Chevy Bolt First Impressions

[bro1999]

Elektrek revisits Bolt test drive.

Electrek

The usual subtle "GM sucks" caveats with some very specific nitpicks, but overall a decent review.

Even Electrek is not stupid enough to try and push out a "The Bolt sucks" review, as that would be like trying to convince males that Scarlet Johansson is in fact NOT hot. Lol

 

[brucet999]

The usual subtle "GM sucks" caveats with some very specific nitpicks, but overall a decent review.

Even Electrek is not stupid enough to try and push out a "The Bolt sucks" review, as that would be like trying to convince males that Scarlet Johansson is in fact NOT hot. Lol

Wow! You read that as negative? I read it as a very positive review that made sure to point out many features that people will like but that probably don't show up in brochures (comfortable upright seating in back, easy ingress egress, for instance) and compared acceleration favorably to a Ford Mustang.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Wow! You read that as negative? I read it as a very positive review that made sure to point out many features that people will like but that probably don't show up in brochures (comfortable upright seating in back, easy ingress egress, for instance) and compared acceleration favorably to a Ford Mustang.

In all fairness, I agree with the opinion that Electrek does have a clear positive Tesla bias and a negative GM bias. It does affect their reporting.

Electrek also seems to have a negative bias towards many EV startups (not dissimilar to the bias Tesla received from many in media during their startup years), but their GM bias has roots in different history - GM's campaign against Tesla for one (e.g. dealerships), GM's ZEV related policies and campaigns as seond and the EV1 history third.

In other words, with GM Electrek seems to hold a grudge IMO.

 

[RobStark]

It is quite clean that Tesla > GM BEV

Tesla is crossing the chasm while FF looks like a disaster and 300 Employee Lucid Motors hopes in the distant future to have a factory that can make 200k vehicles per year while they buy their autonomous hardware and software from a supplier.

So Electrek is spot on.

 

[diamond.g]

So @bro1999 I have been reading your charging escapades on the other forum. You think your SoC isn't low enough to get the 90 miles in 30 minutes as advertised? Or do you think your battery is really too cold to get the higher rate right off the bat?

An idea, maybe you could charge (basically warm the battery) this go on a drive to bring the SoC back down then try CCS charging again. Maybe with a much warmer battery you won't see the starting taper you see now.

Oh and another question, does the Bolt have a separate battery heater or does it share the same loop with the passenger compartment?

 

[mhan00]

I test drive the Bolt last week. I liked the car quite a bit. Front seats were nice and roomy with some great head room. Back seats were a little cramped for me. My head was touching the roof and leg room was tight behind the driver's seat calibrated to my preference, but I'm 6' 3" with fairly long legs. The car was fairly fun to drive. The 360 camera was nice, and the rear view camera/mirror was a cool touch. Not a fan of the lack of TACC, though. I love TACC in my Volt on the freeway. I like the car a lot, enough to be tempted to find someone to take on my lease to get the Bolt instead, but it is a little small for its cost.

 

[MXWing]

That's cute.

Getting back on topic now: Here’s how Chevrolet built a practical electric vehicle with the 2017 Bolt EV

That's what the Bolt offers....practicality (in a <$40k, 238 mile EV range package).

You want the ooos and aaaaahs of passerbys and passengers launching in Insane/Ludicrous mode and "Autopilot" and whatnot? Get a Tesla.

You want something that is more down to earth and doesn't scream "LOOK AT MEEEE!!" and has high utility for everyday life and driving at a price point less than the average cost of a new car in the US (after fed tax credit)? You take a hard look at the Bolt.

I'm going to enjoy pulling hotter chicks than you and burning your Bolt at the red light with my not so down to earth, lower utility, high flying life, Model 3.

I find the thinly veiled insults at Tesla drivers hilarious. As if they all represent pretentious, attention seeking people who are all generally bad.

 

[McRat]

I'm going to enjoy pulling hotter chicks than you and burning your Bolt at the red light with my not so down to earth, lower utility, high flying life, Model 3.

I find the thinly veiled insults at Tesla drivers hilarious. As if they all represent pretentious, attention seeking people who are all generally bad.

I would not buy condoms yet. They do expire.

 

[MXWing]

Bullish on Model 3. Thinking Christmas this year.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

It is quite clean that Tesla > GM BEV

Tesla is crossing the chasm while FF looks like a disaster and 300 Employee Lucid Motors hopes in the distant future to have a factory that can make 200k vehicles per year while they buy their autonomous hardware and software from a supplier.

So Electrek is spot on.

Is it, though?

There were times when Tesla looked like a disaster. The concensus on TMC has been Tesla was treated unfairly at those times. Now that Tesla is a bit more the king of the hill, we would still be wise (and fair) to remember that history.

I of course admit it is possible or even likely many of the current crop of EV startups may fail, but that is no reason to treat them nasty. I think Electrek is shooting themselves and their mission in the foot with that attitude.

Then again, it seems Electrek mission is more closely aligned with Teslarati than Elec-something in general...

