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

[mtndrew1]

All electric car sales are currently a rounding error when viewed against overall sales.
Overall plugin sales for 2017 after 7 months are a little over 100k currently. That's about 2 months of Silverado sales.

And that's the point. The Bolt looked to be the first breakout EV with normal styling, excellent range, and stout performance. It was the first car that could move the needle. It's not doing so (so far).

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Yes, thus the "made up expectations" comment of mine. I would also use the word "journalist" loosely describing Freddy. He is a glorified blogger more than anything. To list his Tesla referral link in his profile is telling enough.

You wrote sales targets. He wrote about expectations and pointed to the inventory as evidence of weakness. (I disagree, given that it's the run-up to summer and the break. Growth combined with the incentives that GM have loaded on the cars in California just means "not wildly successful".).

I don't claim to run a legitimate news organization like Electrek does.

Really? Where does it say that on the site? Journalism is storytelling, and Internet journalism generally particularly desperate clickbait journalism.

I am simply a blogger. Big difference.

He's writing to be read to make money selling readers to advertisers. What are you writing to sell?

And max charge rate is likely 55 kW, give or take a couple kW, but still no real world confirmation yet.

So, not the 80kW that you were so incredibly certain of because of the wording in the user manual that refers to 80kW chargers?

You were wrong because you ignored the fact that GM was being coy on the question of charging speed.
You were wrong because you chose to believe that the 90 miles in 30 minutes previously stated by GM was superseded information.
You were wrong because you chose not to consider charger rating*.
You were wrong because you _wanted_ to believe.
You were wrong because of _your_ bias.

Anyway, have you considered that he might not be biased? He might just understand how to make money telling stories to Tesla fans.

* Which you feel the effects of every time you use a 100A "50kW" charger.

 

[Jeff N]

Yes, and this is probably indicates the trend over the next five years. High end cars may be the only vehicles charging at high rates. The Bolt and similar will not be great travel cars due to this limitation.

Actually, I greatly enjoy road trips in my Bolt. Perhaps "Type A" personalities gotta have a car that charges at 200 kW but some of us are okay with eating lunch or grabbing a coffee while charging.

You were wrong because you ignored the fact that GM was being coy on the question of charging speed.
You were wrong because you chose to believe that the 90 miles in 30 minutes previously stated by GM was superseded information.

I realize you aren't reply to me necessarily but...

From the Bolt owners manual on page 232:

When using a DC charging station with at least 80 kW of available power, it will take approximately 30 minutes to recharge from a depleted battery to an estimated 145 km (90 mi) of driving range.

 

[kelly]

Inventories may be increasing, but if I wanted to take delivery of one today, I would have to drive around 250 miles to get it. Inventory and availability for most of the U.S. land mass is still very much an issue.

I saw my first Bolt in Arizona this morning. Pretty shocked to look over at the car in the next lane and see the Bolt. Seems like I heard they were going to be available nationwide in August, so it looks like that may be true.

 

[bro1999]

You wrote sales targets. He wrote about expectations and pointed to the inventory as evidence of weakness. (I disagree, given that it's the run-up to summer and the break. Growth combined with the incentives that GM have loaded on the cars in California just means "not wildly successful".).

Semantics. If Bob says "I expect to sell 100 units this month" and someone else says "Bob said his sales target is 100 units this month", you telling me those are 2 completely different statements? The point is no one from GM has ever officially stated a "sales goal/target/expectations", and that Electrek is merely pushing what it thinks was GM's sales goal/target/expectations in order to push the "Bolt sales are weak" narrative to please their pro-TSLA audience.

Really? Where does it say that on the site? Journalism is storytelling, and Internet journalism generally particularly desperate clickbait journalism.

Ok, so you freely admit Electrek is nothing more than a glorified blog that has a set objective as far as the narrative it wants to push about Tesla and other alternative vehicle manufacturers. I'm glad you realize that Electrek is not a legitimate source for unbiased EV news.

He's writing to be read to make money selling readers to advertisers. What are you writing to sell?

I'm not selling anything. I write because I feel like writing.
Blog (noun) - a regularly updated website or web page, typically one run by an individual or small group, that is written in an informal or conversational style.

