TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

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

Discussion in 'Electric Vehicles' started by FredTMC, Jan 9, 2015.

Tags:
  1. RubberToe

    RubberToe Supporting the greater good

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    976
    Location:
    Pasadena, Ca
    Please share a link to the story with us.

    RT
     
  2. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    1,987
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    I'm sure he would not mind. I hope: Bolt EV Weekend Trip to Zion
     
  3. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    1,987
    Location:
    Norco, CA
  4. diamond.g

    diamond.g Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2015
    Messages:
    639
    Location:
    Fredericksburg, Virginia
    • Disagree x 1
  5. JRP3

    JRP3 Hyperactive Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Messages:
    10,634
    Location:
    Central New York
    No. A more efficient motor design with better cooling, or more heat tolerance, could allow a higher peak HP without negatively effecting range.
     
  6. diamond.g

    diamond.g Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2015
    Messages:
    639
    Location:
    Fredericksburg, Virginia
    What is inefficient about the current motor?
     
  7. JRP3

    JRP3 Hyperactive Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Messages:
    10,634
    Location:
    Central New York
    Nothing that I'm aware of but there are always ways to improve it, my point was that a motor with a higher peak HP rating doesn't necessarily mean it's less efficient or would negatively impact range. Unless of course you use the extra HP all the time.
     
    • Like x 1
  8. diamond.g

    diamond.g Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2015
    Messages:
    639
    Location:
    Fredericksburg, Virginia
    Ah. Staying off the go pedal is important in staying efficient.
     
    • Like x 1
  9. scaesare

    scaesare Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,319
    Location:
    NoVA
    I wonder what those are, and how that compares to the flow of traffic.

    Having grown up in Northern California, and having driven to/from LA, I know that in those areas sticking to posted speed limits will having people blowing by you...
     
  10. Az_Rael

    Az_Rael Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2016
    Messages:
    1,694
    Location:
    Palmdale, CA
    People will be passing you, but you wouldn't be the slowest thing on the road. Large trucks and RVs usually hold that spot. I normally drive at most 5 over and that seems to work out fine between here and Vegas. Just stay out of the fast lane.
     
  11. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,393
    I haven't taken LA to Las Vegas, but I know on I-5 to LA to keep up with traffic, you have to go at least 5-10 mph above the limit (some cars are way above this). The annoying thing is that there is only two lanes, so if you can't keep up, you have to go on the right lane. That lane is in horrible condition because of the trucks and even though they typically are going 10 above the truck limit, that is still only 65mph (5 below limit).
     
    • Like x 1
  12. scaesare

    scaesare Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,319
    Location:
    NoVA
    Yeah, I-5 is thee route I've taken from the Bay Area to LA most of the times I've driven it. Driving at the limit for that stretch would be painful.

    As I mentioned in another post (regarding need for more than current range in EV's), it would be nice not to have to be stuck in the slow lane passed by everything else on the road. And I don't want to unfairly bash the Bolt, as all EV's will take a hit with increased speed, it's interstate speed efficiency with it's Cd has been questioned. While it's cool that the person in the article was able to make that journey, I'm not sure that it's representative of how most people will want to drive it.
     
  13. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    1,987
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    Unlike more intelligent state governments, California has a 55 mph slow lane for trucks or those with trailers.

    The flow of traffic in the right lanes is normally 50-65 mph.

    But yes, in normal states, speed limits can be as high as 85mph and trucks and trailers can travel that speed too.
    Technically if you are running the I5 during the busy hours (or when the Killer Fog is running up the body count), one semi passes another, and the 200 cars that are blocked behind them are going 50 or less because every frogger in a Bimmer is bouncing between the two lanes that aren't going anywhere, touching off a sea of brake lights.
     
  14. wdolson

    wdolson Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    2,775
    Location:
    Clark Co, WA
    The smaller motor in the S/X is a bit more efficient than the larger motor of the P version. For one thing they weigh less, which helps, but the angular momentum is larger for the larger motor, which contributes to efficiency. A motor with a smaller rotor would be more efficient overall. But electric motors are so efficient to begin with, the improvement would be tiny, at best it would be a few percent. The difference in range between the Model S 100D and P100D is about 6%. To get reasonable performance from the Model 3 with a smaller motor, it probably can't be much smaller than the smaller motor on the Model S/X.
     
    • Informative x 1
  15. wycolo

    wycolo Active Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,501
    Location:
    WY
    > What is inefficient about the current motor? [diamond.g]

    GM uses permanent magnet motors geared to turn lower rpm. Tesla uses wound rotors and uses higher rpm gearing. Once the M3 is released it might be possible to run tight comparisons with the Bolt to try to rank these variables. But based on my experience with the 'monstrous' Spark EV motor I must say that it is very efficient. So motor size is not necessarily an impediment to energy saving esp when the tall gearing is always there to reduce rotational inertia. [too many variables, so little time . . . ]
    --
     
  16. scaesare

    scaesare Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,319
    Location:
    NoVA
    Well of course I'm not referring to truck & trailer speed limits for what a single car would need to do to keep up with the flow of traffic.

    According to the CA DOT, the speed limit from Victorville where he charged to the stat line near NV is 70MPH. So I assume he was doing about that.

    He charged at Victorville to 90% (214 miles range), and he says he traveled the 180 mile with significant charge left. He says he made it with significant miles left. He later mentions trying the return leg with 80% charge (~190 miles), so I'd guess he had at least 24 miles of range left over. The ~725' drop in elevation undoubtedly helped.

    I expect the fact that he likely needed greater than rated charge to make the trip despite a decent drop in elevation likely indicates that at 70mph the Bolt's Cd is coming in to play. Still the not dire situation some had predicted, but I think the discussion of aero impact are likely seen here.

    I can typically get rated range@70 with flat elevation and better than rated with a drop like that. I suspect the Model 3 would have an easier time as well. I'd guess that at the driving speeds most would be comfortable with on that stretch (~80), that the 90% charge may have been pushing necessary.

    Overall, not bad, IMO.
     
  17. wycolo

    wycolo Active Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,501
    Location:
    WY
    > . . whether the CCS infrastructure today would allow a Bolt EV to travel to Las Vegas from SoCal. Apparently somebody has just done that. . . [McRat]

    NOW would be the time for CCS operators to actually promote long distance BOLT trips by installing in Barstow/Baker to enable easy Vegas shots and then advertising such. Likewise with Phoenix mid-point CCS chargers. Then the media will be tripping all over this with free publicity.
    --
     
  18. Jeff N

    Jeff N Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,294
    Victorville is about 700 feet higher than Las Vegas.

    Another factor is that the last 60-70 miles towards Las Vegas drops about 2,700 feet and then rolls flat with a charging opportunity at Primm about 44 miles before Vegas.

    Heading towards Victorville, the last 60-70 miles gains about 1,000 feet in elevation and there are no J1772 or CCS charging opportunities yet.
     
  19. Jeff N

    Jeff N Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,294
    A 4 stall "350 kW" CCS charging plaza is being installed in Baker by EVgo and is aiming to be operational in about 4 months.
     
    • Informative x 1
  20. scaesare

    scaesare Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,319
    Location:
    NoVA
    Looking back, my phrasing may have been awkward, when I referred to the return trip, which I only did as a reference, to guesstimate how much range he may have had remaining on the initial leg, as he opted to only charge to 80% coming back, so he assumed 190 miles would be enough.

    In any case, that elevation drop is indeed what I had noted:

    Thanks for chiming in where I was unclear.
     

Share This Page