 

[stopcrazypp]

Is it, though?

There were times when Tesla looked like a disaster. The concensus on TMC has been Tesla was treated unfairly at those times. Now that Tesla is a bit more the king of the hill, we would still be wise (and fair) to remember that history.

I of course admit it is possible or even likely many of the current crop of EV startups may fail, but that is no reason to treat them nasty. I think Electrek is shooting themselves and their mission in the foot with that attitude.

Then again, it seems Electrek mission is more closely aligned with Teslarati than Elec-something in general...

While I don't read Electrek that much, I don't see where they have a negative bias on startups on a search through their articles. I looked at the Lucid coverage and it is largely positive. Their Faraday Future coverage has been very balanced, even on negative news (don't see them putting a negative slant; check out Jalopnik if you want to see what a negative slant is).

The main reason why there are more negative articles is because Faraday simply had a lot of negative things happening: a poorly received concept car launch, executives leaving left and right (with them giving unflattering accounts of the company), multiple suppliers claiming them being late on bills, principle funder having cash problems, an embarrassing failure during their prototype unveiling, reservations found out to be largely clicks (with them refusing to give a number for the paid ones).

Tesla had a few times where they were tight on cash, but the major difference is Tesla had a revolution in EV technology when it came out with the Roadster. It was seeing the Roadster at an autoshow that got me personally interested in EVs and thinking that they might be viable.

Tesla spent $140 million to get the Roadster into production. Faraday Future has spent $600 million so far and so far they have an empty lot for a factory and only a few prototypes for the money (at the same stage Tesla had only $60 million in investments).

 

[AnxietyRanger]

While I don't read Electrek that much, ...

Maybe that's the problem.

It is subtle. One has to read them to notice it. These constants, almost passive aggressive jabs at other EV startups as well as GM. While of couse giving Tesla much leeway (e.g. misreporting Countergate).

I consider myself a critical reader and think I can usually separate a bias from mere factual reporting. For whatever reason (I hope it is not that TSLA stock ticker in the corner of Electrek) they have let Tesla's competition under their skin a bit. And it seems they would simply never be that critical of Tesla, even when it would be warranted.

Note that also some posters on Electrek are more benign then others. It is actually a bit like the difference between Daniel Eran Dilger and his staff over on AppleInsider, where the former writes actually quite poisonously and others just, well, report.

p.s. The rest of your post on Tesla vs. FF is something I do agree with and informative, so no disagreement there. But my opinion above stands.

 

[Jeff N]

So @bro1999 I have been reading your charging escapades on the other forum. You think your SoC isn't low enough to get the 90 miles in 30 minutes as advertised? Or do you think your battery is really too cold to get the higher rate right off the bat?

I'm not bro1999 but....

I believe the 90 miles in 30 minutes assumes somewhat faster charging on next-generation CCS stations.

The slower charging that bro1999 has seen in his first 3 charges on CCS is likely due to having a cold-soaked battery pack.

Oh and another question, does the Bolt have a separate battery heater or does it share the same loop with the passenger compartment?

The Bolt has a separate liquid thermal management loop for the battery and so has its own independent battery heater. The heater is located near but external to the pack. The battery loop also has a chiller connected to the A/C compressor which itself is shared with the passenger cabin.

 

[SageBrush]

The seats will run on 12V - but that power ultimately comes from the big battery on any modern EV, by way of a DC DC converter that replaces the alternator.

Having said that, the excuse given is pure b.s. - as the other poster said, not having power seats saves a little weight that helps with range slightly, but the power savings are insignificant and I really think it's about cost instead.

Say 100 kg
5 cm range

You just saved 50 joules by manually cranking that seat up.
I can understand GM not wanting to use battery power since their charger network is so piss poor, and every foot of extra range might matter. Or 4 inches, in this engineered savings.

 

[SageBrush]

If it's only about profit, they'd offer power seats as an option with a large profit margin on that option.

There is no profit until the thing sells, and sells in enough volume to recoup the fixed costs.

Just how much more expensive do you think the Bolt can be than a Model 3 and attract buyers ?

 

[bro1999]

I'm going to enjoy pulling hotter chicks than you and burning your Bolt at the red light with my not so down to earth, lower utility, high flying life, Model 3.

I find the thinly veiled insults at Tesla drivers hilarious. As if they all represent pretentious, attention seeking people who are all generally bad.

Insecure much?

 

[Zoomit]

I believe the 90 miles in 30 minutes assumes somewhat faster charging on next-generation CCS stations.

On the Norwegian Opel website, it says (Google translated): "With 50 kW DC fast chargers enter 150 km [93mi] reach in 30 minutes!" This matches what has already been demonstrated by a 50kW/125A charger in the US a few weeks ago (119mi in 39 min => 92mi in 30 min).

Norway has a diverse DCFC network and certainly has 100kW chargers. In the highlights section of the Ampera-e webpage, it says "DC Fast Charging 50kW" (translated). If it could accept more power, why wouldn't they say it here??