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

[techmaven]

Many destination chargers are not open to the public. Many are 8, 13 or 16 kW. Hardly comparable.

And many CCS stations are 24 kW, and others overheat at 45 kW. Hardly comparable.

Here's another way to look at it.

Hypothetically, in 2020, you take delivery of your brand new Audi Q6 e-tron BEV with a CCS v2 inlet. You want to take a road trip that is far enough to require charging to get you there. You pull up the list of CCS EVSE's along the way. The very first thing after that is you filter out every non-SAE L3 CCS... everything less than 300 amps. That would be the natural thing to do, that is what Tesla owners do today by looking at the Supercharger network. Only if a L3 EVSE is not available, then you look at L2 DC... and if that fails, then L2 AC.

As a result, every CCS installed thus far would be filtered out of every road trip as the first action. And therefore, it isn't comparable to the Supercharger network at all. They will likely start building the SAE L3 CCS charging network next year. Pointing to SAE L2 CCS is pointing to the wrong network - in the medium term, it is to become part of the destination charging network, a tweener that never made any real sense.

 

[techmaven]

When the 2016 Volt came out, many people convincingly argued that it looked like a Honda Civic. In overall shape, it does.

So, based on appearance, I could conclude that the Volt is obviously just a derivative of the Civic. That would be an incorrect conclusion.

Of course, if you cut out the rest of relevant evidence, then you bolster your argument. Sane discussion doesn't work that way.

GM doesn't hide the fact that the Bolt is a Gamma 2 platform variant. Also, a slew of key measurements are within a small fraction of a inch, including overall width and many interior dimensions.

Again, if this is GM's ground up effort, that it speaks poorly of their ability to design BEVs.

 

[DFibRL8R]

I think several people have explained why they aren't. I'm sorry that you don't understand how the comparison doesn't make much sense.

Breezy's signature states he is Volt owner and EV enthusiast at large. Having used many superchargers with nothing but great experiences charging and many other (J1772, campgrounds, CHAdeMO) with problems ranging from low voltage warnings, complete failures, slow rates, blocked/restricted access, shut-offs in the deep night, I can confidently say that nothing compares to the Supercharger network.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

Sorry. I must have missed that. All I see are some unsupported assertions that the comparison doesn't make much sense.

The support:

1. You're comparing 20kW and 50Kw stations to 145kW stations.
2. You're comparing a hodgepodge of infrastructure, to strategically placed infrastructure
3. You're comparing infrastructure that has vastly inferior reliability (supported by various sources found via google)
a. Tennessee EV Charging Stations Ranked By Reliability

Unsupported, indeed.

 

[MP3Mike]

The support:

3. You're comparing infrastructure that has vastly inferior reliability (supported by various sources found via google)
a. Tennessee EV Charging Stations Ranked By Reliability

But I don't think your link to reliability includes any CCS stations does it? Is seems like Supercharger and CHAdeMO data.

 

[Breezy]

Of course, if you cut out the rest of relevant evidence, then you bolster your argument. Sane discussion doesn't work that way.

GM doesn't hide the fact that the Bolt is a Gamma 2 platform variant. Also, a slew of key measurements are within a small fraction of a inch, including overall width and many interior dimensions.

Again, if this is GM's ground up effort, that it speaks poorly of their ability to design BEVs.

Yes, we understand that the BEV2 platform (the Bolt's) is related to some extent to Gamma. But, as I've explained before, the Trax/Encore is on the previous generation of the Gamma platform. They are completely different platforms. If you're seeing comparable dimensions or shapes, that's because they are both small car platforms. Nothing more.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

But I don't think your link to reliability includes any CCS stations does it? Is seems like Supercharger and CHAdeMO data.

Depends, as some stations have both.. Though I agree that specific one is probably more Chademo weighted.

If you go to plugshare and look at the comments for the CCS stations around the Phoenix area you will notice reliability issues based on user experience (only place I took a quick look see)...Bowling Travel Center, Chevron Station as specific stations.

I am not saying that CCS is inherently unreliable, I am saying that having multiple companies/individuals in charge of the stations allows for greater reliability issues.

 

[ecarfan]

the Model 3 will be lighter than the Model S due to being a smaller and shorter car just like the Bolt. The Model 3 manages to keep both a 'traditional' front end (and thusly frunk) AND interior cabin space (without that cabin space artificially increased by making it a 'tall' box like the Bolt, in turn reducing aero) by not having all the doodads planted in the front end like an ICE engine, allowing Tesla to move the dashboard and seating forward.

