-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
LG Bolt - Chevy Bolt made in Korea
- Thread starter flathillll
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Electric Vehicles
roblab
Active Member
But you're wound up pretty tight, dude.
Yeah, just don't start checking into what all the other "Merikan" companies are doing to save a few bucks. Or do we have and "Merikan" companies any more? Oh, right. We do insurance and make laws. We're good.
But you're wound up pretty tight, dude.
hella tight bro
you are sure a dandy one
- - - Updated - - -
How Finance Gutted Manufacturing | Boston Review
How Financialization Hurts Manufacturing | financialization
flankspeed8
Member
This thread seems to have lost its way and is kind of bizarre. Why isn't it merged with the existing Bolt thread? Why did the OP start a separate thread for this anyway?
why is it that volt owners love to defend GM? the purpose of this thread to make it clear this car at heart is Korean and to specifically discuss how this could end up with LG taking oven GM long term. the GM powerpoint presentation file was named LGBolt.pptx which is pretty funny and telling at the same time. not many people know how Korea competes. a system like Japan only way with way more nepotism and corruption. It is called CHAEBOL
Attachments
Last edited:
To be fair, quite a large number of people on this board are well informes about industrial combinations and Korean business. A number of us probably know about Samsung cars and their origin with the newly "Renaultized" Nissan and not a few of us can remember how Hyundai began their car business assembling Ford Cortinas, alter buying Mitsubishi drivetrains for their first really semi-Korean car.
One need not suggest that the Chaebol system is uniquely incestuous or corrupt. After all the Standard Oil Trust, Ford/Firestone/Edison all had similar characteristics in the USA.
As for anybody taking over GM, following the massive US federal bailout is is far from clear that such a takeover would be antithetical to US interests if it were to take place.
What manufacturer actually has the most pure US-origin content anyway? If one chooses to make that an issue it becomes instantly fraught because the industry is global anyway. The published national content rules are themselves quite difficult to understand and are not consistent anyway.
Finally, LG battery production is being established in Michigan. Is not Michigan an American state? Should Chrysler be punished for having Italian control?
For the record: I have done work for Korean, American, Japanese, Italian, German and UK (yes, there still is a UK car industry) manufacturers. In off topic discussions I am prepared to debate teh relativa merits of different industrial forms.
That said, we should be able to assess the Bolt and every other competitor, including Tesla, without resorting to ideological arguments, should we not?
This is correct. Korean companies are vertically integrated, family owned, and have complete monopolies in their own country.
flankspeed8
Member
Didn't realize that I defended GM in anyway. You seem to have a lot of emotion over the fact that GM is relying on Korean parts for a large portion of the Bolt which will still be assembled (I believe) in the United States. How does that in anyway delegitimize the Bolt, which is really what you are trying to do? Some of the posts on the Bolt have bordered on hysterics. If in the end the Bolt is going to be a flop as many predict, why give it the time of day? OTOH I am not going to summarily dismiss GM and their ability to build and market a competitive EV based on the fact that they went bankrupt or are partnering with a foreign supplier. EV's are the future and I am completely confident that GM will be a major contributor as will Tesla, Nissan, Hyundai, BMW, Audi, VW, etc.
What you are trying to do is derail the discussion with your choice of words such suggesting:
1) the thread has lost its way
2) the thread is bizarre
3) it should not have its own thread
4) I have too much emotion
6) I am hysterical
5) I am wasting my time
5) I am trying to delegitimize the LG Bolt
You are now on my block list (not really but its so fun to say that)
I am predicting the Bolt is going to be a huge sales success, NOT a flop.
