Of course, the entire premise is that GM can afford to lose money on it forever and Tesla's financial position is precarious. Of course, he's also wrong. GM can't "build hundreds of thousands of Tesla-like vehicles much faster than Tesla" at a "flip a switch" because GM doesn't have access to that much cell manufacturing. It takes years to build up cell manufacturing capacity.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Chevy Bolt - 200 mile range for $30k base price (after incentive)
- Thread starter FredTMC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bolt chevy Electric Vehicles review
Of course, the entire premise is that GM can afford to lose money on it forever and Tesla's financial position is precarious. Of course, he's also wrong. GM can't "build hundreds of thousands of Tesla-like vehicles much faster than Tesla" at a "flip a switch" because GM doesn't have access to that much cell manufacturing. It takes years to build up cell manufacturing capacity.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I don't believe this is true. The Volt and ELR had a 70% warranty. The significant part of the Bolt warranty isn't necessarily the exact amount, but rather that they lowered the amount vs the Volt and ELR.
As for Tesla, people aren't worried about Tesla given their packs have been proven to do well on degradation.
The scary part with the Bolt is that GM has it set to always charge to 100% by default, likely thanks to the EPA rating rule change in 2012.
There is an option for a lower max, hilltop reserve mode, but I don't many expect owners are going to use it unless they actually live on top of a hill - I haven't seen anyone from GM or the dealers explaining that folks should really use that mode unless they knew they'll need the extra range that day.
That means a whole lot of Bolts will be sitting at "100%" a lot of the time.
I'm not sure how high GM picked the user 100% to be, and I don't think anyone has experience with the chemistry the Bolt uses, but that's certainly cause to be concerned about how battery life will work out.
Electrek is fairly OK overall, but they do have a massive pro-Tesla bias (and a TSLA ticker...) and anti-GM bias. That much is obvious.
Not if the battery is 64-65kWh as the initial data is showing. If true, like the Volt, it cannot sit at 100% charge. If the true SOC window is 59kWh, there could be 10% buffer.
I don't much mind the bias as much as I do the zig-zagging. "I am absolutely convinced 100% you should take a left turn at the big oak tree", then shortly afterwards, "What??? I told you to turn RIGHT!!! didn't I?"
I use it and I don't live on top of a hill. Unless you count the 4 foot decline from the top of my driveway to the street.
And even at 100% SOC, it's not truly 100% since the Bolt's actual battery size is between 64-65 kWh. Owners that activate HTR will sit at ~83% SOC raw after a "full" 90% charge.
BluestarE3
Active Member
Even discounting any purported bias or opinion in the article, the sales numbers did dip and that those dealerships did discount their Bolts. I'm not claiming these trends necessarily signal doom and gloom for the future of the Bolt, but facts are facts. Unless one subscribes to the political expedience of "alt.facts".
Even discounting any purported bias or opinion in the article, the sales numbers did dip and that those dealerships did discount their Bolts. I'm not claiming these trends necessarily signal doom and gloom for the future of the Bolt, but facts are facts. Unless one subscribes to the political expedience of "alt.facts".
I'm not sure Blame Trump works when negotiating OTD pricing on cars.
The 'used car salesperson' lost the election.
Even discounting any purported bias or opinion in the article, the sales numbers did dip and that those dealerships did discount their Bolts. I'm not claiming these trends necessarily signal doom and gloom for the future of the Bolt, but facts are facts. Unless one subscribes to the political expedience of "alt.facts".
Nothing wrong with reporting facts, of course. But combining of them such as the suggestive February sales number and individual dealer action on discounting is a bit suspect editorially. As is the sales stagnation claim. Can the facts really support causality here? Or is it just the nature of the dealership model that they do discounts at times... and ramp-up that deliveries are not super big?
Do we really have data that sales have stagnated and dealers are having to discount to get rid of the cars? Really?
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
As I said, one of the unknowns here is just where GM put "100%". I'm sure it isn't as high as the rated capacity 100% would be.
Even if it is at 90% that means more degradation than 80%, etc. How much is acceptable? What's the right trade-off between weight/cost of pack vs long term degradation? Lots of complicated decisions to make.
