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

[EinSV]

Now that's a deal! Bolt sales in June will likely top 2k for sure.

Only 2K sales per month sales for a car in the $40K price range -- accomplished by offering cheap deals like $149/mo leases and $5K+ off MSRP on sales - should send a clear message to GM to go back to the drawing board.

They could easily be selling 20-40 times that number with a more compelling BEV offering in this price range. While the Bolt is only in limited markets so far, the dismal sales in California should be setting off alarm bells at GM.

As a former Detroiter, I would really like to see GM succeed in the long run -- Detroit has already suffered enough due in significant part to a long history of short-sighted management by the auto industry. But GM is not going to succeed without compelling BEV offerings in the very near future. For GM to be a player, it needs to shift its R&D and capital investment resources into battery and BEV drivetrain technology and production, as well as develop a credible plan for fast-charging networks.

GM also should let its engineers and designers loose to make compelling EVs, instead of an econo-box like the Bolt that seems designed specifically to appeal to only a small niche who are already in the market for EVs, so as to avoid impacting sales of GM's more profitable vehicles.

I find it odd that so many GM "fans" spend so much time on this Tesla forum. To really help GM move forward, it seems to me the effort would be better spent convincing GM to change course and make the major, long-term investments in BEVs that are necessary to compete with Tesla, the Chinese EV manufacturers and their foreign subsidiaries (e.g. Volvo), and whichever of the legacy ICE manufacturers eventually decide to make the necessary investments in BEVs.

 

[gregd]

You don't want to hear this, but Mary has quite a bit experience with electrical engineering and electric cars. She knows more about cars than anybody on this site, including electric ones. You don't get to the top of food chain in the auto industry by sleeping with the boss or affirmative action. She had to be better than every single CEO available, and then some, to get the job. Because like it or not, corporations know that a certain percentage of men do not consider women competent. So she had to be better than the best male candidate by more than that percentage. She's arguably the brightest automotive CEO currently holding that title. And she knows electric cars.

Not everybody likes to play with their cars. So you can drive any GM cars just like a 2010 car, even the race versions and electrics. Or you can play with them. That's my hobby.

You can think of it as legacy if you wish. I think of it as good engineering. Grandma can drive a 650HP CTS-V with no fear, but it will also hang with some serious track cars if you turn off the babysitters and step on it's tail.

The Bolt is the same way with one minor exception. They did not use a completely conventional console shifter. It's more like a auto-manual gate. It's just slightly different than a normal console shifter and far simpler to understand than some.

I have no reason to doubt Mary's engineering or management credentials, but rather I'm trying to understand the unstated forces driving GM's electric program. Are they serious (this time), or are they using (milking) the structure of tax incentives and legal statutes (dealership laws) only to further their core ICE business, or somewhere in between? Their actions appear to me to be all of the above. They have designed and brought to market a very competent BEV with the Bolt, and a great transition car with the Volt, yet at the same time they have been aggressive in pushing the legal landscape to maintain the status quo.

Running Conway's Law in reverse, can we use how their products behave to learn what's going on behind the scenes? To your point, the fact that someone only familiar with an ICE can get into, drive, and maintain a Bolt (arguably more easily than someone with a Model S) suggests that they are serious about enabling the masses to drive electric. At the same time, however, their actions on the legal and (lack of) marketing, production, and distribution front suggest otherwise.

My original point in posting this slight distraction was to look at the behavior of the Volt when out of gas as perhaps an indicator that they are, in fact, not serious about moving the masses across the chasm to BEVs. Or, at least, they had an opportunity to further that cause (even if rarely experienced), and missed it. The "klaxons and warnings" could have been focused more on about protecting the drive train ("Please add gas at your earliest opportunity to protect the drive train components"), or a simple reminder that the range-extension aspect of the gas engine was no longer available, versus going into tail-between-the-legs limp-home mode in spite of having a fully competent and charged BEV at the ready. The behavior was gas-first vs BEV-first in terms of the car's behavior and user interface in that specific situation.

Yes, perhaps I'm picking at nits, but they are often more telling than the packaged corporate marketing we get. Actions speaking louder, and all that.

 

[wdolson]

I did a search of dealer inventory in the Portland area. Oddly Chevrolet's website allows you to see inventory of every car or truck they make except the Bolt.

I did do a search on autotrader and the dealers in Portland itself had only one Bolt each, there were none at the Vancouver, WA dealership. For some reason McMinville (SW of Portland) had something like 28 in stock.

 

[wdolson]

I was having some problems with autotrader on my primary browser. I loaded up another browser and it looks like most of the dealers in Portland have at least a few and the Vancouver, WA dealer has 4. I'm thinking of swinging by the Vancouver dealer to look at the car and see what people are talking about.

