Chevrolet Volt offers unique, high-tech drive
The 2013 Chevrolet Volt has a lot going for it.
It can travel up to 50 miles on all-electric power and has a backup gasoline engine for longer trips, is a recommended buy of Consumer Reports magazine and adds features, including a Hold mode that lets drivers set the Volt for gasoline-engine operation only, thereby saving the electric range for later in the trip, if needed.
For the first time since the Volt's introduction as a 2011 model, the black-colored roof and liftgate are gone. Buyers can get those parts painted the same color as the rest of the Volt body. And Chevrolet added global positioning satellite-based navigation for 2013. It's part of an $895 option that adds $495 in optional stereo sound equipment.
Meanwhile, the 2013 Volt earned top, five-out-of-five stars in overall crash protection for occupants during federal crash tests.
But the Volt's electric plug-in system for charging remains less adaptable to some regular, 120-volt outlets than do the plug-in systems for the all-electric-only Nissan Leaf and Mitsubishi MiEV and plug-in hybrid competitors like the 2013 Toyota Prius Plug-In Hybrid and 2013 Ford C-Max Energi.
Simply, the test 2013 Volt — like the 2011 Volt tester two years earlier — would not charge via the regular 120-volt outlet in my circa 1970s residential garage. It would only charge at the 240-volt charging stations at a city-owned, downtown parking structure.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Health care law compliance complex for employers
- Tech companies lay claim to ‘Silicon Beach’
- Fired coal miners find employment in Wyoming
- Data make strong case for 401(k)
- Underestimated income to cost insured workers
- GAO warns of health site weaknesses
- ‘Airbender’ bent rules of Pa. film tax credit
- Sometimes, all you need is a reboot
- Good manners relevant when in professional setting
- Trucking firms stretch to hire drivers
- Young watchmaker pursues lifelong fixation