Exclusive: GM will build Chevy Bolt in Michigan in late 2016

[scaesare]

GM ... is not yet truly committed to long distance EV travel. "Long distance" is not one 200 mile trip in a day, it is 400+ miles in a day with brief stops to charge.

I agree with this.

However, for great majority of people, ~200 miles (especially once adjusted for temperature, elevation, etc...) would seem to service 95%+ of their typical daily needs. Something that a 80 mile range (Leaf, Spark, etc...) won't quite do.

It's obviously why Tesla is building the Model 3. They are just coming at it from different directions.

While DC fast charging for the Bolt will indeed be useful, I don't expect that the majority of drivers would buy the Bolt intending to use it as a primary means of long-range travel...

 

[ecarfan]

@purplewalt: Yes the Bolt is claimed to have "fast" DC charging which will be of no use on long distance trips unless the charging stations are conveniently situated along major highways. Which GM is unlikely to build on their own, they will try to install them at dealerships which are inconveniently located and dealers don't care about making them available or making sure they work properly. But GM won't partner with Tesla because to do so would be publicly admitting that Tesla has a superior charging network and GM won't be able to swallow their pride and do that. It's not in their culture.

Yes Bob Lutz was impressed by the 245 mile EV Roadster, and look what he persuaded GM to come up with in response: a 37 mile range boxy sedan whose sales are now declining. Wow, impressive.

Yes Elon wants every car company to build EVs, that will mean Tesla "wins", but Elon also wants to build the best "cars" period, that just happen to be electric. Tesla doesn't need "other manufacturers joining in the fight with their resources and (financial) contributions" to Tesla (as you wrote) and the proof is that Tesla has already beaten them with the best full size sedan/hatchback ever, is about to beat them with the best full size SUV ever, and has a clear path laid out to beating them with the best mid-size sedan/hatch ever.

I think it's great that there are signs that the auto giants (GM and VW /AUDI) are finally waking up and may be getting somewhat serious about EVs, but they are hobbled by their ICE investments, old school thinking, and unwillingness to understand that a well designed and properly located network of charging stations is essential to overcome the public's anxiety about EV range. Instead they fall back on scattered chargers at their dealerships and make noise about existing for-profit charging networks that are generally less than adequate.

In the Bolt Article (link above in #71), they suggest that they will have "DC fast-charging capability, and 80 percent charge can be achieved in less that 45 minutes"

(Does any of this sound familiar?)

If GM and commits to some sort of DC charging and decides to "tap into and utilize" the TESLA Supercharging network (TM will certainly be financially compensated for that privilege), because all of a sudden you might be pulling up to a Bolt at a Supercharger station.

Think about it:
TM has been developing partnerships and building the Supercharger Network.
They have used their financial resources and done ALL the heavy lifting building the Superchargers (by their selves), so I hope they use that as a complete leverage to bring GM into the EV fold.
Elan has stated numerous times that he wants and welcomes other manufacturers to join the EV revolution.
Simply stated: Tesla Motors cannot win the EV revolution without at least a couple of other manufacturers joining in the fight with their resources and (financial) contributions.

 

[JST]

I've said it before and I will say it again--Tesla's most important innovation is the Supercharger network. It's why I bought a Tesla--without the DE Supercharger station, I couldn't see the logic in buying even a 250 mile EV, because it just wouldn't have worked for the family trips we take to NYC. The DE Supercharger (and the ones that would come later) removed that objection and suddenly made the car practical.

It is at this point painfully obvious that the only way to successfully build out a fast charging network is to have the carmakers own it and operate it for the benefit of their customers. Selling electricity by itself doesn't begin to recover the CapEx necessary to build the network.

It is also clear that the big automakers have for a long time been looking for ways to leverage their customer relationships into something more than an every-five-year purchase. That's what OnStar was intended to do--give GM an ongoing monthly revenue stream. OnStar was not a great success, but selling access to a fueling network? Hmm. Might be something to think about.

Why GM (or any other car company) hasn't figured this out yet is a complete mystery to me. I will entertain whatever conspiracy theories are out there, including simple incompetence.

So, as impressed as I am with the Bolt (and I am definitely among the Bolt-optimists on this forum), until I see GM funding the build out of a network of fast chargers that they will own and operate for the benefit of their customers, I don't think they're serious about really selling electric vehicles.

 

[ggies07]

I really wish, and hope, that the only positive outcome of the automakers' laziness is that they would give in to Tesla's Supercharger network. We need the event of mass EV transportation to happen as soon as possible and I really don't want to watch other companies waste time, money and energy on trying to create sub-par networks and then compare it to Tesla's. No reason to re-event the wheel. Tesla got out there and made it happen first, all others please line up accordingly.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I'm not sure why the concept was shown. It's obvious that they didn't decide in a matter of weeks to build this based on feedback from NAIAS. It could have been a chance to see how certain styling features were received.