So, not the 80kW that you were so incredibly certain of because of the wording in the user manual that refers to 80kW chargers?
You were wrong because you ignored the fact that GM was being coy on the question of charging speed.
You were wrong because you chose to believe that the 90 miles in 30 minutes previously stated by GM was superseded information.
You were wrong because you chose not to consider charger rating*.
You were wrong because you _wanted_ to believe.
You were wrong because of _your_ bias.

When did I ever claim that the Bolt could absolutely, definitively charge at 80 kW? IIRC, all I've ever done is bring up the possibility of 80 kW charging SINCE IT'S MENTIONED IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL. And that the Bolt certainly could charge faster than 50 kW, which has more or less been verified by GM in public statements. All that is missing is the actual real-world charging data, which so far doesn't exist because there are literally 4 CCS stations in the world that charge quicker than 50 kW/125 amps.

And I have charged over 90 real world miles in 30 minutes (over 100 actually, as I have the photos to prove it), but you will write that off and accuse me of engineering results or some nonsense like that.

All your accusations of me being wrong are, well, completely wrong.

Anyway, have you considered that he might not be biased? He might just understand how to make money telling stories to Tesla fans.

Bias (noun) - prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.

I'll let you soak in the definition. Then go back and read any of Frank's articles (especially ones about the Bolt), and tell me again he is not biased in any way.

* Which you feel the effects of every time you use a 100A "50kW" charger.

It's not GM advertising these 100A stations as 50 kW, it's the companies that make them.

 

[bro1999]

Chevrolet Bolt Beats Out Tesla Model S To Become Consumer Reports' Range Champion

 

[scaesare]

Impressive.

I do find not making rated range at those speeds on the Tesla's interesting though. I typically can on my RWD only Model S.

 

[bro1999]

Impressive.

I do find not making rated range at those speeds on the Tesla's interesting though. I typically can on my RWD only Model S.

According to Consumer Reports' methodology, the bulk of their testing was done on the highway at 65 MPH. This should be the arena where the aero-advantaged Teslas should outshine the "aero disaster" Bolt....especially with 20-35% larger batteries and dual motor setup.

 

[Jeff N]

According to Consumer Reports' methodology, the bulk of their testing was done on the highway at 65 MPH. This should be the arena where the aero-advantaged Teslas should outshine the "aero disaster" Bolt....especially with 20-35% larger batteries and dual motor setup.

CR's test methodology tends to produce lower than EPA estimates for city driving and better than EPA for highway driving. The heavier Tesla cars are challenged on city efficiency due to the extra weight and the friction-only braking pedal.

What CR's testing does confirm is that the Bolt can drive quite efficiently on the highway at 65 mph which is the speed limit in many metro regions during commuting. The higher 70-80 mph speed limits on rural highways are more challenging for the Bolt due to its inherent design shape's effect on aerodynamics. However, with an underlying efficient powertrain, the Bolt can still turn in a long range capability of 190 miles at 75 mph which is good for road trips.

 

[mtndrew1]

Chevrolet Bolt Beats Out Tesla Model S To Become Consumer Reports' Range Champion

This matches my experience. The Bolt has incredible range even when driving without any regard for efficiency.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Impressive.

I do find not making rated range at those speeds on the Tesla's interesting though. I typically can on my RWD only Model S.

According to Consumer Reports' methodology, the bulk of their testing was done on the highway at 65 MPH. This should be the arena where the aero-advantaged Teslas should outshine the "aero disaster" Bolt....especially with 20-35% larger batteries and dual motor setup.

I was surprised too. From all range testing I have read in this forum, 65mph with no heat/AC and no headwinds you can easily achieve the EPA range in a Tesla.

I did some math and suspiciously for both the S and X, the numbers are almost exactly 90%. Sounds like they might have only did charging to the standard ~90% and not fully charged.

The video would be a lot more informative if they showed what the rated range was when they finished charging (should be EPA range or close) and what wh/mi they got on the trip meter.

Any 75D (or software limited 60D/70D) owners want to chime in on what wh/mi numbers they see at 65mph steady state? 235 miles on 72.6kWh usable implies Consumer reports got 309Wh/mi (assuming they did actually fully charge the battery).

