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

[scottf200]

Chevy appears to have a much lower Wh/kg number than the Model S does. I was originally thinking they'd have a 50 kWh pack @ about 225 Wh/mi EPA. Given the published specs, I think it's probably going to be 210-215 miles on a full charge. They're likely going to be just as conservative with headroom in the cells - they know they get one shot to make a good first impression and hopefully have learned from Nissan. They can always open it up later for a magic range increase (or degradation suppression through hidden capacity).

I think you are on the mark here about headroom.
My 2011 Volt (3y11mo) has not appeared to lose any battery capacity but we know that it has to have.

Generally
the Gen I Volts use the area of ~22% to ~87% of the battery (65%)
the Gen II Volts use the area of ~18% to ~87% of the battery (69%)

 

[Ampster]

Makes sense. Although it's interesting they decided not to go with 18650. Anyone have more details on the LG tech they are using in the cells? Cycle life, heat tolerance, resistance to thermal runaway, etc.

Form factor doesn't necessarily dictate chemistry. Do we know if the LG Chem cells in the Bolt are cylindrical or flat?
EDIT. Subsequent picture posted of pack seems to suggest flat cells.

 

[techmaven]

60kWh is good news. Should do 200 miles pretty easily I'd think, seeing how Model S 60 got 208 EPA. Smaller (less frontal area) than Model S, so should be fine in the aero department, unless the Cd is bad (it looks good, but I haven't seen official numbers). And skinnier low rolling resistance tires should help. Hope they do well with this car -- seems like it could be a winner.

I doubt there's less CDa than a Model S. It's stubby with a length of just 164 inches (Prius is 176, Leaf is 175), has the width of the Leaf, and a height higher than the Leaf. It's cross section is likely higher than the Leaf and with less CD. The Leaf already has a higher CDa than the Model S at 7.8 sq ft:

https://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/blog_attachments/the-slipperiest-car-on-the-road.pdf

The Bolt should do very well with city driving with only a curb weight of 3600 pounds (227 more than the Leaf) for having 60 kWh of battery.

 

[scottf200]

288 cells = 60 kWh? How did they do that? Model S has over 7,000 cells.

video capture from here: Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs Revealed: 60 kWh, 0-60 In 7 Seconds

Image: http://i.imgur.com/uMdbX9K.png

 

[slyastro]

Bolt 2017: More ev range than the tesla s60 for half the price?

I think that the CHEVY BOLT will have more EV range than the Tesla Model S with the 60 kWh battery, with a curb weight of more than 800 pounds LESS!

More arguments here:

BOLT 2017: MORE EV RANGE THAN THE TESLA S60 FOR HALF THE PRICE?

 

[eye.surgeon]

You're comparing a compact economy car with a luxury car. There's more to comparisons than range. Car magazines don't rank cars based on the size of the fuel tank.

The Bolt does look like a quality product. Hope they sell a ton.

 

[TexasEV]

I can not recall tesla or musk claiming model 3 would have 200 mile range. I do not know where that number came from. Will be curious to see range. I would be very surprised if not more.

The number came from Elon several times. He said Tesla would not build a car with less than 200 miles range.

 

[scottf200]

Battery pack is 138wh/kg, Tesla is around 160wh/kg I believe.

Chevy appears to have a much lower Wh/kg number than the Model S does. I was originally thinking they'd have a 50 kWh pack @ about 225 Wh/mi EPA. Given the published specs, I think it's probably going to be 210-215 miles on a full charge. They're likely going to be just as conservative with headroom in the cells - they know they get one shot to make a good first impression and hopefully have learned from Nissan. They can always open it up later for a magic range increase (or degradation suppression through hidden capacity).

JRP3, I think FlasherZ is on the mark here about headroom.
My 2011 Volt (3y11mo) has not appeared to lose any battery capacity but we know that it has to have.

Generally
the Gen I Volts use the area of ~22% to ~87% of the battery (65%)
the Gen II Volts use the area of ~18% to ~87% of the battery (69%)

 

[stevej119]

I think that the CHEVY BOLT will have more EV range than the Tesla Model S with the 60 kWh battery, with a curb weight of more than 800 pounds LESS!

More arguments here:

BOLT 2017: MORE EV RANGE THAN THE TESLA S60 FOR HALF THE PRICE?

View attachment 107481

Isn't that similar to saying that a Honda Civic gets better mileage than a Jaguar F-Type?

 

[ecarfan]

Thanks, 60kWh battery size, confirmed, is indeed good news!
That should give the Bolt a very respectable useful range.
This is a positive step for GM. I hope that their dealers do not prove to be too resistant to selling them.

 

[ckessel]

The number came from Elon several times. He said Tesla would not build a car with less than 200 miles range.

Even further than that, he said 200 miles of "real world" range, not EPA. I think that's a big part of Tesla dropping the 60 Model S and having the 70, so the car had 200 miles of real world range.

I suspect folks expectations of the Model 3 are too high. Batteries are a big price component and the Bolt supposedly gets batteries at a $150/kwh. The Gigafactory will drive costs down, JB hoping for $100 by 2020, but that means 2017 is going to be quite a bit closer to GM's $150/kwh price. With roughly comparable battery prices, at least initially, Tesla's Model 3 has to be beat GM on build cost in other areas. That's quite a challenge given GM's scale.

