It's a Good Thing that GM unveiled the Bolt nearly 3 months before Model 3 unveiling!

[flankspeed8]

No, GM has not announced any sort of production target.

I think it is impossible to do so because no one really knows what the demand will be, especially in the era of such low gas prices. This is a great unknown and a conundrum for all EV manufactures. There certainly is pent up demand from the enthusiasts though....

 

[Jeff N]

I might have fallen for circular referencing here. :redface: One article is from forum member Zach Shahan
Why Is GM Only Planning 30,000 Chevy Bolts Per Year? - Gas 2
but he lacks a source, too.

Actually, he does quote a source in his 6-month-old article -- it's a commenter on another article of his at a different website. The commenter says:

However, battery production is the big thing. They can only build 30,000 because LG doesn't have that much production capacity. They had never fully built out the Holland, MI LG plant that supplies GM and Ford.

That analysis, even if it were true for the Holland, Michigan LG factory, is irrelevant since the battery cells are being made at a completely different LG factory in South Korea.

 

[Jeff N]

The additional specs released re the Bolt shows that :.....

- Full charging at home will require at least 9 hours !!

....IMO, these are limiting specs, particularly because ......GM / Chevy do not have a Supercharger network.

At least 9 hours? In my experience, these time estimates for Volt, LEAF, etc. have been conservative and actual charge times are a little better.

In any case, how long does it take to fully charge a Model X for 257 miles of range at home using its default 48A on-board charger? Probably 9 hours although Tesla doesn't show a specification for this yet.

A full charge of an S90D with its slower 40A default single charger at home would be closer to 11 hours.

 

[ZachShahan]

Actually, he does quote a source in his 6-month-old article -- it's a commenter on another article of his at a different website. The commenter says:

That analysis, even if it were true for the Holland, Michigan LG factory, is irrelevant since the battery cells are being made at a completely different LG factory in South Korea.

Sorry for the delay in arriving here.

Yes, the number comes from a much earlier piece, but it's not from a commenter but from a pair of supplier sources Reuters talked to: Chevy Bolt Now Scheduled For October 2016

I don't know who the sources were, but am trusting Reuters on this one for a few reasons.

Btw, if you're interested in the topic, I also wrote about it at length in this article: Chevy Bolt Updates, + Awkward Swipes At Tesla −

Even if the number came from GM, 30,000 wouldn't be set in stone. But the fact that it's supposedly a supplier issue makes me think the number is more likely. We've had several threads on CleanTechnica where commenters discussed the battery production capacity of LG Chem at the moment, and the fact that it has contracts with various automakers. I'd be surprised if the Bolt could hit 50,000/year, even if demand was there.

But anyhow, thanks for bringing this stuff up. I was remembering incorrectly that GM announced the number. Forgot it came from "supplier sources."

- - - Updated - - -

As others have stated the biggest deterrent to buying a Bolt is its lack of compatible fast charging infrastructure. If Tesla is really serious about accelerating the advent of sustainable transport they better start sharing supercharger technology. I am hoping this will be the year that other companies start adopting it given there are finally some longer range EV's planned. Without supercharging (or equivalent) the other companies will be at a big disadvantage. I would buy a Bolt in a heartbeat except for lack of fast charging in our area.

I completely agree with you about the need for super-fast charging to be compelling. I think it's obvious. I think a lot of people think it's obvious. But I think the legacy automakers are too prideful to take Tesla up on its offer to share the Supercharger network. Stupid move by them, imho, but how do you convince them to concede that they need Tesla's help?

- - - Updated - - -

All the competitors are at a big disadvantage compared to tesla. The super charger network is a massive selling point to future Model 3 buyers compared to the bolt, and especially anything faraday might have to offer.

Imagine being given a choice between a 35k bolt and a 35k model 3. Bolt has no free nationwide fast charging network, tesla model 3 does. Which would most of America choose?

Until I see a partnership with tesla for access to the supercharger network(or GM/anyone else builds their own) I'm not convinced tesla has any true ev competition whatsoever.

