Bolt EV EPA range = 238 miles combined!

[trils0n]

Squaring is NOT an exponential rise. Squaring is n^2; Exponential is e^n.

Thank you kindly.

Ok thanks for explaining. Been a while since I took math, my mistake, won't describe it that way anymore.

 

[Rashomon]

Squaring is NOT an exponential rise. Squaring is n^2; Exponential is e^n.

Thank you kindly.

Squaring is NOT an exponential rise. Squaring is n^2; Exponential is e^n.

Thank you kindly.

Try looking at wikipedia: Exponential function - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. A function of x-squared meets their definition of an exponential function. That's the common usage. While some math pedants might disagree, that's why they're described as pedants

 

[McRat]

Try looking at wikipedia: Exponential function - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. A function of x-squared meets their definition of an exponential function. That's the common usage. While some math pedants might disagree, that's why they're described as pedants

Yes, it's exponential. I blame the schools. Anything past linear slope is exponential. Effectively, it can actually exceed ^2 since downforce and lift are not in the basic equation. As the nose and tail rise or fall, the aero gets "dirtier", ie - the Cd changes for the worse which is a 3rd acceleration of the curve.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Squaring is NOT an exponential rise. Squaring is n^2; Exponential is e^n.

Thank you kindly.

In general terms, exponential means "becoming more and more rapid", so yes, a squared relationship is exponential. We're just doing math here, not taking Math.

PS e^n is not the only exponential function, it's just a special case.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Try looking at wikipedia: Exponential function - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. A function of x-squared meets their definition of an exponential function. That's the common usage. While some math pedants might disagree, that's why they're described as pedants

It doesn't. The variable is not an exponent. 2^x is an exponential function. x^2 is not.

 

[SageBrush]

Exponential function - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This is the first sentence:

This article is about functions of the form f(x) = ab^x. For functions of the form f(x,y) = xy, see Exponentiation. For functions of the form f(x) = x^r, see Power function.

---
I use the term 'geometric' for power functions, but I'll wait for Topher to say if it is correct.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Yes, I'm being redundant because the EV refueling argument is based on misinformation on how automobiles are used for travel. You mainly charge your EV at home/work unless you're retired or too poor to afford plane tickets. There are people in the US who do not even own cars and they work and play just fine. So apparently the ability to go to North Dakota from New York each week by car is not as important as some folk think.

Elon Musk was well aware of the refueling issue. An EV that needs refueling for range extension is not competitive in that area with other automotive propulsion technologies. Musk went as far as designing the Tesla to accept a quick change battery pack, and putting in a global grid of super high output DCFCs,

The battery swap thing was not economically feasible. The SC grid still has gaps in it that require you to use slower refueling. Unpopular destinations aren't going to get DCFC for a very long time, and nobody is selling EV jerry cans yet.

Today, a BEV controls your schedule when used for long distance travel. When and where you eat and sleep are tied into charging infrastructure, and this simply is not true for gasoline or diesel. With ICE, you eat where YOU want and when YOU want, it's not your car's choice. It's the reason H2 will never catch on, and CNG/Propane are still limited to fleet use for the most part. There is certainly one thing gasoline is good at, and that is packing a lot of energy into very little mass, and that mass is liquid. It's the perfect freakin' energy source when it comes to remote refueling. Gasoline averages about 5 miles per pound. Li batteries? 5 miles per 15 lbs?

So if gasoline is so damn great, why is electricity better? Just to Save Teh Whales and Get Pot Legalized? No, EV tech is not tie-dyed t-shirts, sandals, and fancy bongs. It's a better engineering solution to automotive propulsion than internal combustion and I do not mean emissions control.

Electromotive propulsion allows for a car that NEVER stops for refueling during driving. Or you can refuel. You have a choice. You do not get a choice with ICE unless you have a butler or chauffeur. Our kids Volts are do not get refueled while in operation more than once a month. I think the 2013 gets refueled remotely every 2000 miles on the average, and the 2016 is probably higher. And these are VERY fast refuels since they are normally about 6 gallons.

Digital control of electromotive powertrains is simpler and more robust that trying to control an ICE engine and transmission. Things like stability control, traction control, 4 wheel steering, AWD, energy recovery, hill hold, cruise control, etc, are easy when you're electric.

Moving a heavy object is easier to do when you use electric motors. Cruise ships, trains, big earthmoving equipment, and even passenger cars are easier to propel when you use an electric motor. No idling, no clutch, no fluid torque converter, no gear changing, constant torque. But the instant throttle response at all times and speeds is really what make an EV a better way to drive than the other options.

But thinking that DCFC refueling Ozona, Texas is a critical must-have feature for a BEV is wrong. If that becomes the battle cry of the EV enthusiast, we are indeed doomed to extinction.