I wasn't saying the Bolt will definitely have a big problem, and I'm still not. I said there is cause for concern and we don't know enough yet, and I think that's true.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
It largely depends on where the buffer and the SOC window is (this is easy to tell if using DC charging and just looking at the battery voltage during a 100% charge).
If the buffer is at the bottom, then the fact there is extra capacity does not really matter in terms of staying out of true 100% SOC, given 100% indicated SOC = 100% true SOC. I suppose you would know better what 100% indicated SOC corresponds to (what is the ending voltage or true SOC).
It's not a hybrid. Why would you have significant bottom buffer?
In the Volt drivetrain, the large bottom buffer is to augment the ICE engine when you floor the go-pedal. The car is 111kW-120kW peak electric motor power, but it has only a 62 or 75kW ICE. So to always have 100% rated HP, it uses the bottom buffer to augment the ICE, even if the battery is "0 miles". If the grade is long enough, it will reduce power to the ICE rating.
However, on an EV, there is nothing to augment. You need to stay above the voltage that bricks the battery, but that number is way lower than 0 mile point, you really can't get that low. The power fall off so much before you get there, there is no point in driving it.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Tesla uses a bottom buffer for anti bricking (as you noted). Other than software limited 40kWh and 60kWh packs and the Roadster, none of the Teslas have a top buffer, only a bottom buffer. The buffer prevents self discharge and also cold weather (the cell voltage may drop from low temperatures) from damaging the cells.
Having a bottom buffer also avoids turtle mode like the Leaf uses. Near the end of charge, the battery will only have ~65-70% of its nominal power capability (from the drop to 2.5V from 3.6-3.75V nominal per cell; it may actually be worse once voltage sag is factored in). A lot of manufacturers use an earlier cut off (like 2.8V) to avoid the low power region.
This is all academic however, we need to see actual data from the Bolt. But I doubt it uses zero bottom buffer though.
For most lithium ion chemistries, engineers typically choose a bigger low buffer than a top one. I suspect it is because the voltages are low at that point and the drop off is potentially sudden. Also, I think there is more damage from the bottom than the top.
LargeHamCollider
Battery cells != scalable
Not sure about NCA cells but LFP cells are definitely damaged more by over discharge than by overcharge.
When you consider that most folk only drive under 30mi a day, and plug in at home, an EV that has a very high top window is going to surrender lifespan for most vehicles. I seriously doubt GM did that and still warranties the battery capacity.
It is a possible reason why Tesla does not warranty capacity. You could abuse the battery unnecessarily by full charging and letting it sit all the time, especially in hot climates.
It won't answer the complete question, but IIRC, the Tesla won't regen at peak kW on a 100% charge? That would mean there is no top buffer. But I thought I read the Bolt will, at least briefly? The "hill charge" is needed by people who live at altitude and commute to low lands, which is not that unusual in California.
It is a possible reason why Tesla does not warranty capacity. You could abuse the battery unnecessarily by full charging and letting it sit all the time, especially in hot climates.
It won't answer the complete question, but IIRC, the Tesla won't regen at peak kW on a 100% charge? That would mean there is no top buffer. But I thought I read the Bolt will, at least briefly? The "hill charge" is needed by people who live at altitude and commute to low lands, which is not that unusual in California.
UI defaults are only changed about 5% of the time on average. I'd bet that Tesla's are higher, but not much. I'd also think that the Bolt would be similar to Tesla's percentage.
Do users change their settings? » UIE Brain Sparks
It will be interesting to see what the degradation's are in about a year. Hopefully less than 10%, but I'm a bit pessimistic.
Do users change their settings? » UIE Brain Sparks
It will be interesting to see what the degradation's are in about a year. Hopefully less than 10%, but I'm a bit pessimistic.
Cars are a bit different. We are very used to altering their behavior and settings. In fact, it is dangerous to operate a motor vehicle without adjusting it to suit you. AND YOU!!! YOU TOUCH MY DAMN MIRROR AGAIN AND YOU WILL BE CALLED ONE_ARM_JOE!!!
Similar threads