 

[RobStark]

There are 2076 Bolt EVs in stock within 100 miles of Los Angeles.

Cars.com

 

[wdolson]

I went to the local Chevy dealer and looked at a Bolt on Saturday. I think the problem with the seats is they are convex. Most seats are kind of concave, but the lower portion felt like I was sitting on a sort of padded log. I also think the lack of power seats would be a deal killer for me. I've never been able to get manual seats adjusted so they are comfortable for me.

The cargo space in the "way back" behind the back seats was pretty poor, though I think the backseat legroom was a bit better than a lot of smaller cars. With the back seats folded down it wasn't too bad.

It also has hand holds on the inside roof of the car. That's a big deal for people with mobility problems. I have a friend with fibermialga and she's a Tesla fangirl, but she struggles to get out of my car, even when I have the suspension up all the way. The headroom is also better than the Model S, though that isn't a big issue for me (I have long legs and a short torso).

I haven't seen a Model 3 yet, but from what I have seen I think I would probably opt for it over the Bolt, though I think the Bolt stacks up favorably to other smaller EVs out there like the Leaf.

 

[Jeff N]

[

The cargo space in the "way back" behind the back seats was pretty poor,

Did you consider that the flat loading floor at the same level as the hatch opening can optionally be dropped down a few inches to a lower level? The Bolt's 16.9 cubic foot hatch storage is bigger than some conventional mid-size sedan trunks. Plus, with the camera-based rear view mirror, you can easily load items up to the ceiling without blocking the rear view.

though I think the backseat legroom was a bit better than a lot of smaller cars.

It's better than some large cars like the Model S as well.

Did you just sit in the car or did you take it for a spin?

 

[wycolo]

Is it that the BOLT has limited space available for driver's seat? So you can't order a custom Recaro seat like in 'money is nothing' days of yore? Perhaps your own physical attributes are well outside the bell curve.

 

[McRat]

Why is GM building a better Bolt that is necessary for CARB? Because of what many of us suspected since day one:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/04/...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

I would not believe that 100+ car part though. Those are just the cars logging EV miles for QA purposes, not all the CTF cars in all programs.

 

[wdolson]

[
Did you consider that the flat loading floor at the same level as the hatch opening can optionally be dropped down a few inches to a lower level? The Bolt's 16.9 cubic foot hatch storage is bigger than some conventional mid-size sedan trunks. Plus, with the camera-based rear view mirror, you can easily load items up to the ceiling without blocking the rear view.

The Model S has a loading floor pretty even with the hatch lip, and has a pretty significant "smuggler's hold" under the floor behind the rear wheels. The rear facing jump seats drop into there if you have those, but for those cars without the seats, it's extra storage space. On my road trip to California I put an ice chest down there and still had room for the computer scanner I had to take with me.

One of the reasons I didn't settle for an available ICE was the poor cargo space in most modern sedans. The Fusion PHEV only has 8 cf of trunk space.

Two things the Bolt has Tesla did not think of was the camera mirror (which is an option in the Bolt, the base model we looked at didn't have it) and the paddle shifters to adjust regen on the fly. You can do mostly the same thing with the Model S/X by modulating your foot on the accelerator and I'm getting pretty good at it, but the paddles shifters is easier to control. And with the Model S/X you can display the rear view camera on the center screen full time if you want, which does do the same thing as the camera/mirror, but I think the mirror idea is a better implementation.

It's better than some large cars like the Model S as well.

Did you just sit in the car or did you take it for a spin?

The back seat on the Bolt is roomier than most cars. I see the article from the NYT McRat posted and I do think GM is thinking about autonomous taxis and using the Bolt design for that purpose. Even if taxis that small don't take off in the US, they probably would be popular in some countries.

We didn't take a test drive, we only had a few minutes to stop and look.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Why is GM building a better Bolt that is necessary for CARB? Because of what many of us suspected since day one:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/04/...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

I would not believe that 100+ car part though. Those are just the cars logging EV miles for QA purposes, not all the CTF cars in all programs.

Sorry, still don't really buy it. I have seen many of the Cruise Bolts driving around already in person. The sensors are no better integrated than the Google RX 450h that have been converted. It seems obvious to me the self driving parts are tacked on as an afterthought rather than something designed in from the start.

 

[Jeff N]

Two things the Bolt has Tesla did not think of was the camera mirror (which is an option in the Bolt, the base model we looked at didn't have it) and the paddle shifters to adjust regen on the fly. You can do mostly the same thing with the Model S/X by modulating your foot on the accelerator and I'm getting pretty good at it, but the paddles shifters is easier to control.