Excellent points. Tesla made the 3 significantly smaller on the exterior than the S but very cleverly managed to still offer a great deal of storage capacity (including a frunk, of course a smaller frunk) while maintaining what appears likely to be essentially the same cabin space and perhaps even greater rear seat headroom, yet the 3 doesn't look like a squashed compact car, which in my opinion is what the Bolt looks like.

The Bolt was obviously not designed from scratch as a BEV. It appears to offer decent cabin room for 5 adults, though for the rear seat to accommodate 3 adults they will likely have to be "slender" by modern standards. I will wager that the Bolt trunk will be smaller than the Model 3 trunk and of course the Bolt has no frunk.

GM's decision to go with FWD for the Bolt is...interesting. My guess is that the 0-60 time is slightly constrained by the FWD because the software has to compensate for the torque steer effect. And it seems unlikely that the Bolt is capable of being re-engineered to ever by AWD.

Again, I hope the Bolt is a success for GM. But I am certain that most consumers, when comparing the Bolt to the Model 3, will prefer the Model 3 because it wins on so many counts (in no particular order, and simply based on the data I have so far, my experience with Tesla over the past 3+ years, but without ever having driven either car!):

1. The Model 3 is $2,500 cheaper
2. The Model 3 is in my opinion beautiful and the Bolt is, well, not so much
3. The Model 3 has a longer range
4. Tesla has the Supercharger network
5. The Model 3 will have a higher charger rate in the base model and the Bolt will have optional DC charging that will still be slower than Supercharging
6. The Model 3 has faster acceleration in the base model, and the Performance option will obviously make it crazy quick
7. The Model 3 will have more cargo capacity considering the trunk and the frunk
8. I am confident the Model 3 user interface will be superior even in the base model (and then there is Elon's tweet about "Wait until you see the real steering controls and system for the 3. It feels like a spaceship.")
9. The Model 3 will have the AutoPilot option, which can also be added in the future, I doubt the Bolt will have anything comparable by 2018 or even later
10. I could go on, but my point is made...

Nevertheless, GM will sell Bolts because there are still car buyers with some GM loyalty, because the Bolt apparently will go on sale a year before the 3, and because Tesla already has hundreds of thousands of Model 3 reservations holders so production is already sold out until late 2018 at the earliest.

 

[Breezy]

The support:

1. You're comparing 20kW and 50Kw stations to 145kW stations.
2. You're comparing a hodgepodge of infrastructure, to strategically placed infrastructure
3. You're comparing infrastructure that has vastly inferior reliability (supported by various sources found via google)
a. Tennessee EV Charging Stations Ranked By Reliability

Unsupported, indeed.

1. Only 15% of CCS chargers are 24 kW. Peak charging rate is only part of the story. 145 kW station doesn't charge 3x faster than a 50 kW station. It depends on the charge profile of the vehicle connected.
2. Some CCS infrastructure is strategically placed.
3. Reliability is variable. There are many CCS stations rated 10.0 on PlugShare.

 

[techmaven]

Yes, we understand that the BEV2 platform (the Bolt's) is related to some extent to Gamma. But, as I've explained before, the Trax/Encore is on the previous generation of the Gamma platform. They are completely different platforms. If you're seeing comparable dimensions or shapes, that's because they are both small car platforms. Nothing more.

So you are saying that the Bolt is constrained by the designer's minds - that they couldn't conceive of a better BEV? They couldn't throw off the shackles of thinking like ICE designers? I would have rather thought that they were constrained by the Gamma 2 platform derivative. The Bolt really makes no sense other than a design by committee to minimally meet government incentives using an existing platform.

 

[the dude]

I hope the Bolt sells well, but there is one thing I don't understand, why is their motor so complex looking, its similar to the Leaf, its like they want people to think its an ICE, if Tesla can have a trunk and a frunk why can't all other EV do the same, it can't be that hard

 

[techmaven]

1. Only 15% of CCS chargers are 24 kW. Peak charging rate is only part of the story. 145 kW station doesn't charge 3x faster than a 50 kW station. It depends on the charge profile of the vehicle connected.
2. Some CCS infrastructure is strategically placed.
3. Reliability is variable. There are many CCS stations rated 10.0 on PlugShare.

