Chevy Bolt - 200 mile range for $30k base price (after incentive)

[Breezy]

FWIW, those "focus groups" that were believed to be looking at GM's 200-mile EV were apparently shown specs that it would be rated 205 miles EPA.

The irrational GM hate on this forum is humorous. Everyone loves the idea of Tesla goading other OEMs into building EVs, except when they actually do. Then GM's evil, it's a conspiracy, yada yada.

Come on, this is a good announcement. Looks like there will be at least three affordable 200-mile+ EVs to choose from in a few years. Hooray!

 

[Krugerrand]

Actually since Elon is with tesla motors they have a focus group of one member: Elon.
Everysingleoneofeverybodyelse just stand and listen.
Those who were not up to listening are no longer with tesla.

Because you've been to the meetings, right?

- - - Updated - - -

FWIW, those "focus groups" that were believed to be looking at GM's 200-mile EV were apparently shown specs that it would be rated 205 miles EPA.

The irrational GM hate on this forum is humorous. Everyone loves the idea of Tesla goading other OEMs into building EVs, except when they actually do. Then GM's evil, it's a conspiracy, yada yada.

Come on, this is a good announcement. Looks like there will be at least three affordable 200-mile+ EVs to choose from in a few years. Hooray!

You've misinterpreted what's been said. Most everyone here would be delighted for GM to produce this car as advertised; several are merely not convinced it'll happen until they see GM do it, since GM has provided no roadmap to achieve the results.

 

[JST]

No, not at all. I fully believe in Mr. Ghosn's commitment and that he will ship a Leaf 2.0 with roughly double the range of the existing Leaf. We also know the limits of the next generation NCM battery chemistry. Just like when Tesla makes a claim, we should evaluate those claims against what we know is reality. There are many among us that question Tesla's claim of the Roadster 3.0 upgrade achieving 400 miles of range at highway speeds (maybe at 40 mph).

I think the Bolt has a good chance of being built in some fashion. But I don't like companies taking advantage of the confusion surrounding the claim of 200 mile range. Again, examine what kinds of details GM provided for the original Volt concept vehicle. They provided curb weight, battery weight, hp, and battery capacity. None of this was provided with the Bolt concept. Given that everyone in the industry knows the vast difference between JC08/NEDC range, EPA range, and steady mph range, people should have asked GM the right questions. The Bolt is more of a mirage simply because GM provided so few details, even compared to other concept car introductions they've done previously. Matter of fact, it is better if GM provided the right details... then we could either celebrate the fact that they will be building a Bolt with 200 miles of EPA range instead of feeling disappointed that it is a 135 mile BEV.

I don't disagree with you on this, but Tesla is just as bad on this front. Did you notice in the vids of Elon at NAIAS that the exhibit at the auto show shows 270 miles of range for the P85D?

I am going to stop short of calling it willful obfuscation, but the lack of clarity we saw over the past couple of months surrounding the actual, EPA range of the P85D is notable.

Partly this is because the whole idea of "range" is simultaneously the single most important and hardest to define feature of an electric car.

So, is GM playing fast and loose here? Time will tell. I'm inclined to believe based on what I've seen that the Bolt and Leaf 2 will have roughly double the range of current compliance cars, which probably isn't 200 miles but is...well...twice as good as anything currently extant save for the Model S. And that, imho, is progress.

EDIT:

Actually, let me walk back the claim above--I'd have to go back and look and make sure the sign on the wall isn't referring to the S85D.

Regardless, though, the point stands--for weeks after the P85D launch, Tesla was rather casually intermingling range figures derived from different protocols in its marketing. Some models were EPA numbers, others were at a constant 65 mph, etc.

 

[dennis]

Regardless, though, the point stands--for weeks after the P85D launch, Tesla was rather casually intermingling range figures derived from different protocols in its marketing. Some models were EPA numbers, others were at a constant 65 mph, etc.

While potential buyers/journalists/TMC members were intermingling the range figures, IIRC Tesla was pretty clear about this. Before they had EPA numbers for the P85D/85D, they gave out range numbers at a constant 65 mph for those models. But they also updated the website to include the same rating for the S85. Meaning that anyone who bothered to read would have seen that at a constant 65 mph the P85D and S85 were rated the same, and the 85D was 10 miles more, not 30. Apples to apples.