This is a/the key point for me. And we have a report coming out any day that backs this up quite strongly. Keep your eyes peeled.

And as someone else just wrote, the Autopilot & future-tech advantage will be big in the Model 3 as well.

And then there's Tesla's hot brand and reputation.

 

[Quant]

At least 9 hours? In my experience, these time estimates for Volt, LEAF, etc. have been conservative and actual charge times are a little better.

In any case, how long does it take to fully charge a Model X for 257 miles of range at home using its default 48A on-board charger? Probably 9 hours although Tesla doesn't show a specification for this yet.

A full charge of an S90D with its slower 40A default single charger at home would be closer to 11 hours.

1. Maybe you don't like comparing apples to apples ? But, whatever !

2. Let the Tesla Model 3 specs come out , including range, charge times etc and then we will see, as far as a comparison with the CHEVY Bolt !

And, let's look at reservations, with about $1500 deposit down and compare that too, later this year ! I'm in no hurry ! I'm not bolting anywhere !

Let the market of consumers decide and have their input !

 

[ZachShahan]

1. The ICE manufacturers in the global auto industry, ALL have huge plant, equipment and product development tied up in the ICE platforms.

2. Any transition for them, must be slow and gradual, because they simply cannot afford to quickly abandon those existing ICE platforms and sunk costs.

3. Even if they wanted to, due to the sheer work, investment $ and repositioning/reorienting/retraining etc. required, it will take over 10 years.

4. The industry will have to rework their contractual and incentive structures with their union employees, the dealer network franchise agreements and the phasing out of the exiting ICE vehicles that are on the road ( billions of vehicles ), which still require maintenance, support, servicing and they continue to retain legal liability for all those vehicles sold on the iCE platform, which are and will continue to be on the road for sometime.

Therefore, they simply cannot go fast ( practically difficult ) or importantly, cannot afford to go faster - than a certain pace - because of the constraints of the current ICE platform. I am sure the CEO's and CFO's at each manufacturer have developed a glide path to the future, but glide it will be, because the CFO 's will be very clear about the financial ramifications of each change, vs. time . This financial proforma for investment capital and slow and gradual transformation is a pretty BIG deal.

Besides all of the above, there is the Bigger problem of battery supply and lithium required, and we all know that the current battery and lithium based technology may or may not be the paradigm ten years down the road.

So, a new entrant like TSLA will continue to have significant advantages in many respects for quite some time.

The ICE manufacturers will need to play both offense vis a vis EV tech and defense vis a vis ICE legacy platforms and costs.

I am sure many new entrants ( current like TSLA and in the future like , maybe Apple ) also understand and appreciate the strategic and operational challenges faced by the ICE manufacturers. This gives them a strategic advantage to start fresh without the constraints of the legacy systems.

I'm not sure the investment community fully appreciates the extent of the constraints placed by these legacy platforms and how it will continue to constrain and weaken the ICE manufacturers. The auto industry and the employees and dealers will be in for some big changes and some tough times starting in about 3-5 years and lasting until at least 2030, IMO.

So, the patient LT Tesla investor, IMO, will be rewarded because of the strategic advantages vs. time T and the constraints of the ICE platform investment and sunk costs for the ICE manufacturers. This is a LONG game.....forget about the quarter to quarter stuff and focus on the 2020-2025 timeframe. It will be quite interesting.

Completely agree. More on this topic here (my text and a wonderful video presentation from a Tesla cofounder): #1 Reason Why Big Auto Isnt Big On EV Revolution? −

Really recommend anyone with money in the game digest that.

- - - Updated - - -

The additional specs released re the Bolt shows that :

1. BATTERY :

It will have a 60 kWh battery pack, and battery charging on AC will produce ONLY 50 miles of range in about 2 hours.

- Fast DC charging with deliver about 90 miles in 30 minutes.

- Full charging at home will require at least 9 hours !!

