Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
The question is... most people were driving 75+mph on I-95 this past weekend, with cruise control set to 79 mph for many miles on end. What kind of range do you have in that situation? And we already know the situation after driving 2-3 hours... the Bolt charges slow, mostly under 50 kW if you can find a free plug. It just isn't the kind of vehicle that brings about the EV transition as it should given this limitation.
I'm just back from another road trip from SF to LA.

Here are some real-world numbers. On the way back, I stayed overnight in Bakersfield and put a full charge on the car. I then drove back on CA-99 with an hour and 15 minute or so layover in Atwater to recharge the Bolt during lunch. Total trip time was around 6 hours from Bakersfield for ~290 miles today. Google estimates a non-stop trip time of 4.5 hours.

During the first segment back I reset the trip odometer, efficiency calculator, and average speed calculator in the car while on the freeway and recorded a ~100 mile stretch on flat Central Valley highway at 90-95F, tires underinflated by ~2 PSI (36 PSI cold, 40 PSI hot), the A/C set to automatic mode at 73F target temperature, cruise control set to 76 mph, and apparently calm conditions with little to no wind.

Over that stretch my average speed was calculated at about 74 mph due to rare and temporary mild congestion slowdowns. My average efficiency was 3.4 miles per kWh from the battery or about 300 Wh per mile. That's consistent with a range of around 190-200 miles with 58-59 kWh of available energy.

My starting battery range estimate was a bit over 200 miles from previous driving the night before at a similar speed. I drove around 166 miles to Atwater and arrived with about 33 miles of range remaining.
 
I will do a longer write later, but this is a shot of the energy display after 3 days of driving from MD to CT to PA and back to MD. Several DCFC and L2 partial charges. I was driving 5-10 mph ABOVE the speed limits (so probably 70 mph average) almost the entire time, unlike last weekend, with the AC blasting at 70 for the majority of the time. Temps were well into the 90s this weekend.

Almost all highway driving to boot....mainly on the NJTP. Got to try out both new EVgo locations on the NJTP colocated with existing Superchargers.

Complete round-trip numbers:
IMG_20170703_223955778.jpg
Molly Pitcher EVgo stations (100A max):
IMG_20170703_123252864.jpg
MD to CT trip meter:
IMG_20170702_112717861_HDR.jpg
CT to PA to MD trip meter:
IMG_20170703_223938389.jpg
Here are stretches of the return drive to MD captured in Torque Pro...mostly 70+:
Screenshot_20170704-054858.png
Screenshot_20170704-054913.png
Screenshot_20170704-054932.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff N
During the first segment back I reset the trip odometer, efficiency calculator, and average speed calculator in the car while on the freeway and recorded a ~100 mile stretch on flat Central Valley highway at 90-95F, tires underinflated by ~2 PSI (36 PSI cold, 40 PSI hot), the A/C set to automatic mode at 73F target temperature, cruise control set to 76 mph, and apparently calm conditions with little to no wind.

Over that stretch my average speed was calculated at about 74 mph due to rare and temporary mild congestion slowdowns. My average efficiency was 3.4 miles per kWh from the battery or about 300 Wh per mile. That's consistent with a range of around 190-200 miles with 58-59 kWh of available energy.

Very interesting. Thanks for the info.

I did a similar run twice recently in my 2013 Model S P85, with 267 and 287 Wh/mile, AC on, first time with no additional passengers, 2nd time with 3 passengers. My cruise control was set to 78-80 mph most of the trip, but also both hit congestion at the beginning, more so the first time. I wasn't trying to data collect, so there were speeds involved going with the fastest of traffic on I-95 that I won't admit to here. There was enough traffic and surface streets to have an average of 65 mph overall, but the Wh/mi didn't change much from when I looked at it just as I was getting off the highway.

I will try to make a run with an eye towards data collection, but I think the Model S is slightly more efficient at 75+ mph than the Bolt. However, 190+ miles of range with a ~75 mph speed is quite good. That means most drivers in good weather should be able to see 170-180 mile range, driving the way most people do on U.S. highways. That means Supercharging equivalent jumps of 120-140 miles should be comfortable in a variety of conditions. The cadence would be more acceptable if the charge rate was higher.