When Tesla published EPA numbers for the P85D/85D they removed the constant 65mph numbers from the website. So again apples to apples.

The real problem is that the P85D as delivered (and as still delivered) doesn't have the firmware (torque sleep) that enables the claimed 65mph and EPA ratings. Big screwup on Tesla's part, and it has fanned the flames over the numbers that Tesla proclaimed at launch.

 

[JRP3]

The irrational GM hate on this forum is humorous.

Yes skepticism of GM's actual intentions based on past and present performance = irrational hate.... Tesla is "goading" other OEM's into making compelling EV's that people can buy, the world is still waiting while Tesla is doing.

 

[Sparky]

FWIW, those "focus groups" that were believed to be looking at GM's 200-mile EV were apparently shown specs that it would be rated 205 miles EPA.

The irrational GM hate on this forum is humorous. Everyone loves the idea of Tesla goading other OEMs into building EVs, except when they actually do. Then GM's evil, it's a conspiracy, yada yada.

Come on, this is a good announcement. Looks like there will be at least three affordable 200-mile+ EVs to choose from in a few years. Hooray!

I agree it's a reason to celebrate. I don't think these comments are hateful but skeptical and representative of where we are... a Tesla forum. Congrats on your Volt and you must admit there's some pretty strident commentary on the Volt forum about everyone's else's BEV/PHEV.
I've been in quite a few focus groups and this car was in one of them. It was 1 of 6 we got to walk around, sit in and examine a Monroney type sticker. 205 mi sounds correct for the range on that sticker and the other cars had their EPA numbers printed (I have a LEAF also, so I knew that value).

After examining the cars, each focus group member sat down at a terminal and answered a bunch of questions about generic specs and manufacturer. The line of questioning seemed directed at finding out if we cared more about the manufacturer or other features than the range. It was almost comical (BMW i3 with 100 mi or concept X with 250 mi for same price? hmmm, mulling that one). How about if we offered an additional 100 mi range for $2k, $4k? $6k?. I was all, "hell yes, can I pay all three"!!

My skepticism comes from 2 things:
1) I was so surprised to eventually learn (elsewhere) that this was a GM car since it seemed to have been so genetically modified from that family tree; fairly clean lines (the front grill-thing was covered up) and a spacious, elegant interior. The Volt is the inverse IMO and one of it's turn-offs. I expect this aspect of the design to get scrapped and the car to be dulled down with a more typical GM small-car interior to save $.

2) The general lack of enthusiasm and understanding GM and the other big car companies have for EVs will be made worse in the crucial development phase coming up because gas prices are so low that they will feel no need to push.
The truck/SUV and other gas-guzzler divisions will lobby for and get more of the resources since that's where the sales are. This will get pushed back.

I hope I'm wrong about this.

One last thing that turns me off to this car vs a Model 3. Dealers. I might own a Volt instead of a LEAF today if it weren't for the GM dealers that tried to shake me down at every turn. $5k markups, no promise of what features you could get. $500 to get in line (paid to dealer, but without a price/delivery guarantee). Just shady crap. Nissan got that right for the early adopters of the LEAF. You get a delivery reservation for your car as spec'd and shop for a dealer (and a $1000 lower price in my case) to handle the delivery. No nonsense.

I do hope the Bolt arrives in 2018.
If it's very similar to the concept and ~$35k I may buy one. But, I'll be assessing the Model 3 as well and that's a case where the manufacturer does matter for me.

 

[qwk]

The irrational GM hate on this forum is humorous. Everyone loves the idea of Tesla goading other OEMs into building EVs, except when they actually do.

You must live on a different planet than the rest of us, because on planet earth GM doesn't offer an EV, except for a compliance city car in California and Oregon. In the rest of the states besides AZ, GM has NEVER offered an EV(EV 1 included).

Look, if GM made a vehicle that is better or equal to Tesla's offerings, that would be one thing, and worthy of praise, but when their first EV(Impact) looks, and is a better engineered product than what they promise they will offer 30 years later, there is definitely a problem. Blind, ignorant loyalty to bankrupt companies is just stupidity IMO.

 

[scaesare]

Come on, this is a good announcement. Looks like there will be at least three affordable 200-mile+ EVs to choose from in a few years. Hooray!

I agree.. people seem to have a hard time grasping the idea that on the one hand you can recognize GM's failings in the past and therefore have healthy skepticism regarding their ability to execute on their current plans, and on the other applaud and encourage future intent that is aimed in the direction we'd like to see.