I expect TSLA Model 3 will beat both these quite handily.

IMO, these are limiting specs, particularly because ......GM / Chevy do not have a Supercharger network.


2. ACCELERATION:

0-60 mph will take about 7 secs.

I expect Model 3's 0-60 mph will be in the 4-5 sec range.


3. The CHEVY Bolt will NOT have all wheel drive.

Model 3 will probably offer this as one of the options....particularly for those in snow country.


4. I also expect TESLA Model 3 will Beat the CHEVY in fit, finish, paint, wheels and looks. And I am quite confident, in any area that deals with software.

Completely agree again. And regarding fast charging, yes, my understanding is that Supercharging is about twice as fast: Electric Car Charging 101 -- Types of Charging, Charging Networks, Apps, More! −

Critical point. And as I said, we have a report coming out any day that touches on this topic. (Hint: we surveyed >2000 EV drivers and aspiring EV drivers, and have some data on how much they value Supercharging/super-fast charging, among many other things.)

 

[Jeff N]

Sorry for the delay in arriving here.

Yes, the number comes from a much earlier piece, but it's not from a commenter but from a pair of supplier sources Reuters talked to....

Even if the number came from GM, 30,000 wouldn't be set in stone. But the fact that it's supposedly a supplier issue makes me think the number is more likely.

I don't see anywhere in the Reuters report or the other links you provided that quote any source as saying the 30,000 initial production intent is tied to supplier limitations generally or battery supply specifically. The 30,000 is just mentioned as an initial production target.

From what I know, 30,000 a year seems like a perfectly reasonable initial target given the very low gas prices now and the fact that US sales of the top 3 BEVs last year were:

26,700 Tesla Model S
17,200 Nissan LEAF
11,000 BMW i3

GM previously experienced slow sales of the Opel version of the Volt in Europe so it makes sense for them to be shy on initial expectations there as well.

Nowhere is it stated in any of these articles that anything would prevent GM from increasing their production target beyond 30,000 if market demand turns out to be stronger than expected.

Of course, there is a weak link in the supply chain (there always is) but nobody says it is tied to battery cell production or what the number would be limited to or how long it would take to further ramp up production.

 

[ZachShahan]

I don't see anywhere in the Reuters report or the other links you provided that quote any source as saying the 30,000 initial production intent is tied to supplier limitations generally or battery supply specifically. The 30,000 is just mentioned as an initial production target.

From what I know, 30,000 a year seems like a perfectly reasonable initial target given the very low gas prices now and the fact that US sales of the top 3 BEVs last year were:

26,700 Tesla Model S
17,200 Nissan LEAF
11,000 BMW i3

GM previously experienced slow sales of the Opel version of the Volt in Europe so it makes sense for them to be shy on initial expectations there as well.

Nowhere is it stated in any of these articles that anything would prevent GM from increasing their production target beyond 30,000 if market demand turns out to be stronger than expected.

Of course, there is a weak link in the supply chain (there always is) but nobody says it is tied to battery cell production or what the number would be limited to or how long it would take to further ramp up production.

Correct. Whether the production target is due to supply limitations or caution regarding demand isn't explicit.

And I think either one is a reasonable assumption (assuming you trust the anonymous sources in the first place).

Go dig up LG Chem's battery production capacity and planned capacity, and balance that against the 20 EVs/PHEVs and counting it is supplying batteries for. 30,000 Bolts/yr makes sense when doing that, imho.

Demand-wise, with the Model 3 around the corner, I think 30,000/yr sounds about right as well. If GM could really advertise the thing and get dealers on board, maybe it could get up to 50,000 (demand side), but I think that's pushing it. People who know about EVs are largely waiting for the Model 3. Those who don't, as others have pointed out here, need to be convinced the better drive quality and greater convenience (home charging, if they can do it) and various other benefits (clean air, stable climate, energy independence, etc) trump the advantages of gas cars. GM dealers aren't likely to be superstars at that. Furthermore, you can now get a CPO Model S for $43,000... How long till you can get one for under $40,000? (I know, apples and oranges... for some people. Some people just want some fruit, though, and... okay, I'll stop this metaphor here.)