My impression is that the Bolt EV's 'go pedal' regen control in 'L' mode is at least as strong in terms of 'g force' deceleration as the Tesla Model S. The Bolt's paddle regen controls are then operating to increase regen in addition to that.

We didn't take a test drive, we only had a few minutes to stop and look.

You should go back and take a test drive. I'm interested to read about your impression.

 

[Jeff N]

Sorry, still don't really buy it. I have seen many of the Cruise Bolts driving around already in person. The sensors are no better integrated than the Google RX 450h that have been converted. It seems obvious to me the self driving parts are tacked on as an afterthought rather than something designed in from the start.

GM's Cruise Automation subsidiary's adaptation of the Bolt EV is clearly a 'science project' rather than a final production quality self-driving option although the LIDAR sensor towers do bear a remarkable resemblance to San Francisco's Coit Tower where Cruise is located and where much of the testing is taking place:

 

[WannabeOwner]

camera mirror

I've not seen one so no idea if it is a problem, or not, but I wonder if having to shift eye-focal-length when looking into the camera-mirror is an issue (compared to using the rear view or wing mirror).

 

[Saghost]

I've not seen one so no idea if it is a problem, or not, but I wonder if having to shift eye-focal-length when looking into the camera-mirror is an issue (compared to using the rear view or wing mirror).

I'll defer to other folks who have personal experience about how much of an issue it is, but from the reviews I know that the mirror camera doesn't have any fancy focal shifting - you do need to focus on the mirror itself rather than infinity like a typical mirror.

Of course, the mirror is about the same distance the instrument panel is...

 

[FlatSix911]

Why is GM building a better Bolt that is necessary for CARB? Because of what many of us suspected since day one:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/04/...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

I would not believe that 100+ car part though. Those are just the cars logging EV miles for QA purposes, not all the CTF cars in all programs.

DETROIT — The chief executive of General Motors, an automaker synonymous with Detroit, saw the future of driving not in the Motor City but on the streets of San Francisco. Mary T. Barra, a G.M. lifer who had worked her way from engineer to the top, was in the back seat of a prototype self-driving electric car as it wound its way through the city’s downtown a year ago. She wanted to see for herself whether automation was ready to take over from a driver — safely, and on a mass scale. How would it react, for example, when it reached an intersection as a light turned yellow?

Driving in a situation like that, “you have to make a decision,” she recalled in a recent interview. “Generally if you decide to go, you decide to speed up. Or you stop.” If the technology works, she said, it will make the right decision: “The car knows.” After that drive, Ms. Barra made her own decision to speed up, convinced that such cars were worth betting the company on. Within six months after what she called her “aha! moment” in San Francisco, a fleet of self-driving Chevrolet Bolts, the company’s new electric car, was being built at a G.M. assembly plant in Michigan, the pace accelerated at the direction of Ms. Barra and her senior management team.

It was a first for any major car company, and the first leg of a race she is determined to win. The question now is whether a company identified with the industry’s bygone glory days can be a trendsetter in 21st-century transportation — and beat out Silicon Valley rivals like Google, Tesla and Uber with no legacy business to encumber them...

 

[McRat]

Sorry, still don't really buy it. I have seen many of the Cruise Bolts driving around already in person. The sensors are no better integrated than the Google RX 450h that have been converted. It seems obvious to me the self driving parts are tacked on as an afterthought rather than something designed in from the start.

Time will tell. I've never known Mary to be prone to hyperbole.

I've not seen one so no idea if it is a problem, or not, but I wonder if having to shift eye-focal-length when looking into the camera-mirror is an issue (compared to using the rear view or wing mirror).

It's bizarre at first and takes getting used to. It's harder to judge distances and detect police cars behind you. The magnification is different when in Video mode as opposed to Mirror mode. And if you put it at the wrong (right?) angle it will ghost the Video and Mirror together so you can sort of choose without flipping the switch. The best place to aim the mirror for Video mode is right at you, seems to work best for me.

 

[WannabeOwner]

The best place to aim the mirror for Video mode is right at you, seems to work best for me

Interesting, thanks.

 

[bro1999]

IIRC, GM owns a patent for the "Regen on demand" paddle. I don't think any other manufacturer has a paddle on the steering wheel that engages Regen with a single press.

I know some plugins have paddles that ADJUST the level of Regen to varying levels by pressing then several times, but none operate like in GM vehicles.

 

[wycolo]

> It spent $1 billion on Cruise Automation, a Silicon Valley start-up

Really, 1 Billion?? But not a British billion of course, but merely a thousand million, the cheesy US definition of the word. Still, that's a lot to slide out to the center of the poker table. For their next ploy maybe GM could front a Billion to establish a DCFC network alongside Tesla's. How does this compare to Tesla's investment in the GigaFactories? I need help in 'thinking big'.
--