selling a lot of them.

Others have said this part but it bears repeating: a car with a battery system and a gasoline-burning electrical generator is a very different beast from a hybrid or a pure electric. It's no surprise that it's more expensive, nor does the price seem unreasonable, considering that a) it can cover most people's daily commute with zero gasoline and b) it can then be filled up and driven across the country.

The Volt will likely fail because of its massive price and less than optimal features. Why would you buy one over a Prius anyway? At least with the Prius you'd be getting a quality car made by a quality company. I have no idea why people are buying cars made by G.M. these days between the poor quality history and getting bailed out I have no interest in doing business with them.