I'm not talking about something as long as NY to North Dakota. I'm talking about something that will be a lot closer, like SF to LA. I can comfortably go on such a trip on a whim in my current ICE, and I can do the same in a Tesla. I can't say the same of any non-Tesla EV.

As for what buyers consider, they don't only consider the daily case. The ability to do something a couple of times a year is still important to buyers. That is why SUVs and pickups sell so well. Probably 99% of the time they don't need the capability, but they buy it for that 1% of the time that they do.

I'll put out a hypothetical: would the Model S sell as well as it does if it didn't have the supercharger network (or perhaps no quick charging at all)? That will give some perspective on the importance of quick charging speeds and coverage.

 

[SageBrush]

I read somewhere that a 5 hour car trip gets you to your destination in about the same time as flying nowadays.

 

[McRat]

I'm not talking about something as long as NY to North Dakota. I'm talking about something that will be a lot closer, like SF to LA. I can comfortably go on such a trip on a whim in my current ICE, and I can do the same in a Tesla. I can't say the same of any non-Tesla EV.

As for what buyers consider, they don't only consider the daily case. The ability to do something a couple of times a year is still important to buyers. That is why SUVs and pickups sell so well. Probably 99% of the time they don't need the capability, but they buy it for that 1% of the time that they do.

I'll put out a hypothetical: would the Model S sell as well as it does if it didn't have the supercharger network (or perhaps no quick charging at all)? That will give some perspective on the importance of quick charging speeds and coverage.

Unless something changes significantly, you will be able to go from San Diego to Seattle in a Bolt today. Furthest distance between CCS DCFC's is 140 miles, but that is just the gap between Portland and Tacoma, the rest are much closer to each other.

CCS uses both 101 and 99 up to Sacramento, then uses the 5 past that point.

You can go from LA to Las Vegas as well it appears. But they do need one more CCS on that route. Long jump between Victorville and LV, 187 miles.

Nobody will know exactly what the story is for a few months. No EV's with CHAdeMO or CCS have the range to pull it off yet.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Unless something changes significantly, you will be able to go from San Diego to Seattle in a Bolt today. Furthest distance between CCS DCFC's is 140 miles, but that is just the gap between Portland and Tacoma, the rest are much closer to each other.

CCS uses both 101 and 99 up to Sacramento, then uses the 5 past that point.

You can go from LA to Las Vegas as well it appears. But they do need one more CCS on that route. Long jump between Victorville and LV, 187 miles.

Nobody will know exactly what the story is for a few months. No EV's with CHAdeMO or CCS have the range to pull it off yet.

I actually looked at the route previously in another post. It is not a comfortable trip on par with an ICE. 101 is possible, but there are two legs with only a single 24kW charger (which would put wait times past tolerable). 99 has a huge gap after Visalia which would make it stressful, esp at typical I-5 speeds.
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/posts/1685334/

I didn't mention the main problem: practically all stations have only 1-2 chargers (most only 1). If you aren't the only person on the trip, you could be stuck waiting a lot longer. The CEC chargers planned to be installed won't change this kind of layout either. The main variable is what VW plans to do for their diesel settlement.

 

[techmaven]

Unless something changes significantly, you will be able to go from San Diego to Seattle in a Bolt today.

Wow, I would not be trying to highlight that route. Way too many 24 kW EVSE's, especially the critical ones between the cities.

 

[Jeff N]

I actually looked at the route previously in another post. It is not a comfortable trip on par with an ICE. 101 is possible, but there are two legs with only a single 24kW charger (which would put wait times past tolerable). 99 has a huge gap after Visalia which would make it stressful, esp at typical I-5 speeds.

On my first long drive from SF to LA in my Bolt EV I will likely drive on US-101 and charge at EVgo in Salinas 110 miles from SF for 30 minutes while I get coffee at Starbucks. Then I would drive another 130 miles and charge at EVgo at San Luis Obispo for an hour and get lunch and hit Starbucks again. Another 140 miles of driving would get me to the north western edge of LA so depending on where my final destination would be I would either just keep driving or stop at EVgo in Calabasas or other nearby locations for a final boost. So, about 90 minutes of charge during two bio and food stops. No problem.

All of those EVgo locations are 125A AKA 50 kW as far as I can tell. If they were broken or otherwise unusable for some reason both locations have nearby fallback 50 kW DC charging strategies within a few miles. Extending the trip to San Diego via 50 kW charging should be easy as well.

Driving to Portland or Seattle from SF is another story. Then you really are stuck with 24 kW chargers at least until you get up to Oregon but it's still doable and I expect 50 kW or faster charging to be available on that route within another year or two. I would probably get a full charge overnight at a motel in Redding.

I can hardly wait.... It's going to be fun!

 

[Dave EV]

I didn't mention the main problem: practically all stations have only 1-2 chargers (most only 1). If you aren't the only person on the trip, you could be stuck waiting a lot longer. The CEC chargers planned to be installed won't change this kind of layout either. The main variable is what VW plans to do for their diesel settlement.

