-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
No, I was just talking about BEV's. This thread after all is about a BEV.
Where I question whether the BOLT is really a viable option due to it being treated like a compliance car by GM, and not as something they actually want a lot of people to buy. The question is whether GM will ever produce/market the BOLT in a way where it's an HONEST competitor to the Model 3? That maybe this entire thread is pointless because the Bolt isn't meant to be competition for it.
I'd like viable options for BEV's. Where they weren't artificially production run limited or sold at a loss.
Not ruling out the various other types of cars, but there are lots of options for those. They also tend to be gateway drugs to a BEV. For example the Volt is a great PHEV, but there are a ton of Tesla owners that are ex-Volt owners. Why? Because the Volt was the gateway drug.
Last edited:
You do not understand you are just saying the exact same thing again and again. It's all FUD to boot.
On a sales volume basis the Bolt EV / AmperaE has more money spent per unit for marketing than any other car or truck in their line up. Far more than Tesla spends or Nissan or BMW or VW or Ford.
If the AmperaE (Bolt EV) does not create US ZEV credits, then please explain why Europe is getting them before some North American regions? If the Bolt EV is sold at a loss, then why did they drop the price even further for Europe where they do not get ZEV credits?
If the production run was limited, why are they building up inventory and bumping up the Euro debut date?
The Acura NSX is a joke that the punchline came 10 years too late. It's a fantasy car for 12 year old boys.
So you're saying the Bolt isn't production run limited, and isn't meant to be a compliance car? So outside of being ugly it's a perfectly viable car that I should have no issues getting in all 50 states this year?
That's a perfectly good rebuttal to what I said, and the article I linked to.
After all my only concern was the lack of competition. So it's not that was a really hard thing to address, and why it took me multiple tries to get that across to you is beyond me.
Last edited:
According to FUD Magazine or GM or LG Chem? LG Chem and GM are saying they are planning for a demand of 30k units, but will produce whatever quantity is required.
There is no such thing as a Compliance car in Norway. So how could it meant to be a compliance car? Current California Only Compliance EVs are less than 120 miles range and cannot hit 93 mph in under a 1/4 mile. Ugly is subjective. It's not a sedan. But people are not buying sedans either anymore.
It's just a little hard for me to believe that Motor Trends car of the year for 2017 can only sell 30K units a year. The Chevy Bolt is also on Car and Drivers 10 best cars.
That's a lot of good press so why is the demanded projection so low? That projection is what the Leaf sold in 2014, and it absolutely trounces the Leaf in some many ways for about the same cost.
Is it the result of the slow rollout that only initially includes ZEV states? That the availability doesn't line up with all the good press coverage? If I could walk into a dealer today to try out the Bolt I would.
Chevrolet Bolt Availability | Chevrolet Bolt Forum
Now you are correct that some places like Washington State that's getting it before a ZEV state like Maine. But, I think other factors are being taken into account like the EV adoption rate in a state. It's pretty high in Washington. So it helps out the average fuel consumption of the entire fleet on GM cars.
For me it's not about what some magazine says, but that I have a hard time seeing how a car with so much can sell so little.
The only thing I can really find it to knock about it is how ugly it looks, and that it lacks adaptive cruise control.
dhrivnak
Active Member
The Bolt is to be on sale in all 50 states by September. And while it is very early in the year GM sold more Bolts in January than Tesla sold of the S or X. That does not strike me as a limited compliance car.
I don't think one can compare sales volumes of a 100K+ car to a $30K car. Especially when there is a build up of demand before release.
As to whether it's a compliance car really comes down to the effort made to sell the car, and whether the availability is limited. With 2017 we won't really have a good gauge for the sales numbers. Due to the build up of demand before release (which artificially inflates the initial sales), and that it's not available in a large part of the country for a good portion of the year.
So we'll have to wait for 2018, but by then the Tesla Model 3 will be released which is a fair comparison cost wise.
Where is the data you have on the January Bolt sales? Because it doesn't match what I found.
US Electric Car Sales Up 59% In January 2017
Even the link I posted is questionable because I can't find collaborating numbers on another site unless they link back to the other site.
Why is it so hard to get sales numbers?
In any case Tesla and GM are pulling the electric car sales forwards so they're the two most important companies until VW starts rolling out their stuff that they're obligated to through the whole diesel gate thing. I don't want the Bolt in any shape or form to be limited, and hopefully GM will add adaptive cruise control to it by 2018. Right now that's the only thing holding it back from a feature set.
Last edited:
I saw that one, and quickly rejected it because it mixed worldwise sales with US sales.
I also rejected the numbers I linked to because those were estimates.
The bolt numbers at 1162 is the only one that two sites independently collaborate.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
- GM is a business, on Earth to profit
- The Bolt is not profitable at its current cost to build and amount people are willing to pay for it
- To meet CARB mandates
- To meet CAFE mandates
- To keep a foot in the door of EVs in case they become profitable
- For PR reasons
Calling a model a "compliance" car is missing the point that it is made so by customer's unwillingness to pay a price for the car that would make it profitable. If, as we all hope, Tesla pulls off the Model 3 successfully, it will be the first EV ever to compete in the mid-range car market at a profit for the manufacturer. That is not so much a ding against GM as it is a marvel of Tesla since they will stand alone.