A Model S driver has to pay attention to avoiding excessive energy use for acceleration and drive in a manner to fully utilize a lower level of regenerative braking to get efficiency comparable to a Bolt off the highway. I think it is very easy to bleed of a lot of energy using the AC induction motor(s) in high torque situations, pushing the average consumption to 300-375 Wh/mile easily when driving surface streets with a lot of stop lights. A Bolt with its newer power electronics and permanent magnet motor does far better there. But on the highway, cruising at 75-80 mph, the Model S has far lower consumption, where I can easily achieve 275 Wh/mi in favorable conditions with AC on, calm weather, and flat elevation.

I do think this highlights why the EPA range calculations are not all that useful for US drivers. They are certainly better than NEDC or JP08... Europeans should look to the EPA results to match their typical driving patterns. For the US, the long distance range is the issue for 200+ mile large battery vehicles. Idaho National Labs AVT did run testing at steady state 70 mph, but with their budget cuts and low visibility, I am afraid we won't see much more good data from them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff N
Having the EPA calculate economy based on 75, 85, or 95 is sort of silly. It's the kill zone.

75-85 mph is a suckers bet unless you have a squirrel out front (a car that is zig-zagging trying to drive fast). But I suppose somebody needs to feed Jerry and Friends. Drive faster or slower, but not in the Kill Zone where most freeway radar tickets are written.

Like my daughter just found out, yes you CAN get a ticket for 75 mph by CHP radar. If you're going to drive at a speed you get radar'd at, go for it, 85-99 mph. It's not much more $, can still be taken off by traffic school, and is still a one pointer. Just keep it under 100 mph. There is a pricey ticket that can be written for 101+ mph, it's like DUI.

I was ironic to read in this thread about the impossibility of being ticketed at 75 mph, and now I have to deal with it since she is on our insurance. In a perfect world, the guy who posted that 75 mph in California is immune to tickets would pay the insurance boost.

To an extent, I consider myself a 'professional ticket generator'. I've had at least 30 tickets in the first million miles, 2 license suspensions for excessive points, 1 bench suspension for Exhibition of Speed, no DUIs. I simply drive too damn fast. Texas gives written warnings, California gives Notice to Appears.

OK, so what speeds should the EPA use? Well most miles are commuter miles. This normally involves a combination of surface streets and highways. It is almost never all highway. It is normally done at the worst congestion times. It is almost never done at 6 am Sunday and Holidays.

This is probably why even though I occasionally tag 100mph briefly, and spin the tires from a stoplight, I get about EPA Combined economy on a month-to-month basis. Those who drive hours at a time at 77 mph aren't really 'average drivers' when it comes to miles driven by US drivers. They might THINK they are, but that is delusional. Congestion is caused by popularity of roads and drive time. If you are going 77 everywhere, you simply aren't driving when and where most people are.

The byproduct of the EPA getting pessimistic with their test loop, is that I can beat it without impeding traffic. Obey the limits, drive when most people are driving, in areas where most people live, and I will get up to 30% higher than EPA highway. 49 EPA hwy mi vs 70.4 congested hwy miles. That's an extraordinary loop, but 66-68 miles is common at 9 am in SoCal freeways.

So if I were to buy an EV/PHEV car or truck, how would I judge what range I really need? By somebody who vacations or commutes? Range costs money. Sometimes it's REALLY expensive. Like the jump between a Leaf and MS100D.
 
Last edited:
  • Funny
Reactions: FlatSix911
I suppose the real test will be to privately stage a Baker Sea-to-shining-Sea Memorial EV run. This would be interesting, but would require GPS tracking due the ease of towing. Towing is not a help to ICE entries, but sure is to EVs.
 
Europeans should look to the EPA results to match their typical driving patterns.
Europe is transitioning this year away from NEDC to a new framework called the Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicles Test Procedure or WLTP that generates EPA-like estimates.

Read about it here:
The WLTP: How a new test procedure for cars will affect fuel consumption values in the EU | International Council on Clean Transportation

The Bolt/Ampera-e gets 238 miles EPA combined, 323 miles NEDC (520 km), and 236 miles WLTP (380 km).
 

Thanks.

That driver with the "nightmare" trip was just driving _normally_. Naive would be a better word than clueless.

It's ridiculous that EVgo is still installing 100A CCS chargers, _especially_ at turnpike service areas.
At this year's rate the Bolt is outselling the e-Golf and i3 combined, will overtake the e-Golf in sales in 2 months, and the i3 in about 2 years. All 3 cars have batteries in the 320-360V range. Long range will be the new norm. What are they on?