The two are not mutually exclusive... and I don't understand why folks feel that denigrating the plans because of "feature X" is constructive. Don't like the styling? Fine, it won't be the only car you can choose from... but let's not lose sight of what is a positive direction.

 

[qwk]

K

I agree.. people seem to have a hard time grasping the idea that on the one hand you can recognize GM's failings in the past and therefore have healthy skepticism regarding their ability to execute on their current plans, and on the other applaud and encourage future intent that is aimed in the direction we'd like to see.

The two are not mutually exclusive... and I don't understand why folks feel that denigrating the plans because of "feature X" is constructive. Don't like the styling? Fine, it won't be the only car you can choose from... but let's not lose sight of what is a positive direction.

The problem myself and many here have is "talk is cheap". I can say that I'm going to start manufacturing X product, but until I do, it's all talk. The battery industry is one of the finest examples of this.

GM and others have been TALKING for an awful long time, 2008 comes to mind. You can bet that if this current gasoline price trend continues, every current auto manufacturer is going to go back to their old ways. History ALWAYS repeats itself. Too bad humans are too ignorant to realize this.

 

[Model 3]

I agree.. people seem to have a hard time grasping the idea that on the one hand you can recognize GM's failings in the past and therefore have healthy skepticism regarding their ability to execute on their current plans, and on the other applaud and encourage future intent that is aimed in the direction we'd like to see.

The two are not mutually exclusive... and I don't understand why folks feel that denigrating the plans because of "feature X" is constructive. Don't like the styling? Fine, it won't be the only car you can choose from... but let's not lose sight of what is a positive direction.

I was looking forward for this announcement, ready to celebrate that GM finely came back on the track. The more EV's, the better. And from a big company as GM? Just marvelous! But, it was - to my disappointment - NOT an announcement of a new GM EV. They showed us just a concept car, and made it very clear that they was NOT committed to produce this car - EVER! And no mention of when this car - or any car developed on this base - was to be produced, if it was to be produced at all. And the lack of details they provided tells me that it has a long way to go before it may enter production. It was a disappointment to me.

So, no hatred, just a disappointment. And I fully applaud Nissan for developing their Leaf to be the first EV after Tesla to go 200+ miles, and looking forward for their official announcement of this, full of technical details about this new version.

Ps: And I wold rather buy a GM then a Nissan, if GM had given me that choise. From what I saw, they did not. But then again, I rather buy a Model 3 from Tesla if it's on time

 

[Doug_G]

FWIW, those "focus groups" that were believed to be looking at GM's 200-mile EV were apparently shown specs that it would be rated 205 miles EPA.

LOL @ focus group. They're totally useless except for incremental changes in a product. The only people who will give you useful information from a focus group would be EV drivers. People who've only ever driven gas cars won't have a clue. So I really hope the focus group at least consisted of Volt owners!

 

[anticitizen13.7]

The irrational GM hate on this forum is humorous. Everyone loves the idea of Tesla goading other OEMs into building EVs, except when they actually do. Then GM's evil, it's a conspiracy, yada yada.

My dislike of GM has nothing to do with Tesla. I'm a Honda guy, so anything GM is about as welcome as a Michigan fan in the OSU section. Screw GM!

 

[tga]

I agree it's a reason to celebrate. I don't think these comments are hateful but skeptical and representative of where we are... a Tesla forum. Congrats on your Volt and you must admit there's some pretty strident commentary on the Volt forum about everyone's else's BEV/PHEV.

In a discussion re the Cadillac ELR on the Volt forum, I once made a comment that if I'm spending that kind of money on a green car, it'd be a Tesla. The responses were, well, "strident."

My dislike of GM has nothing to do with Tesla. I'm a Honda guy, so anything GM is about as welcome as a Michigan fan in the OSU section. Screw GM!

I'm not sure the GM fans ever got the memo that they were supposed to be in a rivalry with Honda fans. They're too busy with their real enemy, Team Big Blue Oval. :wink:

 

[richkae]

LOL @ focus group. They're totally useless except for incremental changes in a product.

Focus groups wanted a faster horse.

