-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Not horrible is a terrible state. The fact that there are a significant number of 11 kW and 24 kW stations out there is part of the mess. Relying on higher voltages is a non-starter for quite some time. We will see if anyone actually implements 350 amps or higher than typical pack voltages in their cars. The major automakers have a big chicken and egg problem... Who is installing 350 amp, 1000 volt EVSE's without vehicles that use it? Do you see the Bolt taking 350 amps? Tesla's Model S 70 takes 370 amps today. Does CCS > 200 amps require the Porsche Mission-E to ship to become somewhat reality? The Nissan Leaf 60 kWh, the upcoming i3 30 kWh, the Hyundai Ioniq 30 kWH certainly are not going to push that envelope. The Audi Q6 e-tron? What numbers will Audi build of that, so what push will there be for 150 kW? When CCS is finally standardized at 150 kW, likely Tesla's will be the vast majority of vehicles that can utilize that power level than all of the other automakers combined for quite some time.
mtndrew1
Active Member
The Bolt is the new Leaf and Zoe, as far as buyer demographics are concerned.
The Model 3 is the new BMW 3 series. I think there's a market for both but the Model 3 will catch a larger swath of the market because it's (hopefully) a great premium sedan, regardless of fuel type.
The Model 3 is the new BMW 3 series. I think there's a market for both but the Model 3 will catch a larger swath of the market because it's (hopefully) a great premium sedan, regardless of fuel type.
GM has to have a price that includes a profit (and negotiating room) for the dealer. Dealer doesn't have much incentive to sell the Bolt as maintenance is less than a ICE based car. Maybe GM will start supporting direct sales for EVs...
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I read the Model 3 thread over at the Volt forum, and all I can say is this:
Imagine if the cars were reversed, and it was the Tesla Bolt Vs the GM M3.
Well, hey, that was a reasonable worry... when the Roadster came out. I was seriously worried about this back in 2009, which is why I was far from the first to reserve a Model S.
So I analyzed the company intensively and figured out that they had almost everything lined up (including financing) to guarantee that they'd be able to produce 10s of thousands of cars. Tesla needed to (a) have a driveable prototype of Model S and (b) have a factory, and if they had both of those, they would remain a going concern. They got the factory October 2010 and the prototype in January 2011, and so I made my reservation.
I figured if Tesla got up to 10s of thousands of cars, there would be so many cars on the road that they WILL be maintained. After all, DeLoreans can be maintained without too much difficulty, and there were only 9000 of them.
But it's even better now. Now Tesla has massive value as a going concern. The brand is valuable and the manufacturing techniques are valuable and the production line itself is state-of-the-art and valuable. At this point, even if something goes wrong with Tesla, the worst that happens is that the stockholders lose their shirts. The company *will continue operating* and manufacturing cars. Someone (Google, Apple) would buy the company if it got in dire financial straits. At this point, I see zero chance that Tesla will shut down.
What I'm saying is that nobody needs to worry about getting a car which they can't service because of Tesla "going under". It was a serious risk early on -- as the buyers of the Fisker Karma found out. But that is impossible now; Tesla is too high volume for that to be a risk.
That's fair. I figure the Bolt will definitely have a market: people who want a moderately-priced *hatchback* specifically. Great! I think the market for electric cars is going to completely replace the market for gasmobiles, so I think there's room for Bolt and Model 3.
This is how I think of it now: there are currently only two automobiles on the US market, they're both made by Tesla, and they both cost over $70,000. There are also two brands of motorcycle to choose from. In autos, a $37500 hatchback will be introduced by GM next year (their first auto), and then a $35000 liftback will be introduced by Tesla somewhat later. I figure both will be limited only by how fast they can make them.
Only people who can't afford an automobile, or have requirements which cannot be met by the short list of autos on the market, or are aficianados of obsolete equipment, will buy the inferior alternative gasmobiles. The gasmobile market now is like the market for horses was in 1910, except horses are cuddlier than gasmobiles.