And some people say that Tesla should have used CCS. Sheesh.
 
I suppose the real test will be to privately stage a Baker Sea-to-shining-Sea Memorial EV run. This would be interesting, but would require GPS tracking due the ease of towing. Towing is not a help to ICE entries, but sure is to EVs.

It has been done in a Tesla. The current record is apparently 57 hours, 48 minutes - from Portofino Inn to Red Ball Garage. Cannonball Baker Sea-To-Shining-Sea Memorial Trophy Dash - Wikipedia

It will be interesting to see when a CCS (or CHAdeMO) EV can approach that number.
 
Thanks.

That driver with the "nightmare" trip was just driving _normally_. Naive would be a better word than clueless.

It's ridiculous that EVgo is still installing 100A CCS chargers, _especially_ at turnpike service areas.
At this year's rate the Bolt is outselling the e-Golf and i3 combined, will overtake the e-Golf in sales in 2 months, and the i3 in about 2 years. All 3 cars have batteries in the 320-360V range. Long range will be the new norm. What are they on?

And some people say that Tesla should have used CCS. Sheesh.

Yeah, it is puzzling that they are still installing 100 amp stations when 150 kW stations are just now coming online (or will very soon).
Maybe they got a good deal on some discounted 100A stations. *shrug*

But beggars can't be choosers. Without those new NJTP stations, my trip would have been a LOT more hairy.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Jeff N
Yeah, it is puzzling that they are still installing 100 amp stations when 150 kW stations are just now coming online (or will very soon).
Maybe they got a good deal on some discounted 100A stations. *shrug*

But beggars can't be choosers. Without those new NJTP stations, my trip would have been a LOT more hairy.
I would be interested in seeing the EVGo charger utilization across the country. Maybe it isn't worth it to them to install higher power chargers?
 
I would be interested in seeing the EVGo charger utilization across the country. Maybe it isn't worth it to them to install higher power chargers?
I don't know about nationwide, but you can see the utilization details for all of California on document pages 18-26 and at the tail end in Appendix D-1 in this report from EVgo last year. There may be a newer version of it issued this year but I'm not sure offhand.

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=10411

So far, there aren't that many CHAdeMO or CCS cars on the road that can take much advantage of charging above 125A so there hasn't been pressure to install faster but more expensive chargers. Many of EVgo's recent and near-term planned locations in California already have pre-installed conduit and transformers designed for easily supporting an additional 100+ kW charger.

Bolt's can apparently utilize up to 150A and the Kia Soul EV and Hyundai Ioniq Electric can apparently utilize 175-200A. No doubt, other new cars with bigger batteries coming out soon will leverage even higher charging rates including Porsche and Audi cars.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it is puzzling that they are still installing 100 amp stations when 150 kW stations are just now coming online (or will very soon).
Maybe they got a good deal on some discounted 100A stations. *shrug*

But beggars can't be choosers. Without those new NJTP stations, my trip would have been a LOT more hairy.
probably because there only about 4000 that can utilize these more than 50 kW chargers?
 
During the first segment back I reset the trip odometer, efficiency calculator, and average speed calculator in the car while on the freeway and recorded a ~100 mile stretch on flat Central Valley highway at 90-95F, tires underinflated by ~2 PSI (36 PSI cold, 40 PSI hot), the A/C set to automatic mode at 73F target temperature, cruise control set to 76 mph, and apparently calm conditions with little to no wind.

Over that stretch my average speed was calculated at about 74 mph due to rare and temporary mild congestion slowdowns. My average efficiency was 3.4 miles per kWh from the battery or about 300 Wh per mile. That's consistent with a range of around 190-200 miles with 58-59 kWh of available energy.
Jeff--Thank you for collecting and providing this data. This is the first data I have seen that I can confidently use to calibrate my Bolt EV driving efficiency model. Putting your conditions in the model initially showed that my estimate was slightly off, then I checked the actual weather conditions for Visalia and Delano yesterday morning. It looks like you had about a 4 mph tailwind, which is actually hard to notice just standing outside, but is enough to throw off the model. After I corrected for that, my prediction fell right on top of your results.

When comparing the Bolt EV highway performance to my speculative Model 3 data, the Model 3 60 is able to go 35 miles (18%) further per charge than the Bolt EV at highway speeds. Obviously, we need to know more about the Model 3 before that's anything other than a guess.
 
probably because there only about 4000 that can utilize these more than 50 kW chargers?