 

[vinnie97]

I was looking forward for this announcement, ready to celebrate that GM finely came back on the track. The more EV's, the better. And from a big company as GM? Just marvelous! But, it was - to my disappointment - NOT an announcement of a new GM EV. They showed us just a concept car, and made it very clear that they was NOT committed to produce this car - EVER! And no mention of when this car - or any car developed on this base - was to be produced, if it was to be produced at all. And the lack of details they provided tells me that it has a long way to go before it may enter production. It was a disappointment to me.

So, no hatred, just a disappointment. And I fully applaud Nissan for developing their Leaf to be the first EV after Tesla to go 200+ miles, and looking forward for their official announcement of this, full of technical details about this new version.

Ps: And I wold rather buy a GM then a Nissan, if GM had given me that choise. From what I saw, they did not. But then again, I rather buy a Model 3 from Tesla if it's on time

Why is GM a preferred choice for you over Nissan? The former has a ridiculous # of recalls. Their quality control is a travesty. I haven't looked as deeply into Nissan's quality of late, but GM is a fright.

 

[Model 3]

Why is GM a preferred choice for you over Nissan? The former has a ridiculous # of recalls. Their quality control is a travesty. I haven't looked as deeply into Nissan's quality of late, but GM is a fright.

I know all this, but my past experience with GM has been better then my experience with Nissan. Just that. But no, I'm no "Nissan hater" ... and I admit - my experiences with GM is from some old cars - from the time they still made cars.

 

[renim]

I don't expect Nissan LEAF gen2 to match the EPA figure for GM Bolt
I expect GM Bolt to have outstanding LA4 (city) range, perhaps enough to earn 300mile CARB credits.
I suspect Nissan LEAF gen2 to match or exceed GM Bolt for highway range only.

 

[dhrivnak]

My dislike of GM has nothing to do with Tesla. I'm a Honda guy, so anything GM is about as welcome as a Michigan fan in the OSU section. Screw GM!

I do not understand the Anti-GM. Yes Honda makes a good car but we currently have two GM cars we bought new 12 and 16 years ago. Both are well north of 100,000 and I have had less than $100 in repairs over STD maintenance. In both cars even the brakes lasted over 100, 000 miles. I know Tesla is very new and ground breaking. But my 4 year old Tesla has cost me much more in maintenance and repairs than my last 3 GM cars combined. All of which have had over 3x the miles.

We now have a Volt in addition to my Roadster and while new it has excellent fit and finish. Time will tell if it is reliable but so far so good.

 

[JohnQ]

LOL @ focus group. They're totally useless except for incremental changes in a product. The only people who will give you useful information from a focus group would be EV drivers. People who've only ever driven gas cars won't have a clue. So I really hope the focus group at least consisted of Volt owners!

I have been part of a focus group from a current manufacturer who intends to build 200+ mile EVs in the near future. They specifically invited Tesla owners to get our perspective about interior user experience, exterior design, range and recharging solutions. Focus groups are not always a soulless marketing exercise. There were a wide variety of opinions and I expect the company learned a few new things. NDA prevents detailed disclosure of information.

 

[scaesare]

KThe problem myself and many here have is "talk is cheap". I can say that I'm going to start manufacturing X product, but until I do, it's all talk. The battery industry is one of the finest examples of this.

Talk is indeed cheap. Hence my point about healthy skepticism.

However part of why manufacturers talk is to gauge market reaction.

Hence, "If they actually build this, this would really help expand the market for some folks, even if the styling is not for me." is different than, "GM is lame if they build that ugly piece of junk using that battery chemistry, and besides they couldn't figure out fast DC charging to save their life!"

Again, GM even feeling the need to acknowledge the idea a 200-mile EV is needed helps legitimize a market. Why not at least encourage that behavior?

GM and others have been TALKING for an awful long time, 2008 comes to mind. You can bet that if this current gasoline price trend continues, every current auto manufacturer is going to go back to their old ways. History ALWAYS repeats itself. Too bad humans are too ignorant to realize this.

GM has been talking about the need for a 200 mile range EV since '08?

History does tend to repeat itself, but not always in the same way or by the same people. Prior to the Volt, they had never built a hybrid like that, and I'd bet that Lutz & Company would have expected to build muscle cars and traditional ICE's, and yet here we are.

Look, I'm not an apologist for GM. I doubt I'd ever buy one of their products as I know them today. But does anybody think that if GM hears a collective group of potential customers say "A 200 mile EV in the $30K's sounds good!" it doesn't help move them the direction we'd like to see them go.