Last edited:
Source for Bolt numbers: http://media.gm.com/dld/content/Pag...wnload_0/file.res/Deliveries-January-2017.pdf
GM Announces January U.S. Sales, Affirms Positive Outlook
Tesla doesn't release monthly numbers, so they are all estimated until we get the quarterly numbers.
The problem with using profitability to gauge it is sometimes with a product it takes awhile for it to become profitable. You take the early loss because you know down the road it will be profitable. So you can become Amazon, and take over the world even though it wasn't really fair that you could operate at a loss for so long.
The Chevy Volt was unprofitable for awhile before it became profitable. According to GM the 2016 Chevy Volt is profitable.
Whats frustrating with GM is they come out with some new car that is awesome in a lots of ways, but then they find some way to screw it up. Their like a company where the Engineers are awesome, but the Marketing/Sales suck.
A Chevy Volt is a great mix of EV practicality where the average driver can go to work, and back purely on EV. Then for the rare time they need to go somewhere further they use gas. That removes the need to have a massive batter.
But, they didn't really sell nearly as many as one would expect. So that begs the question why?
It wasn't ugly
It was a GM which deters some people
It wasn't particularly fast or exciting. Did that dissuade people? It was why I never looked at it when looking at plug in hybrids and BEV's. My goal was to get to work, and back on electricity alone (I live in WA State which has the cleanest electricity). Plus it's fun and quiet so it's was a must have.
My concern is the Bolt will have the same fate. Enough sales to continue on, but not enough to really put a dent in ICE sales.
They never marketed it to its full potential. You could go into a dealership in many places and dealers were clueless about Volts. Even here in CA, I got quite a bit of misinformation about mine before I bought it. Even today, I have coworkers who don't know why the Volt is any different from a Prius.
And its price was probably an issue. You could buy a Prius for less money and still save a lot on your gas costs and not have to deal with plugging the car in. Which was really too bad, since a Volt is waaaaay more fun to drive than a Prius. If GM had marketed it that way (have your cake and eat it too!), they might have done better. That is why I bought a Volt - so I could save $$ on my long commute and drive a car that was fun to drive.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
The price for one,
And it being a GM, for two. This was a double wammy because the enviro crowd tends to be GM-skeptical if not outright anti-GM, while the GM crowd have been inoculated for years to view a car like the Volt with distaste and disdain.
GM fell on its own petard.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
There are degrees / everything is relative
The most gutless car I've driven was a Nissan with a 1.8L. Thankfully someone rear ended me and I got to use the insurance money to get a Prius which was ironically faster with the 1.5L and electric motor.
But when I got the Leaf I discovered it was sports car like 0-30 and would spin the tires at any SOC%. Unlike a Tesla the electric motor is not sized to take advantage of high SOC%. But just the nature of full torque at 0 RPM is infectious. Knowing you can gun it with no delay in throttle response. No waiting for a gas engine to wind up and eventually feed the transmission to wind up and eventually feed the drive shaft.
But yes the Leaf won't break lose when you are at highway speeds and want to gun it. The thing is every time I see the pluses of an EV it makes me want it all the time. I don't consider it a sleeping aid. I consider it a gateway drug. It leaves me wanting more.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
That remains to be seen.
I sure know that you can't get a Leaf serviced in West Virginia and you can't get a Rav 4 EV serviced in Tennessee (among many other states). Nissan and Toyota haven't mastered getting their dealers to do service for EVs in all states. I'm not going to assume GM can magically do better overnight.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
Not even Tesla has done 250K a year.
Monthly Plug-In Sales Scorecard
Non compliance cars per year in US sales ignoring plugin hybrids the leaders are Nissan and Tesla:
2013: 2012/2013 Leaf (22,610 units), 2013 Tesla Model S (17,650 units)
2014: 2013/2014 Leaf (30,200 units), 2014 Tesla Model S (16,689 units)
2015: 2015 Leaf (17,269 units), 2015 Tesla Model S (25,202 units)
2016: 2015/2016 Leaf (14,006 units), 2016 Tesla Model S and X (47,644 units)
You could widen those from US numbers to worldwide numbers and you still wouldn't hit 250,000 cars a year combined between Leaf and Tesla.
So I guess you are saying those 4 years of solid EV production and sales were just compliance cars because they didn't hit 250,000 a year?
I fully expect Tesla S and X as a pair to outsell Bolt on it's own but I'm not going to say that Bolt is a compliance car based on quantity alone. My big test is can I go to Arkansas and West Virginia and any state in between NY and LA and buy one? If demand outstrips supply but they make it available in at least 48 states I'm not going to call it a compliance car.
If the Bolt outsells the Leaf and the Prius Prime I'll consider it a success for GM. That probably doesn't need more than 20,000 a year in the US to do.
If I have to read the footnote list of states and figure out if NJ or GA is closer to me then yes I'd call it a compliance car if it isn't sold in my state no matter if they sell 250,000 in California. If it isn't for sale in Tennessee I'm going to cry compliance.
Last edited:
Similar threads