Not that obvious to me because isn't that exactly what they did for the Volt? They rolled out the concept in January 2007 still undecided about production and saw the reaction and decided to produce shortly after (by March 2007 they already had a target production date). This time they were sure they needed to produce an EV (for compliance) and judged the reaction to this one and gave it the go-ahead.

I remember in early leaks they did a focus group with one EV that went 100 miles and another that went 200 miles and judged the reaction of people (how much more they are willing to spend for more range). If the reaction was underwhelming, they could have easily gone back and just done another EV with ~100 miles of range (incremental improvement to the Spark as they have done with the Volt).

 

[jeffd]

I agree with this.

However, for great majority of people, ~200 miles (especially once adjusted for temperature, elevation, etc...) would seem to service 95%+ of their typical daily needs. Something that a 80 mile range (Leaf, Spark, etc...) won't quite do.

It's obviously why Tesla is building the Model 3. They are just coming at it from different directions.

It's funny the amount of Tesla Model 3 vs Chevy Bolt discussion there is, and at first I thought they are totally different targets (Tesla premium vs Chevy economy), but I came across this on the Bolt Forum: Chevrolet Bolt EV Forum View topic - Chevrolet Bolt vs Tesla Model 3
And it talks about how although one may be more premium than the other, there are a group of EV enthusiasts who need 200+ mile range, and don't care so much about luxury.

For that reason, I can see why the Bolt and the Model 3 will be cross-shopped by a certain group of people. The real question is how large will that group of people be?
GM is hoping 30,000 per year I guess

 

[Breezy]

Not that obvious to me because isn't that exactly what they did for the Volt? They rolled out the concept in January 2007 still undecided about production and saw the reaction and decided to produce shortly after (by March 2007 they already had a target production date). This time they were sure they needed to produce an EV (for compliance) and judged the reaction to this one and gave it the go-ahead.

Well, if you insist on taking GM's marketing spin at face value. I guess it just seems a bit too pat to not have been orchestrated. After November's announcement of investment at Orion for a "future vehicle program," the Bolt goes from "just a concept" to planned production in four weeks? I guess anything is possible.

 

[purplewalt]

I would have hoped that GM would do a full roll out and had a couple of working models before the unveiling, and then the subsequent statements.
Who knows how close to the real thing (the gold colored model @ the Detroit Auto show) even works or is road worthy.

I do love what Kia did and is doing with the Soul EV: they just rolled it out, had a snappy TV ad campaign and will make it available in 5 or so states (initially).
But it is a real car at this point.
A City car.
Similarly for new VW E-Golf. Not heavily promoted as the EV, but it is a viable car for city driving.

The Bolt is not there yet.
The two really interesting points I take interest in are:
==>>200 mile Range. Gotta love it.
+
==>>DC fast-charging capability, less than 45 minute charging to get 80% recharge. Really gotta love that.

To date, NO other car manufacturer makes a (true) EV that has a 200+ EPA rated mile range.
Except Tesla.

To date, NO other car manufacturer makes a (true) EV that has any kind of viable charging network.
Except Tesla.

GM has been hiring technical staff, and engineers.
Electrical and computer engineers.
I wonder what they have been working on?
Not just ON-Star, and hopefully not the ELR (gag).


Quoting Bob Lutz again from 2009:
'How come some tiny little California startup, run by guys who know nothing about the car business, can do this, and we can't?' That was the crowbar that helped break up the log jam."

Perhaps GM will build a 200 EPA rated mile car.
If they do, I hope they are extremely successful, and have a 6 month backlog of orders.
Maybe GM will build their own charging network.
That, I don't have a real sense how it can be easily accomplished, and it seems a waste of time, real estate, money and energy to go that route.
GM (false) Pride or not, it just makes NO sense.
They had their chance with the EV-1, they changed horses, they lost the chance to be first.
Boo-hoo.
Maybe they will get to the market first, before the Model 3.
The first "affordable" long distance EV.
Maybe that will be their tag-line.
And GM has a LOT of experience and history quickly changing horses in mid-stream.
At the beginning of WWII, their entire factories were switched out to became plants that made tanks, bombers and tank destroyers.

I am completely convinced the Gigafactory and Model 3 are on parallel paths, and since the Giga factory is currently ahead of schedule, so mid to late 2017 Model 3 is being delivered and on the road in the hands of full time owners.
If I am in the market to purchase a new car, an EV car buyer, and I see a Bolt ready to buy in the not too distant future...
Do I buy it in 2016, or wait until I could get a Model 3?
Sometime in 2017...?
Hmmmm.....