30,000/yr seems like a safe projection for GM. But that definitely puts some perspective on how well it competes with the Model 3, no?

 

[Breezy]

1. Maybe you don't like comparing apples to apples ? But, whatever !

2. Let the Tesla Model 3 specs come out , including range, charge times etc and then we will see, as far as a comparison with the CHEVY Bolt !

And, let's look at reservations, with about $1500 deposit down and compare that too, later this year ! I'm in no hurry ! I'm not bolting anywhere !

Let the market of consumers decide and have their input !

GM doesn't take reservations, so that isn't something that can be compared.

One thing's for sure: the Bolt will be well ahead of the Model 3 in sales at the end of 2017.

Longer term, I think they'll both do well.

 

[Quant]

GM doesn't take reservations, so that isn't something that can be compared.

One thing's for sure: the Bolt will be well ahead of the Model 3 in sales at the end of 2017.

Longer term, I think they'll both do well.

That's just hogwash. Are you saying that Bolt deliveries, by year end 2017, will be ahead of Model 3 deliveries by end of 2017?

If so, yeah, of course! Simply because Model 3 will not start delivering probably until 4 Q 2017, and with Bolt they expect to start delivering by Dec 2016!!! So, yeah ! Duh!

However, if you are saying that Model 3 reservations, plus any deliveries by year end 2017, will be less than Bolt deliveries and Bolt cumulative orders at Chevy dealerships by year end 2017, then I think you are quite mistaken.

By year end 2016, Model 3 reservations , with $ 1,500 or so per unit deposits, will be over 100k. Bolt will not be close !

And by year end 2017, the difference will be at least 2 or 3 times Model 3 demand vs Bolt demand.

And after that, by 2018 year end and 2019 Bolt will be constrained by battery supply, IF, (and that is a huge IF ) the Chevy dealers continue to book and sell high BOLT demand, in the absence of a supercharger network. The Tesla Supercahrger network by year end 2017 will be at least double what it is now.

Also, Chevy dealers will have little incentive to sell the Bolt and see the NPV of their service department investment $ at risk for the future!

 

[Jeff N]

GM says 2017 Chevy Bolt can meet demand of over 50,000 per year

 

[JohnSnowNW]

GM says 2017 Chevy Bolt can meet demand of over 50,000 per year

Words.

We'll just have to see what shakes out. I think GM is simply posturing assuming there won't be more than 30,000 orders...which there may not be.

 

[Visscher]

That's just hogwash. Are you saying that Bolt deliveries, by year end 2017, will be ahead of Model 3 deliveries by end of 2017?

If so, yeah, of course! Simply because Model 3 will not start delivering probably until 4 Q 2017, and with Bolt they expect to start delivering by Dec 2016!!! So, yeah ! Duh!

However, if you are saying that Model 3 reservations, plus any deliveries by year end 2017, will be less than Bolt deliveries and Bolt cumulative orders at Chevy dealerships by year end 2017, then I think you are quite mistaken.

By year end 2016, Model 3 reservations , with $ 1,500 or so per unit deposits, will be over 100k. Bolt will not be close !

And by year end 2017, the difference will be at least 2 or 3 times Model 3 demand vs Bolt demand.

And after that, by 2018 year end and 2019 Bolt will be constrained by battery supply, IF, (and that is a huge IF ) the Chevy dealers continue to book and sell high BOLT demand, in the absence of a supercharger network. The Tesla Supercahrger network by year end 2017 will be at least double what it is now.

Also, Chevy dealers will have little incentive to sell the Bolt and see the NPV of their service department investment $ at risk for the future!

I like seeing these predictions come more than true in favour of Tesla.

 

[Curt Renz]

GM says 2017 Chevy Bolt can meet demand of over 50,000 per year

I should have asked Bob Stovall about this after I mentioned GM.