100% of CCS today is not SAE L3. Therefore, none of the SAE L3 CCS network is strategically placed, since it doesn't exist yet.

Tesla's spend a lot of time charging above 50 kW. And given the poor aerodynamics of the Bolt, each kW charged goes further in a Model S or Model 3 at highway speeds.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

1. Only 15% of CCS chargers are 24 kW. Peak charging rate is only part of the story. 145 kW station doesn't charge 3x faster than a 50 kW station. It depends on the charge profile of the vehicle connected.
2. Some CCS infrastructure is strategically placed.
3. Reliability is variable. There are many CCS stations rated 10.0 on PlugShare.

Yet, you make no distinctions when comparing the stations to the SC network...even though your're admitting there are differences. I agree that "some" are strategically placed, and that only "some" are less than 50kW. That's also why I say you can't just take the number of stations and compare them to the SC network.

To add, I never said that the SC charges 3x faster, but said it supplies ~3x the power.

 

[bro1999]

So when can I order and receive a base Model 3 again? Has anyone even received a base Model X yet? I mean it was only released almost a year ago.

Meanwhile, base Bolts will be delivered this year. People on here seem to be completely ignoring that fact. I bet some people will be able to lease a base Bolt for 36 months AND turn it in before then can get their hands on a base Model 3.

 

[Spidy]

I hope the Bolt sells well, but there is one thing I don't understand, why is their motor so complex looking, its similar too the Leaf, its like they want people to think its an ICE, if Tesla can have a trunk and a frunk why can't all other EV do the same, it can't be that hard

Looks very similar to the Model S when you imagine a housing around it.

Model S also has somewhat similar gears.

 

[techmaven]

So when can I order and receive a base Model 3 again? Has anyone even received a base Model X yet? I mean it was only released almost a year ago.

Meanwhile, base Bolts will be delivered this year. People on here seem to be completely ignoring that fact. I bet some people will be able to lease a base Bolt for 36 months AND turn it in before then can get their hands on a base Model 3.

The Nissan Leaf came out pretty early... in 2011 model year. And it influenced a whole host of things, including $100 million spent on the Blink network in all the wrong ways. About $100 million wasted and it was preventable - simple modeling would have informed how a proper charging network should have been built to last. What is truly disappointing about the Bolt is that GM could have started ground up and made a proper long range BEV, or a much better short range BEV for cheaper. They chose, instead, to build the Bolt, coming out soon. Practically, a Bolt with 40-50 kWh of battery would be more efficient, cheaper, a better match for the existing CCS network, and fail at being a long distance BEV in exactly the same ways as the Bolt that is going to ship.

The charging networks for a long range BEV are different than a short range BEV or a PHEV. How exactly will they space out the CCS v2 charging network for long distance travel? Appropriate for a Audi Q6 e-tron or a Bolt? Or will the Audi Q6 e-tron be as hobbled as the Bolt? Or other BEVs coming out soon-ish? We will see how that influences the build of the CCS v2 L3 charging network. Ideally, the Bolt will be ignored for the upcoming L3 charging network. There is a limited amount of funds for building out charging networks and I fear we are at the precipice of building the new boondoggle Blink network. Even worse will be the perpetuate the spending of money on the L2 DC charging network, depriving funds from a sorely needed vast expansion of the L2 AC destination network and a proper L3 long distance charging network.

 

[Breezy]

100% of CCS today is not SAE L3. Therefore, none of the SAE L3 CCS network is strategically placed, since it doesn't exist yet.

Agreed. I don't believe I said Level 3 SAE CCS. If I did, that was my error.

Yet, you make no distinctions when comparing the stations to the SC network...even though your're admitting there are differences. I agree that "some" are strategically placed, and that only "some" are less than 50kW. That's also why I say you can't just take the number of stations and compare them to the SC network.

To add, I never said that the SC charges 3x faster, but said it supplies ~3x the power.

Perhaps there is some misunderstanding that I am arguing for CCS and/or against Superchargers. I'm not taking a position where I need to admit or deny anything. I am just trying to point out that the CCS network exists and it is or may be useful to some people.

 

[Matias]

1. The Model 3 has a longer range

I thought that both have range "over 200 miles". Do you have some more information?

 

[eye.surgeon]

I think the design is meant to keep the floor low, something Tesla's suffer from. The interior space looks great. I hope they sell a ton of them. Good for GM.

 

[Matias]

I think Bolt is someways more usable.