-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Chevy Bolt - 200 mile range for $30k base price (after incentive)
- Thread starter FredTMC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bolt chevy Electric Vehicles review
That's what I figured, thanks.
I haven't bothered to line up the SoC's against some of the steep "stair step" tapers I've seen posted for the Bolt, but hopefully that curve can be improved if the battery chemistry allows for it.
Statistically it always will have quicker times assuming the same charge rate.
First, both types do not start at the same zero.
Second, you cannot refuel when you decide. You refuel when the infrastructure decides. Which is one of the greatest drawbacks of EVs today. The car schedules you, you do not schedule the car.
Third, hypermiling effect is greater due to item 2.
Fourth, safety buffer magnifies the differences in ranges. The nastier the drive, the more magnification.
"Assuming the same charge rate."
But that's very much the point here: it seems that Leafs and Spark EVs charge faster than the Bolt does in absolute terms as well as relative terms, at least on the available stations. I don't have much expectation of it going faster when bigger stations come out, either, given how roughly and sharply it limits for ~50% SoC on up.
So your contention is that Chevrolet exaggerated their specifications on their car. It could happen I suppose. Name one time in 20 years that was true? I'm honestly curious having spent more hundreds hours on dynometers than most people. Unlike other brands, if Chevy says xxx HP, xxx MPG, xxx lbs, xxx g's, xxx top speed, etc, you can take that to the bank and get interest.
But even given the early DCFC teething pains, you will still cover more ground in a 200 mile EV. And a 200 mile EV can travel to a lot of places that a "125 mile wishful thinking" EV cannot. EV mfrs provide the EPA with their range, and they get to pick how it's calculated. This is why GM range tends to be in 5280 feet per mile, and other brands tends to be 5000 feet or less. Sort of like horsepower.
The comedy routine of the last 20 years was when Chevrolet released a 305HP Camaro, Ford released a 320HP Mustang Cobra, and BMW released a 338HP M3.
Ford rated their engines like the Japanese and Germans did, with their thumb on the scale.
Ouch. It was ugly. Trap speed, top speed, and chassis dyno numbers were far higher on the Chevrolet which was far cheaper as well. And they put the rev limiter 200 rpm lower than peak HP so once you adjusted that, it was more than a full second quicker and 10 mph faster in a 1/4 mile instead of 0.7s and 7mph quicker.
For those who are not track hounds, 1.0 seconds in the quarter is a whole different league. 3 bus lengths in the quarter.
No, they don't. The EPA has very specific test conditions and formulas for calculating mpg and MPGe estimates. Manufacturers do have some limited choices between using an adjusted version of an older two cycle test protocol and a newer 5 cycle test but that's about it. I suppose GM wouldn't be fined very much for intentionally reporting their estimates to be worse than they actually are. Doing so would also lower their reported CAFE numbers since they are calculated from the same raw numbers. GM has a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to take full advantage of their CAFE results.
It would be an extraordinary claim to say that GM is artificially lowering their EPA estimates. That's not credible without substantial evidence.
Last edited:
I had posted the link somewhere, I'll hunt it down sometime. Yes, the EV makers get a choice that the ICE makers do not. And they can pick the best. But it is not EPA testing, it's mfr testing. Some overinflate tires and other optimizations. Some do not. I'm not sure CAFE has anything to do with the EV range since EV's are rated by kWh.
When the liability today for exaggerating EPA/CARB data can be billions of dollars, that does give you an incentive to not exaggerate.
I can take 2002 Corvette that spent most of it's life on racetrack, and hit 30 mpg at 70mph with the cruise on running sticky tires. Many big cam V8 track version engines cannot do that today.
It is EPA testing that has been outsourced to the manufacturers but they must do it in accordance with standard EPA test protocols. EPA does their own duplicate tests on about 15% of car models every year to keep the car makers honest.
CAFE itself probably isn't impacted by EV range results but car makers can still be fined for doing incorrect testing and faulty reporting of EV range to EPA and the public and shareholders would still be hurt.
So I take you did not believe the 2015 Chevrolet Volt actually had a further range than the 2014?
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I think that used an EPA loophole that allows cars of similar configuration to use the same rating. Ford famously exploited that in their Fusion/C-max ratings:
Ford Fudges EPA Numbers Again, Hybrids and Plug-Ins See Fuel Economy Downgrade
However, given the Bolt had no similar predecessor, I don't think this loophole applies. Whatever results GM had would essentially be a fresh test (not shared with any previous vehicle).
There's a difference between choosing to not redo a test that isn't required due to model year changes vs. doing a test and doing it with non-approved protocols or calculation methods.
Time will tell. Is there true parity among mfrs on testing and marketing numbers? Absolutely not, as been shown many times. Some get punished, some do not, but errors tend to exaggerate and they are common.
I would actually like to hear stories of Chevrolet overstating capabilities of their cars or trucks. It could have happened. I have not heard of it though after owning, tuning, and racing many GM products. From microcars to Kodiaks, they tend to be more pessimistic in their marketing than any other brand.
I would actually like to hear stories of Chevrolet overstating capabilities of their cars or trucks. It could have happened. I have not heard of it though after owning, tuning, and racing many GM products. From microcars to Kodiaks, they tend to be more pessimistic in their marketing than any other brand.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
Recent interview with Woz in our local newspaper ... Roadshow: The Woz and his cars are back! (Guess what he's driving now)
Q I think your legions of loyal readers should know that your bestie Woz seems to have abandoned his Prius. I’m hearing him on KCBS shilling for the Chevy Bolt.