Well, at current sales growth in 3 months time there'll be 8000, and then another there'll be 12000 and so on.

But that wasn't the real problem in this case. The problem he had was that they were 100A instead of 125A. Pack voltages for current cars are 360V or less. He was getting 36-37kW instead of 47kW. That's 6-8 minutes extra per hour of driving beyond range. Other CCS-charging owners would have the same thing. Every CCS BEV can charge at 125A or more.

It just seems counter-intuitive that a charging company would choose to make charging worse than it needs to be.
 
It has been done in a Tesla. The current record is apparently 57 hours, 48 minutes - from Portofino Inn to Red Ball Garage. Cannonball Baker Sea-To-Shining-Sea Memorial Trophy Dash - Wikipedia

It will be interesting to see when a CCS (or CHAdeMO) EV can approach that number.

The coast to coast EV record is 51 hours, 47 minutes and it was set this morning, July 4, 2017, by a two-man team who drove a "reverse Cannonball" in a Model S 90D from the Portofino Hotel in Redondo Beach, CA to the Red Ball Garage in NYC. They beat the previous record of 55 hours set last year by a three man team.
 
Having the EPA calculate economy based on 75, 85, or 95 is sort of silly. It's the kill zone.

75-85 mph is a suckers bet unless you have a squirrel out front (a car that is zig-zagging trying to drive fast). But I suppose somebody needs to feed Jerry and Friends. Drive faster or slower, but not in the Kill Zone where most freeway radar tickets are written.

Plenty of highways in the U.S. have speed limits that are 70 mph or higher. As a result, testing at 70+ mph makes sense, as plenty of mainstream buyers will want to drive at those legal speeds. It also helps paint a more realistic all weather range.

For the one figure for all electric range, it makes more sense to use a highway, high speed figure for the U.S. The most common question people have about BEVs is about range. It’s usually the first question. And when they ask, they are not talking about how far they can go at 25-45 mph in city traffic. They are talking about hopping on the highway for a road trip range. That’s at high speed, which is legally 70-80 mph in large parts of the country.
 
Plenty of highways in the U.S. have speed limits that are 70 mph or higher. As a result, testing at 70+ mph makes sense, as plenty of mainstream buyers will want to drive at those legal speeds. It also helps paint a more realistic all weather range.

For the one figure for all electric range, it makes more sense to use a highway, high speed figure for the U.S. The most common question people have about BEVs is about range. It’s usually the first question. And when they ask, they are not talking about how far they can go at 25-45 mph in city traffic. They are talking about hopping on the highway for a road trip range. That’s at high speed, which is legally 70-80 mph in large parts of the country.

In California, we have freeways that are posted at 70 mph. But they are not in the highly populated areas (ie - you don't live or work there). 65 mph is the most common freeway posting by a wide margin. Hence how my daughter got tagged at 10 over.

The states I've driven through are not much different. Populated areas have lower freeway speeds, both posted, and actual.

As I said, Monday through Friday you will hit EPA or better in many EVs. On the weekends? You probably will not.

But 25-45 mph??? 6+ miles per kWh isn't out of the question. Few people with an EV will tell somebody that with a straight face.
 
I'm just back from another road trip from SF to LA.

Here are some real-world numbers. On the way back, I stayed overnight in Bakersfield and put a full charge on the car. I then drove back on CA-99 with an hour and 15 minute or so layover in Atwater to recharge the Bolt during lunch. Total trip time was around 6 hours from Bakersfield for ~290 miles today. Google estimates a non-stop trip time of 4.5 hours.

During the first segment back I reset the trip odometer, efficiency calculator, and average speed calculator in the car while on the freeway and recorded a ~100 mile stretch on flat Central Valley highway at 90-95F, tires underinflated by ~2 PSI (36 PSI cold, 40 PSI hot), the A/C set to automatic mode at 73F target temperature, cruise control set to 76 mph, and apparently calm conditions with little to no wind.

Over that stretch my average speed was calculated at about 74 mph due to rare and temporary mild congestion slowdowns. My average efficiency was 3.4 miles per kWh from the battery or about 300 Wh per mile. That's consistent with a range of around 190-200 miles with 58-59 kWh of available energy.

My starting battery range estimate was a bit over 200 miles from previous driving the night before at a similar speed. I drove around 166 miles to Atwater and arrived with about 33 miles of range remaining.
Those are pretty respectable numbers... Thanks @Jeff N