Charging infrastructure and planning for longer trips is where Tesla has the biggest advantage over other EVs. 6-12 with plugs at each location capable of pushing 400-800 kW of power at once is an order of magnitude more power than your typical 1-2 plugs with 50-100 kW total power.

Not to mention that with the CHAdeMO adapter, a Tesla could also use the same infrastructure as the other EVs (nearly all CCS QC stations are dual-plug with CHAdeMO plugs, too).

If you think that Tesla has a problem with crowded Superchargers today, just wait until the Bolt starts selling in quantity and people start looking to drive up and down California. I am hoping that EVgo, the current leader in public QC infrastructure is able to keep up with demand.

IMO this highlights an advantage that Tesla has with 48A L2 charging standard and 72A L2 charging as an option. Even 40A on a 50A circuit gives one enough speed that it's acceptable in a pinch. An hour there would get a Bolt 30 miles of range, more than likely far enough to make it to another QC in a pinch. 72A L2 starts getting you real amounts of range in an hour.

 

[h2sux2]

I am happy for GM, I think they have done a good job with this car and the Volt. If there was no model 3 plans than I think the Volt would kick ass this year. As for the Bolt, I think it will really put pressure on the LEAF more than anything. When people think electric car they think of a cute little pudgy car like the Bolt, LEAF or Prius. Model 3 buyers(at least myself) are going for a little more class and if I were not buying electric cars, I would be buying a BMW.

The more competition in the electric space, the better for the future of the industry and the world. The same cost reductions that will allow Tesla to make more of a profit on the model 3 at 35k, will hopefully help reduce the cost of the Bolt to $27,000 which is about what Prius's go for and Toyota sells millions of them. At 30k after the tax credit, I think GM will be successful with this vehicle. They will take some sales away from the Prius and the LEAF but hopefully they take sales away from ICE cars like the Chevy Impala(also priced at 27k).

Not sure why the media continues to compare things to Tesla or talk about Tesla killers. Tesla will sell every car it can make for at least the next 3 years without a problem and that is without a single commercial or advertisement and not being able to sell directly in most of the states. The Bolt will bring in some older people that are more comfortable with a "GM car" into the Electric world and based on every electric car I have driven, they will be very impressed and likely never go back to an ICE car. Well done GM.

This is hands down, the best reaction I have encountered to the Bolt news. Nicely put.

Everyone take a deep breath.... Tesla will be fine.
The more EVs the better - especially when they match ICE convenience.
The Bolt will most likely help convert new EV drivers, not steal Tesla customers. We tend to forget that most EV drivers on the road today, were ICE drivers not very long ago.

 

[stopcrazypp]

On my first long drive from SF to LA in my Bolt EV I will likely drive on US-101 and charge at EVgo in Salinas 110 miles from SF for 30 minutes while I get coffee at Starbucks. Then I would drive another 130 miles and charge at EVgo at San Luis Obispo for an hour and get lunch and hit Starbucks again. Another 140 miles of driving would get me to the north western edge of LA so depending on where my final destination would be I would either just keep driving or stop at EVgo in Calabasas or other nearby locations for a final boost. So, about 90 minutes of charge during two bio and food stops. No problem.

All of those EVgo locations are 125A AKA 50 kW as far as I can tell. If they were broken or otherwise unusable for some reason both locations have nearby fallback 50 kW DC charging strategies within a few miles. Extending the trip to San Diego via 50 kW charging should be easy as well.

Driving to Portland or Seattle from SF is another story. Then you really are stuck with 24 kW chargers at least until you get up to Oregon but it's still doable and I expect 50 kW or faster charging to be available on that route within another year or two. I would probably get a full charge overnight at a motel in Redding.

I can hardly wait.... It's going to be fun!

I missed the 50kW EVgo station in San Luis Obispo (I guess I didn't zoom in enough on plugshare and it was covered by the marker for the 24kW at the Kon Tiki Inn). However, on plugshare I don't see any 50kW fall back stations station nearby that is only a few miles away. So I suppose it would be possible to do it on 101 without relying on 24kW, but as I mentioned, the station issue is still a significant problem (if more than a handful of people are on the same route, then wait times can increase significantly). Browsing the comments, it seems the stations can't use CCS and CHAdeMO at the same time, so you won't only be waiting for other CCS cars, but also CHAdeMO ones.

Personally I always take I-5 going 70-ish mph, so Tesla's network would not be a significant difference from how I use an ICE (20 minute stops for bathroom/stretching/snacks + charging vs 10 minute for an ICE). Going 101 by itself would add an hour extra to my trip, plus the slower charging if using CCS.