 

[scaesare]

I was surprised too. From all range testing I have read in this forum, 65mph with no heat/AC and no headwinds you can easily achieve the EPA range in a Tesla.

I did some math and suspiciously for both the S and X the numbers are almost exactly 90%. Sounds like they might have only did charging to the standard ~90% and not fully charged.

Yeah, that was what stood out to me too... Your 90% theory definitely sounds plausible...

 

[RiverBrick]

I saw a test on a French site where an S85 with over 138,000 miles on the odometer appeared to edge a new Bolt.

They drove 172 miles at 62 mph and the dashboards displayed 36% remaining for the Tesla and 34% for the Bolt. I think a new 75D has more range than an 85 that has lost 6% of its battery capacity (estimation from the owner) but we don't know how accurate the dash readings were and how much each vehicle would have had in reserve, so it's not conclusive. An X60 in the same test ended with the battery at 21%.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Yeah, that was what stood out to me too... Your 90% theory definitely sounds plausible...

Thanks to @Jeff N pointing out CR's cycle is more of a mixed cycle, I looked at the source article (instead of Inside EVs article and the video which is misleading in characterizing it as a 65mph test), and see that this was simulating a combined cycle test.

"CR’s electric-vehicle range test involves some mixed driving, but much of it is done by driving a constant 65 mph on a highway."
Chevrolet Bolt Sets Consumer Reports' Electric-Vehicle Range Record

This explains the results. It is not indication of either Tesla's or the Bolt's range at 65mph, but rather in mixed driving. Given the huge weight difference and tire differences, it's not a surprise the Bolt performs better in mixed driving than either S or the X.

Discussion from here:
.23Cd ?

 

[scaesare]

Thanks to @Jeff N pointing out CR's cycle is more of a mixed cycle, I looked at the source article (instead of Inside EVs article and the video which is misleading in characterizing it as a 65mph test), and see that this was simulating a combined cycle test.

"CR’s electric-vehicle range test involves some mixed driving, but much of it is done by driving a constant 65 mph on a highway."
Chevrolet Bolt Sets Consumer Reports' Electric-Vehicle Range Record

This explains the results. It is not indication of either Tesla's or the Bolt's range at 65mph, but rather in mixed driving. Given the huge weight difference and tire differences, it's not a surprise the Bolt performs better in mixed driving than either S or the X.

Discussion from here:
.23Cd ?

Ah.. .interesting.

Unfortunately the "Road Test" page is behind a paywall once you get past the introduction...

 

[scaesare]

Talked to a Bolt owner at the local (Leesburg, VA) Costco today. Saw him parking and stepped over to chat for a moment. Said he loved the car and he enjoyed the range. I congratulated him on being a fellow EV'er.

The second I've seen... the other I got a glimpse of near I work in Rockville, MD.

 

[bro1999]

Chevy Bolt EV user interface: reviewer calls it best of any electric car

 

[Zoomit]

Here's another perspective on the Bolt EV user interface. These guys are obviously Tesla-biased but they are professional software developers with UI design experience. Their comments are spot on.

40 – Bolt EV Test Drive

 

[patrick40363]

Chevy Bolt EV user interface: reviewer calls it best of any electric car

The header on the link seems to be a bit misleading. The quote below from the article is as close as I could find to what the header states.

"The UI is one of the best I’ve seen in any recent car, and I’m including a test drive in a Tesla in that comment."

 

[Jeff N]

Another new data point:

Chevy Bolt EV Can Charge at 55 kW - HybridCars.com

"The new report, by the Innovative Vehicle Institute near Montreal, says the Bolt EV can likely charge at up to 55 kilowatts at a current of up to 150A when plugged into future higher-powered chargers."

Apparently confirmed.

Someone finally says they plugged an Opel Ampera-e into the 100 kW (200A max) CCS charger in Vestby, Norway.

"The charger showed the following values:
7% SOC 52.6kW
11% SOC 53.7kW
21% SOC 53.8kW
33% SOC 54.6kW
44% SOC 55.2kW
49% SOC 55.5kW"

Google Translate