This is what makes the fact that at heart the Bolt is made and engineered by LG even more of a problem. GM is run by a bunch of idiots with no long-term thinking capability. The only reason I will feel bad when they get taken over by Korea/China (after bankruptcy) is because of the loss of manufacturing jobs in the USA. In any case it doesn't matter as much anymore as the the automotive industry is moving from Detroit to Northern California. Thank G we have Tesla, Apple, & Google(Ford), the new BIG 3
RELAX AND DON'T BE SO EMOTIONAL. ACTUALLY THAT IS THE OPPOSITE EFFECT THIS THREAD IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE. IT IS SUPPOSED TO PROVOKE A DISCUSSION. THAT IS WHY I USE STUPID BIG RED LETTERS AS IT UPSETS YOUR NORMAL THOUGHT PROCESS (BREAKS A LOOP).THE MODS:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
Last edited:
Thanks for telling me what the thread is about. I wasn't really sure with the title being 'LG Bolt - Chevy Bolt made in Korea'
Please stop trying pigeonhole the thread. Thanks! The LG Bolt is an Electric Vehicle.
The main topic of the thread is anything related to LG's involvement in the Bolt, but we should not limit ourselves. US manufacturing is just one many subjects we can discuss as you have show by bringing up a new subject: Does the LG Bolt increase the switch-over rate at which we are transitioning to alternative energy transportation?
Yes. The more Electric Vehicles on the market the better! The only way the LG Bolt could actually decrease the switch-over rate is if they starting catching on fire giving EV's a bad reputation. All it takes is one Bolt in a garage to catch fire and kill a sleeping baby/grandma/puppy/whatever in the apartment above to retard the movement. The chances of an LG Bolt catching on fire is much greater than a Tesla given the close packing of the prismatic cells. The advantage with cylindrical cans is it vents up away from the neighboring cell and blows cell-level fuse. Think of the can more like a fire nozzle. The soft prismatic cells in the Bolt pack are even tighter packed than the Volt pack. For ultimate energy density the prismatic pack wins, but you actuallywant a tiny bit of airspace between the cells as air is a very good insulator (stops thermal runaway). Long-term with solid state cells, all packs will be prismatic, but right now prismatic packs are extremely dangerous I.M.O.
Remember no Tesla have every caught fire just sitting there or while driving normally (not in accident). Yes, individual cells in a Tesla packs have vented and techically caught fire if you are being pedantic, but it did not spread. You just got a message to pull over and then got a tow truck.
Spontaneous cell thermal runaway due to a mfg defect is a one in a billion chance with good QC, but a good battery pack design will still allow for it and not allow it to propagate. Yes, a Model S caught fire while supercharging, but that is highly suspect since the guy (who's brother is a day trader) just bought the car used 2 days before, and then lent it to his friend. The same is not true of the Volt. There have been numerous reports of Volts catching fire while driving and while simply parked (not even charging).
See there is a new topic. The LG battery design in the Bolt. Wow isn't this great allowing ourselves to speak about more than one thing?
Last edited:
Funny enough, I first only gave the posts here a cursory look but then I stumbled across Bolt EV Powertrain: How Did GM And LG Collaborate On Design, Production? today on this very subject.
- - - Updated - - -
Around that time, I poked around at http://www.renaultsamsungm.com/ and found many of the vehicles were based on Nissan designs and Nissan powertrains. It seems more recent cars from them tend to have Renault interiors, not Nissan ones.
Busan Style - YouTube mentions Renaults and even now Nissan Rogues (for export) being built at the Busan plant.
- - - Updated - - -
On this note, I first learned of Samsung's cars via https://web.archive.org/web/20110910171548/http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_40/b3802159.htm when I used to have a 5th gen Nissan Maxima. Back then Renault Samsung Motors was building the 4th-gen Maxima in their Busan plant and selling it as the Samsung SM5.
Around that time, I poked around at http://www.renaultsamsungm.com/ and found many of the vehicles were based on Nissan designs and Nissan powertrains. It seems more recent cars from them tend to have Renault interiors, not Nissan ones.
Busan Style - YouTube mentions Renaults and even now Nissan Rogues (for export) being built at the Busan plant.
Thanks for the links.
It is interesting they claim the inverter is a GM design since LG "will also manufacture the car's power electronics modules to specifications mandated by GM."
That doesn't sound like it is a "GM Design" as they claim. I wish I could claim I was a power electronics designer simply by giving another company some specifications. What a joke.
GM is for sure very capable of designing motors and I'm sure that is really their design (meaning they simulated it), but the sad fact is GM is incapable of design the car by themselves (as I will prove below).