Q My Roadshow pal and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has given up his sleek fleet of eight Priuses? I first wrote about this relationship in 2007 when he was hauled over for going 104 mph on Interstate 5 while driving to Las Vegas for a business meeting, and paid a $700 fine. A few years later he accepted my invitation to attend Roadshow’s party to turn in our yellow carpool stickers after the state banned them. He drove up in his Hummer, which had yellow stickers. So, Woz, update us on your life.
A I abandoned the Prius for a Tesla two or three years ago. I love our new Bolt and use it for almost all of my own driving now, including a recent road trip to Anaheim. I figured I’d share my driving between this and our Tesla but I’m using the Bolt almost exclusively.
This car is nice to drive, small, light, easy. It feels like the Prii I drove. Now I’m sort of back to the Prius because that’s the feeling I get from the Bolt — easy and convenient all the time. I still think highly of the Prius and it was the major go-to car of my life for 10 years. The Prius had more luggage space and I could carry two Segways in it but I’m not often taking Segways in my cars anymore, and the Bolt is easier to park anywhere than the Prius was. Both of those cars are easier to park than the Tesla. I could easily wind up someday with a full-EV Prius. That’s what I’m doing these days. Full EV. Tesla, Bolt, Segway.
Steve Wozniak
Q I think your legions of loyal readers should know that your bestie Woz seems to have abandoned his Prius. I’m hearing him on KCBS shilling for the Chevy Bolt.
Q My Roadshow pal and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has given up his sleek fleet of eight Priuses? I first wrote about this relationship in 2007 when he was hauled over for going 104 mph on Interstate 5 while driving to Las Vegas for a business meeting, and paid a $700 fine. A few years later he accepted my invitation to attend Roadshow’s party to turn in our yellow carpool stickers after the state banned them. He drove up in his Hummer, which had yellow stickers. So, Woz, update us on your life.
A I abandoned the Prius for a Tesla two or three years ago. I love our new Bolt and use it for almost all of my own driving now, including a recent road trip to Anaheim. I figured I’d share my driving between this and our Tesla but I’m using the Bolt almost exclusively.
This car is nice to drive, small, light, easy. It feels like the Prii I drove. Now I’m sort of back to the Prius because that’s the feeling I get from the Bolt — easy and convenient all the time. I still think highly of the Prius and it was the major go-to car of my life for 10 years. The Prius had more luggage space and I could carry two Segways in it but I’m not often taking Segways in my cars anymore, and the Bolt is easier to park anywhere than the Prius was. Both of those cars are easier to park than the Tesla. I could easily wind up someday with a full-EV Prius. That’s what I’m doing these days. Full EV. Tesla, Bolt, Segway.
Steve Wozniak
The Kia Soul EV and Hyundai Ioniq have a stated nominal pack voltage of 360v.
The 69-70 kW charge rate I've seen photos or videos of for the Soul EV and Ioniq reached that rate at around 66-76% state of charge so the charging voltage was likely around 390-400v which make the current be around 175-180a.
The peak current is likely reached at very low state of charge. One video shows the Ioniq starting a charge at 10% and quickly ramps up to about 62 kW which probably implies around 190-200a and then the power very slowly rises with increasing state of charge and charging voltage as the current slowly falls.
All evidence I've seen and heard points to a peak current of around 150a for the Bolt EV.
Seems reasonable but I would guess 90-95 kW for an actual 55 kWh pack. Of course, it would tend to be higher if it has a larger capacity that is limited by software until an owner pays for an over-the-air update to access the full actual capacity as in today's 75 kWh S60.
If it's like the S and X then the Model 3's smallest pack may have a smaller nominal pack design voltage thus a 55 kWh Model 3 might be similar in voltage to an S60.
Last edited:
The Model S/X 75 KWh pack is still only 350V. The voltage of the pack is determined by the number of modules which are in series. Each module is around 25V. 14X25V = 350V and 16X25V = 400V. We know the Model 3 layout from the reveal showed 8 modules, which may be 40V each and would give a pack voltage of 360V. It's possible the larger pack version will have a 9th module to get to 400V, or they may all have just 8 modules. If all have 8 modules, that would mean the best voltage for the M3 is 360V.
I suspect 350-360V is going to be the typical voltage of packs for affordable EVs. Most out there now are in that range and it seems reasonable the M3 will be similar.
I suspect 350-360V is going to be the typical voltage of packs for affordable EVs. Most out there now are in that range and it seems reasonable the M3 will be similar.
My assumption was that the 8 module version from the unveiling is the big battery version, probably with the same 400V nominal as the big battery S/X - which would mean 12 cells in series in each instead of the current 6, ~48V modules.
I've been guessing they'll take out either the front or rear pair for the small battery car, which would presumably lead to a lower voltage than they've used before, ~300V.
That gives them the spread they need to create some actual separation between the two while using common modules - a 55-60 kWh base version and a 75-80 kWh upgraded pack with each module being slightly under 10 kWh, ~200Ah at ~48V.
I don't think the geometry they showed us has a place for a ninth module - and if you assume they'll go to the historical 350V and 400V versions in one way or another, the "less than 60 kWh" of the base version implies the upgraded version won't be more than 68 kWh unless they use different modules for the two versions, a practice Tesla tried with the original S60 and hasn't used since which increases cost and logistical footprint.
When and where will CCS and/or CHAdeMO be available at > 125A in North America?
TonyWilliams
Active Member
Similar threads
