# Chevy Volt **URL:** \ **Category:** PittSpeed Off Topic\ **Created:** [August 11, 2009, 6:42am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/chevy-volt/203423 "2009-08-11T06:42:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 9
**Author:** ![wtfpgh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/51bf81/32.png) [@wtfpgh](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/wtfpgh)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2009, 11:22am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/chevy-volt/203423/9 "2009-08-11T11:22:42Z")
> [@FS: Used two up Snowmobile/Atv trailer](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/fs-used-two-up-snowmobile-atv-trailer/40786/4): > > Chevy had a LOT tougher act to bring. They have a much smaller budget. The demographic that they are looking to reach needs much different things out of the car. Chevy has to worry about the sourcing of parts. It has to worry about mass production issues. It has to worry about a LOT more things than Tesla. > > If you commute less than 40 miles each way, you’ll be able to get the equivalent of 200+ MPG. What Chevy achieved for $40K is a hell of an accomplishment. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that what they’ve done isn’t commendable - they’re (supposedly; remember, we’ve seen GM do this once before in the past) bringing a practical EV to traditional consumers. I’m using Tesla to question how they’ve managed to produce it with a 40-mile range when a relatively new company without the buying leverage and R&D facilities of GM managed to accomplish much greater. It’s a step forward in the sense that we’re reducing our need for fossil fuel, but a step backwards in the sense that it’s going to cause us to settle for using X gallons of fossil fuel instead of using 0 gallons of fossil fuel. --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/chevy-volt/203423)._