This Is The Chevy Volt's Post-Crash Safety Protocol

by Edward Niedermeyer

Published: September 28th, 2022

TTAC has received the following protocol, developed by GM in the wake of the June Volt fire at a NHTSA facility in Wisconsin, from a GM source and has confirmed its legitimacy with a second GM source. Though the procedure may be refined based on the findings of NHTSA’s latest round of tests, it gives a good picture of what GM currently does to ensure the safety of Volt driver and passengers as well as rescue workers, towing company workers and salvage yards. And, I have to say, it puts some of my fears about this safety scare to rest. It hadn’t occurred to me that GM’s Onstar system could provide opportunities to respond to crashes in real-time, and apparently the system provides a wide variety of data with which GM’s “corporate SWAT team” can tailor its response to any Volt crash event. Hit the jump for the full procedure.

Chevy Volt sends Onstar message of just occurred crash event.
Onstar team notified of Volt crash and immediately implements standard crash protocol to assist vehicle operator
Onstar immediately pulls key crash criteria from crash notification, i.e. vehicle speed, vehicles conditions (rollover), etc
Onstar team notifies Volt Battery Team Leader of crash event including key vehicle conditions
Volt Battery team leader works with Onstar to ping Volt and check additional data if appropriate (higher severity crash events, battery data, etc)
Volt Battery team Leader determines if high crash severity standards met for depowering or if there is any question about battery severity level. If yes to either, Battery team representative is sent to crash site
Volt Battery team works with Volt advisor to contact Vehicle Owner and/or determine vehicle location
Volt Battery representative obtains approval from owner and then proceeds to investigate the crashed Volt and depowers battery if deemed necessary
Post Crash Volt stable and ready for disposition

#Batteries #Chevrolet #CustomerRelations #EV #Fire #GM #Hybrid #Lithium-ion #NewCars #OnStar #Volt #Quality #Safety

Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments

Join the conversation

8 of 50 comments

Juniper on Dec 01, 2011

And the Volt wins CRs customer satisfaction survey. Hate it all you want Buickman, the owners love it. Oh that's right the customer is always wrong, right?

Like Reply
- See 3 previous
- Buickman on Dec 01, 2011
  
  people loved their Corvairs too, until they spun out and were killed. remember the old sayiong about fools and their money? at least they are happy fools.
  
  Like
- Chuckrs on Dec 01, 2011
  
  Buyer's remorse may take a while to set in. OK with me if early adopters are happy with it; the world needs guinea pigs.
  
  Like
- Flipper35 on Dec 01, 2011
  
  @Buickman The later Corvairs had multilink rear suspension while the Beetle (and other related cars)had a swing axle in the rear. The later Corvairs were actually a decent handling car and the early ones weren't any worse than others with a similar setup.
  
  Like
- Nick on Dec 02, 2011
  
  @Buickman Retrospective analysis (in the early 70s) of accident stats refuted all Nader the kook's claims about the Corvair being less safe than other vehicles.
  
  Like
Zykotec on Dec 01, 2011

European car journalists seem to praise the European version (Opel Ampera) for being a bright idea, with it's range extender, and that it drives better than most EV or hybrid cars. On the other hand, I think most European car journalist haven't grown up with American car manufacturers so they may not be able to grasp the sheer extend of GM's uselessness in the past.... Odds are 50/50 if it's a great little car or a time bomb... Now, tell me once again why they can't make the side-windows as big as they were obviously trying? or is it a nostalgic hint back to Mercury's of the 50's ?

Like Reply
- See 1 previous
- Mike978 on Dec 01, 2011
  
  I understand your point about American manufacturers and their checkered 50 year past. But European journalists (and the buying public) have had American owned brands - Opel/Vauxhall and Ford - to buy from in that time.
  