 

[Jeff N]

I missed the 50kW EVgo station in San Luis Obispo (I guess I didn't zoom in enough on plugshare and it was covered by the marker for the 24kW at the Kon Tiki Inn). However, on plugshare I don't see any 50kW fall back stations station nearby that is only a few miles away.

You could drive 10 miles and charge for ~30-40 minutes at Kon Tiki Inn at 24 kW and then drive 50-some miles to Buellton and charge at the 50 kWh EVgo charger.

Going 101 by itself would add an hour extra to my trip, plus the slower charging if using CCS.

Sure, but US-101 is much more scenic. I-5 is a desert wasteland -- remember to switch the climate controls to recirculate when driving past the ginormous stinky cattle feedlot at Harris Ranch.... Or maybe you have biohazard mode.

The California Energy Commission recently issued grants to install 50 kW CCS stations along I-5 so it should be possible to go that route in another year or so.

 

[h2sux2]

MS P100D: 100 kWh battery / 315 mi = .317 kWh/mi
MS 90D: 90 kWh battery / 294 mi = .306 kWh/mi
MS 75: 75 kWh battery / 259 mi = .290 kWh/mi
MS 60: 60 kWh battery / 218 mi = .275 kWh/mi

Bolt: 60 kWh battery / 238 mi = .252 kWh/mi

Why is the bolt battery more efficient? The Cd of the MS is better so aerodynamics can't be the reason.

The Bolt is about 1000lbs lighter than the lightest MS, according to RoadShow. So that might help too.

 

[stopcrazypp]

You could drive 10 miles and charge for ~30-40 minutes at Kon Tiki Inn at 24 kW and then drive 50-some miles to Buellton and charge at the 50 kWh EVgo charger.

Sure, but US-101 is much more scenic. I-5 is a desert wasteland -- remember to switch the climate controls to recirculate when driving past the ginormous stinky cattle feedlot at Harris Ranch.... Or maybe you have biohazard mode.

The California Energy Commission recently issued grants to install 50 kW CCS stations along I-5 so it should be possible to go that route in another year or so.

Usually when I'm on a trip like this, I value the time more than the scenery, most importantly to beat rush hour traffic. 101 isn't significant enough an upgrade in scenery to be worth it. Highway 1 has much better scenery than both, but it's even longer.

Yes, the CEC grants will go a long way and help fill out I-5 with non-Tesla chargers, but the grants show they are still doing the 1-2 charger per station strategy (61 chargers for 41 sites split between I-5, 101, and 99).

 

[Cebe]

With 238-Mile EPA Range, Rumored Lower-Than-Expected Price, Chevrolet Bolt EV Sets Sights On Tesla Model 3
...
With the price and range bragging rights out of the picture, along with OTA updates as well, Tesla will be left with just the SC network (that will be an add-on cost for people wanting a base 3), styling, and the Tesla badge as trump cards.

Even ignoring the SC network, didn't you just describe the ICE marketplace? BMW over Toyota is mostly about styling and badging, the rest of it is in the realm that most of us will never actually experience (skidpad numbers), and perhaps bragging rights. Once you have enough range, for your particular driving habits, it doesn't matter anymore. I would not have bought a car with exact Model S utility, functionality and specs if it looked like a 1972 Ford LTD.

And that's OK. It's awesome Bolt is getting more range than predicted, but in my case, since 200 miles is plenty, 215 mi or 238 mi falls under the "bragging rights", and makes no difference. Like megapixels in cameras...

 

[Cloxxki]

Only on page 14...
Perhaps a zealous 90D or P100DL owner could do this Bolt route in their car...and back, and document it? It just might do it

Although one commenter mentioned that GM may be reworking some of the corners of the car, I wonder, WHY make a boxy BEV? Do they WANT it to fail? Or would an aero conscious design just net them a Tesla lookalike? Seems that rounding the corners (a bit more complicated than that) should be cheaper than adding extra batteries to 30,000 cars.

People mention the length of a car. Now let's take this short and tall Bolt. How much more would the car reasonably needd to cost, to add 20 inches between the front and second row to created even more leg room or luggage space/sleeping floor? 20 inches of chassis, roof, some brake lines, etc. Would it make the Bolt an expensive or heavy car? I can't see it. And imagine how many more battery would fit in a 20 inches longer pack. Or, the pack could be flatter if the components allow it. The car lower and more aero.

Let's say the Bolt really got a bigger battery or better economy than expacted, and Tesla wants Model 3 to 1up it. From 215 to 240 miles is 25. At roughly 4 miles per kWh, that's just over 6kWh added. Are those $100 or $200 per kWh for Tesla with 2170's? $600-1200 extra batteries for those 25 miles extra.

If LG can't make more packs than 30,000pcs, then they can't get close to Tesla's production cost /kWh. Tesla should have an edge when it come to range for years to come. Other can invest hard to get more range, but Tesla can cheaply outdo them. At the same price and range they should easily create a superior car. A full class higher up?