It seems a WHOLE lot easier to me, for a car manufacturer, ANY car manufacturer developing a new true EV car, to build the car so that the owner can (if they choose) purchase a plan and some hardware that would allow it to be driven like a car.
For 600 miles in a day.
From charging station, to charging station.
DC to Boston.
Chicago to Pittsburgh and then on to Philly
Dallas to Austin for lunch then back to Dallas in a day.
KC to Denver.
LA to SF.
SF to Seattle.
And utilize the charging station network that is already in place.

Currently, there are 380+ Superchargers worldwide already built, 164 in North America alone.

IF GM chooses to build their own affordable EV long-range car.
Best of luck to them. Seriously.
If GM chooses to build their own charging network that will support their NEW out-of the box EV car.
The KING of Charging Networks will probably be pretty-well already built-out BEFORE your first (working) Bolt ever hits the road.

Note to GM:
Choose.
But choose Wisely.

 

[Jeff N]

It seems plausible to me that GM will spin up a fast charger consortium with some of the other CCS companies that make longer range EVs. It's not surprising they haven't done it yet.

 

[Evbwcaer]

Ecarfan had mentioned how he thought GM corporate culture would not adopt the Tesla standard for Supercharging because of pride, and I basically agree.

I wonder though if GM never said it was the Tesla standard, but it was compatible? GM could start building their own GM branded DC stations, oh, and there is a side bonus, you can use Tesla's DC stations as well. It is a subtle difference but it could be a big enough difference, their "nozzles" could say "Chevrolet" and be shaped differently, you would only really know if you looked closely at the end.

The upside for us is that we could probably use the Chevy stations and it would probably end the fight over charging standards, making Tesla/GM the winner.

 

[stopcrazypp]

It seems plausible to me that GM will spin up a fast charger consortium with some of the other CCS companies that make longer range EVs. It's not surprising they haven't done it yet.

Maybe, but I don't think GM sees the importance of fast charging (esp. 100kW+). Ford (of all companies) was the one that insisted CCS support 150kW charging. If GM (one of the leaders of SAE) realized the need for faster charging, they should have been the ones to push for that.

 

[mknox]

Had a look at the Bolt yesterday at the Toronto Auto Show. The door handles look vaguely familiar... not sure, but I think I've seen something similar somewhere before...

 

[30seconds]

Had a look at the Bolt yesterday at the Toronto Auto Show. The door handles look vaguely familiar... not sure, but I think I've seen something similar somewhere before...

How big is it? Volt sized? Seat 5 + luggage or not really. How about 4 + luggage?

 

[WarpedOne]

judging from above pic .... 4 + a bag

 

[JST]

How big is it? Volt sized? Seat 5 + luggage or not really. How about 4 + luggage?

I saw it in Detroit. It's a little hard to judge the exact size, since you couldn't get inside, but my guess is that the interior space is comparable to something like a Focus or a Golf. Maybe closer to the former than the latter (i.e., a little smaller than a Golf).

Externally, it's nowhere near as long as a Volt, but then again it has packaging advantages that the Volt doesn't have, so the real space inside is probably similar.

 

[mknox]

How big is it? Volt sized? Seat 5 + luggage or not really. How about 4 + luggage?

It's different than the Volt (they also had the new Volt on display). More like a small SUV. In it's prototype flavor, it had 2+2 seating, but I suspect any production version would have a 3 person bench in the back. Not a huge amount of luggage space, but not bad. The rep said the production version would come in around $30,000 and have better than 300 km of range. I quite liked it, and it is a style and size that my wife likes. Here's a couple more snaps:

 

[ecarfan]

The rep said the production version would come in around $30,000

After the $7,500 Federal tax credit. So I expect that the real price with no options will be just under $40,000. Hardly a "Tesla Model 3 Killer".

 

[scaesare]

I quite liked it, and it is a style and size that my wife likes.

But... but... you CAN'T like the styling. People in the Bolt threads said so!!

 

[Breezy]

Had a look at the Bolt yesterday at the Toronto Auto Show. The door handles look vaguely familiar... not sure, but I think I've seen something similar somewhere before...

Ha ha, yep. These aren't retractable/extendible, though. You push in on the indentation, then the handle swivels out and you pull to open. One of the YouTube videos shows this. Seems a bit too much trouble. I wouldn't be surprised to see hidden touch sensitive buttons like the ELR on the production version..

 

[mknox]

But... but... you CAN'T like the styling. People in the Bolt threads said so!!

Yeah, don't take my advice on what's stylish and what isn't. I thought the AMC Pacer was cool!

- - - Updated - - -

After the $7,500 Federal tax credit. So I expect that the real price with no options will be just under $40,000. Hardly a "Tesla Model 3 Killer".

Likely. We have an $8,500 rebate here in Ontario, Canada (no federal rebates) so it probably did factor that in. It will be interesting to see where Model 3 comes in price wise. Remember the Model S was advertised to come in "under $50,000" which it barely did for a brief period of time.