  Like
- Zykotec on Dec 01, 2011
  
  @mike978 Yes, that's true, but it's still miles away from the cars sold in the US. I can't think of any example from the top of my head when any of the reasonably good Euro GM or Fords have made a decent transition to the American market, or been sold successfully on both sides of the Atlantic. Not to mention the fact that in Europe Ford and GM has had large market shares of compact and smaller cars over the years, while at the same time having refused to even try making a compact. (or even a mid-size by European standards)
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Bouzouki Cadillac (aka GM!!) made so many mistakes over the past 40 years, right up to today, one could make a MBA course of it. Others have alluded to them, there is not enough room for me to recite them in a flowing, cohesive manner.Cadillac today is literally a tarted-up Chevrolet. They are nice cars, and the "aura" of the Cadillac name still works on several (mostly female) consumers who are not car enthusiasts.The CT4 and CT5 offer superlative ride and handling, and even performance--but, it is wrapped in sheet metal that (at least I think) looks awful, with (still) sub-par interiors. They are niche cars. They are the last gasp of the Alpha platform--which I have been told by people close to it, was meant to be a Pontiac "BMW 3-series". The bankruptcy killed Pontiac, but the Alpha had been mostly engineered, so it was "Cadillac-ized" with the new "edgy" CTS styling.Most Cadillacs sold are crossovers. The most profitable "Cadillac" is the Escalade (note that GM never jack up the name on THAT!).The question posed here is rather irrelevant. NO ONE has "a blank check", because GM (any company or corporation) does not have bottomless resources.Better styling, and superlative "performance" (by that, I mean being among the best in noise, harshness, handling, performance, reliablity, quality) would cost a lot of money.Post-bankruptcy GM actually tried. No one here mentioned GM's effort to do just that: the "Omega" platform, aka CT6.The (horribly misnamed) CT6 was actually a credible Mercedes/Lexus competitor. I'm sure it cost GM a fortune to develop (the platform was unique, not shared with any other car. The top-of-the-line ORIGINAL Blackwing V8 was also unique, expensive, and ultimately...very few were sold. All of this is a LOT of money).I used to know the sales numbers, and my sense was the CT6 sold about HALF the units GM projected. More importantly, it sold about half to two thirds the volume of the S-Class (which cost a lot more in 201x)Many of your fixed cost are predicated on volume. One way to improve your business case (if the right people want to get the Green Light) is to inflate your projected volumes. This lowers the unit cost for seats, mufflers, control arms, etc, and makes the vehicle more profitable--on paper.Suppliers tool up to make the number of parts the carmaker projects. However, if the volume is less than expected, the automaker has to make up the difference.So, unfortunately, not only was the CT6 an expensive car to build, but Cadillac's weak "brand equity" limited how much GM could charge (and these were still pricey cars in 2016-18, a "base" car was ).Other than the name, the "Omega" could have marked the starting point for Cadillac to once again be the standard of the world. Other than the awful name (Fleetwood, Elegante, Paramount, even ParAMOUR would be better), and offering the basest car with a FOUR cylinder turbo on the base car (incredibly moronic!), it was very good car and a CREDIBLE Mercedes S-Class/Lexus LS400 alternative. While I cannot know if the novel aluminum body was worth the cost (very expensive and complex to build), the bragging rights were legit--a LARGE car that was lighter, but had good body rigidity. No surprise, the interior was not the best, but the gap with the big boys was as close as GM has done in the luxury sphere.Mary Barra decided that profits today and tomorrow were more important than gambling on profits in 2025 and later. Having sunk a TON of money, and even done a mid-cycle enhancement, complete with the new Blackwing engine (which copied BMW with the twin turbos nestled in the "V"!), in fall 2018 GM announced it was discontinuing the car, and closing the assembly plant it was built in. (And so you know, building different platforms on the same line is very challenging and considerably less efficient in terms of capital and labor costs than the same platform, or better yet, the same model).So now, GM is anticipating that, as the car market "goes electric" (if you can call it that--more like the Federal Government and EU and even China PUSHING electric cars), they can make electric Cadillacs that are "prestige". The Cadillac Celestique is the opening salvo--$340,000. We will see how it works out.
Lynn Joiner Lynn JoinerJust put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
Lynn Joiner Just put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
Ollicat I am only speaking from my own perspective so no need to bash me if you disagree. I already know half or more of you will disagree with me. But I think the traditional upscale Cadillac buyer has traditionally been more conservative in their political position. My suggestion is to make Cadillac separate from GM and make them into a COMPANY, not just cars. And made the company different from all other car companies by promoting conservative causes and messaging. They need to build up a whole aura about the company and appeal to a large group of people that are really kind of sick of the left and sending their money that direction. But yes, I also agree about many of your suggestions above about the cars too. No EVs. But at this point, what has Cadillac got to lose by separating from GM completely and appealing to people with money who want to show everyone that they aren't buying the leftist Kook-Aid.
Jkross22 Cadillac's brand is damaged for the mass market. Why would someone pay top dollar for what they know is a tarted up Chevy? That's how non-car people see this.