I think the Model 3 will be better than the Bolt, but I'm tempering my expectations.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Chevy appears to have a much lower Wh/kg number than the Model S does. I was originally thinking they'd have a 50 kWh pack @ about 225 Wh/mi EPA. Given the published specs, I think it's probably going to be 210-215 miles on a full charge. They're likely going to be just as conservative with headroom in the cells - they know they get one shot to make a good first impression and hopefully have learned from Nissan. They can always open it up later for a magic range increase (or degradation suppression through hidden capacity).

If you work from the pieces they've given and compared to other cars you can try some rough back-calculation and guess where the range would be
- 7.2kW (225V@32A) x 9 hours = 64.8kWh

Bolt curb weight: 3580lb
Combined ratings of some other PEVs:
i3 BEV (2635 lb) - 0.27kWh/mi
30kWh Leaf (3342lb) - 0.30kWh/mi
2016 Volt (3528lb) - 0.31kWh/mi

64.8/0.27 = 240
64.8/0.30 = 216
64.8/0.31 = 209

So, similar weight to Volt, but more boxy, (should be a) simpler transmission and with a faster AC charger that should make charging more efficient.
Also, note that when rating the car, as far as I understand, the manufacture can choose the most efficient method of charging, so they might even use "slow" DC charging.

So, I'm thinking somewhere in the 210 to 220 range, but not expecting that on the highway...

 

[Yuri_G]

Wait, do you realize it has a 60 kWh battery? Per official announcement: Drive Unit and Battery at the Heart of Chevrolet Bolt EV

Didn't see that before I posted. Seems like GM wants to claim being first without actually being able to produce a mass market EV. I suppose one can't ask much more from a major ICE manufacturer.

 

[jeffro01]

As I said on twitter when Engadget tweeted their "review", the bolt is DOA. The primary reason is the lack of a fast changing network, the other is the dealerships that GM is forced to sell the cars through. I can guarantee you there are tons and tons of dealerships in vast stretches of this country that still refuse to sell the Volt much less this. They see EVs as some sort of communist intrusion into their daily lives. It's almost always political in nature. For instance, where I used to live no Chevy dealership would carry the Volt because it was "Obama's car"... I expect the Bolt will fall into the same category...

I applaud GM for taking such a risk here but in the end their own dealers, and the lack of a fast charging network, will doom this car to second class citizen status within GM and it's dealer partners.

Jeff

 

[Chickenlittle]

The number came from Elon several times. He said Tesla would not build a car with less than 200 miles range.

Less than 200 does not mean 200 range. Tesla will exceed

 

[drewgould]

GM has no charging network. It was mostly-fine when Tesla did it because everyone buying a Model S was an admitted "early adopter" and understood EV-limitations and avoiding range anxiety. To try to release a mass-market car without the charging network in place (GM's or someone else's) seems like a death sentence for the Bolt. People won't know how to get from A to B while charging and will either return the car or pass it up completely. Tesla has spent the last few years blanketing the US with Superchargers. That's their major advantage.


Also, let's see how the Bolt does in crash safety ratings.

 

[electracity]

I'm not sure if the 60kwh spec is good or bad. Does it show a lack of skill? I doubt the M3 will have more than 50kwh. Tesla's design goal may even be below 50kwh for the M3.

- - - Updated - - -

.....

What will be important for me is not quantity, but rather how they approach the sales. If they relegate it to the compliance car pile, I'll be saddened. Anything else is going to be wonderful.

The Bolt battery is in the floor on a new chassis design. That is not a compliance car. But if the Bolt doesn't sell well, it won't be improved much each year. I suppose it could eventually become a compliance car if EV remain niche.

Interesting how cheap gas and great US car sales is helping fund GMs EV effort. GM doesn't have to worry much (at this point) about Bolt being a big drag on profits.

 

[techmaven]

JRP3, I think FlasherZ is on the mark here about headroom.
My 2011 Volt (3y11mo) has not appeared to lose any battery capacity but we know that it has to have.

Generally
the Gen I Volts use the area of ~22% to ~87% of the battery (65%)
the Gen II Volts use the area of ~18% to ~87% of the battery (69%)

It is likely they will have to use most of the battery to get range. They likely need to use at least 55 kWh, which is about 91.5%, which is about what Tesla allocates in the Model S.

288 cells is interesting... 288 volts at 3 v/cell, and 393 volts at 4.1 volts/cell. Hooked up to a 200 amp EVSE, that's 60 kW at low SOC's. Probably tops out at around 70 kW charging from a 200 amp EVSE.

 

[AndY1]

I'm not sure if the 60kwh spec is good or bad. Does it show a lack of skill? I doubt the M3 will have more than 50kwh. Tesla's design goal may even be below 50kwh for the M3.

Of course it's bad, because GMs engineers are skillless and everything they do is bad.

Only Tesla can do good

 

[bwa]

View attachment 107473

http://www.wired.com/2016/01/gm-electric-car-chevy-bolt-mary-barra/

Thank god they are finally doing it.

200 miles for $30K. I can afford that! And it has a halfway decent range.

Now, there is the fact I hate Chevy and GM cars, and it's made way out in the foreign hinterlands of USA called the Far East out there in Illinois/New York/North Dakota/whereever, but I might just get one and use it until I find a better EV. I would have a Leaf by now if it weren't for the unsafe results in crash testing; I want to know if the Bolt holds up first.

It says available "Late 2016", so another year from now, maybe. I'll put my selections on hold until then.

I like that it looks good. It doesn't have the "butt ugly veto" problem like Prius, et al, which would cause me never to ever buy it regardless of all other variables. It's icing on the cake that in addition to not being ugly it is actually good looking!