This article seems like a desperate attempt to spin the LG partnership as a positive thing:
Reuss quote from the cwerdna Green Car Reports article date Feb 3 2016:
"We have the capability as a company, obviously, to make all of these components ourselves," Reuss stressed. He called the allocation of responsibilities a "mix and match," noting as an example that GM doesn't supply its own heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning systems for the cars it builds."
My reply: What a shite logic. Clearly the heating, ventilation, and air-condition sytems should be outsourced. This is vastly different than completely outsourcing the heart of an EV, not only on the component level, but on the ***system level***
Now let's travel back in time to October of last year to prove GM and Reuss are now lying:
Mark Reuss, GM executive vice president of global product development, purchasing and supply chain, said that without the expanded relationship with LG, GM would not be able to bring the Bolt to market (insert old ironic quote linkhere).
"I think GM was lacking that [electrification knowledge] in a very complete way for many years, I'll just be frank about that,"
source (link): http://www.autoblog.com/2015/10/21/gm-without-lg-chem-we-couldnt-build-bolt-ev/
It is interesting they claim the inverter is a GM design since LG "will also manufacture the car's power electronics modules to specifications mandated by GM."
That doesn't sound like it is a "GM Design" as they claim. I wish I could claim I was a power electronics designer simply by giving another company some specifications. What a joke.
GM is for sure very capable of designing motors and I'm sure that is really their design (meaning they simulated it), but the sad fact is GM is incapable of design the car by themselves (as I will prove below).
This article seems like a desperate attempt to spin the LG partnership as a positive thing:
Reuss quote from the cwerdna Green Car Reports article date Feb 3 2016:
"We have the capability as a company, obviously, to make all of these components ourselves," Reuss stressed. He called the allocation of responsibilities a "mix and match," noting as an example that GM doesn't supply its own heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning systems for the cars it builds."
My reply: What a shite logic. Clearly the heating, ventilation, and air-condition sytems should be outsourced. This is vastly different than completely outsourcing the heart of an EV, not only on the component level, but on the ***system level***
Now let's travel back in time to October of last year to prove GM and Reuss are now lying:
Mark Reuss, GM executive vice president of global product development, purchasing and supply chain, said that without the expanded relationship with LG, GM would not be able to bring the Bolt to market (insert old ironic quote linkhere).
"I think GM was lacking that [electrification knowledge] in a very complete way for many years, I'll just be frank about that,"
source (link): http://www.autoblog.com/2015/10/21/gm-without-lg-chem-we-couldnt-build-bolt-ev/
Last edited:
flankspeed8
Member
I think that Flathill has disappeared from TMC, but he seemed quite critical of GM using Korean components. Not sure how accurate this is, but I find this paragraph interesting:
"Tesla intends to use more Korean technology on its Model 3. It decided to use tires manufactured by Hankook Tire and LG Display will possibly be supplying its OLED panels for the automotive systems. Additionally, Tesla is testing the manufacturing capability and production of LG Chem, Samsung SDI and SK Innovation," said an official, Tuesday.
Tesla approaches LG, Samsung for Model 3 batteries
"Tesla intends to use more Korean technology on its Model 3. It decided to use tires manufactured by Hankook Tire and LG Display will possibly be supplying its OLED panels for the automotive systems. Additionally, Tesla is testing the manufacturing capability and production of LG Chem, Samsung SDI and SK Innovation," said an official, Tuesday.
Tesla approaches LG, Samsung for Model 3 batteries
looks like same thing is happening to Tesla 3, it uses Korean tire,steel,self-driving system,display,steeling wheels and brakes, and list goes on and on..........and Japanese battery technology, and the best part is it will be made in China......I think you are very ignorant on how automotive industry is working these days...
RobStark
Well-Known Member
One Korean newspaper said Korean steel used for A pillar.
Self driving system is made in the USA.
Battery Technology is a collaboration between a Japanese Company and an American company that will be made in the USA.
Any Model 3s made in China will be for The Chinese market.
BTW Please reference credible source saying brakes and wheels will be made in Korea.