Sounds pretentious, but really, think of it this way and you can see where the market is headed.
The worst thing about this for CCS is that the Supercharger coverage is actually a *superset* of the CCS coverage. Which incidentally means Tesla has no reason to make a CCS adapter yet.
Tesla made a Chademo adapter because there are areas with lots of Chademo and no Superchargers. Unless CCS starts planting stations in Maritime Canada or West Texas or Arkansas or North Dakota, CCS has no advantages.[/QUOTE]
I think the Bolt looks great but in the class of a Honda Fit, where the Model 3 is competitive with (if not superior to) the BMW 3xx, Audi A4 etc - a different class of car. The biggest differentiator though is the Supercharger network. Yes there are a lot of Chademo and some CCS sites but they typically have one charger (not 6 or 8 or 10) and given that no one 'owns' their network you can't depend on them working when you get there. We've had a couple problems with our Tesla's over the last 3 years but the many Superchargers we have visited have always been ready.
Bangor Bob
Member
They could commit to building a hassle-free nationwide fast charging infrastructure at convenient travel locations (IOW, NOT at dealerships). That would go a long, LONG way to closing the gap (even though Superchargers are faster). CCS can talk to the car, it could validate a Bolt VIN and allow free charging, while requiring payment by non-Chevys.
What GM "isn't getting" is that the car is just one piece of the puzzle. Taking responsibility for delivering the whole ecosystem is what they're having trouble wrapping their minds around. The whole experience from purchase, to operation, to upgrades, to repairs needs revamping, and the dealers are an albatross around the neck in that story...
I'm starting to wonder if the reason for Chevy to build the Bolt is to sell more Volts, and the reason for the Volt is to sell, well, anything else. Bait and switch. They get curious people to come into the dealerships. As prey.
We experienced that years ago when Toyota first came out with the Prius. Daughter took it for a drive, and ultimately bought a Corolla. Still has it (and really wants an M3!). Toyota eventually made good on their work on the Prius, and in the line-up they sell a lot more trucks and SUVs, and Chevy seems to be doing the same with the Volt. Where does that leave the Bolt? I think the pre-order numbers have already spoken.
We experienced that years ago when Toyota first came out with the Prius. Daughter took it for a drive, and ultimately bought a Corolla. Still has it (and really wants an M3!). Toyota eventually made good on their work on the Prius, and in the line-up they sell a lot more trucks and SUVs, and Chevy seems to be doing the same with the Volt. Where does that leave the Bolt? I think the pre-order numbers have already spoken.
Actually, I had never heard of 11 kW CCS stations before you mentioned them. How many of them exist?
I can imagine 24 kW as a useful charge rate for PHEVs and small battery city BEVs. Some locations may have enough spare electrical capacity to support such a charger but not enough for a 100 kW station. It's not reasonable to compare local metro charging locations with interstate Supercharger stations. They fill different roles.
I suspect the Bolt EV is wired internally for 200A charging but they haven't released those details yet.
As seen on this Bjorn video, the S60 spends the large majority of its time charging at under 200A. The S60 is charging at less than 240A within a couple of minutes and under 200A after 8 minutes. It takes a full 56 minutes to get an 80% charge from empty. If the charging session were started with a partially full battery (30 miles in reserve) then time spent charging above 200A would be negligible.
I'm sure the older car makers are taking notice of Tesla's ~250k Model 3 reservations and will commit greater resources to bringing competitive cars to market sooner than they had been planning. Truly competitive cars will need 350A charging using today's pack voltages.
It's probably a good assumption that cars with new capabilities will appear before the infrastructure that fully utilizes their capabilities. We will see some interstate 200A CCS stations first and 350A stations will fill in or upgrade older locations when those cars become available. It will certainly be more chaotic than Tesla's central planning. This will be a competitive advantage for Tesla for at least the next 5-10 years.
Last edited:
Actually, I just realized that because the Bolt EV is likely a bit more efficient than the S60, the Bolt will apparently charge at least as fast as the S60 in mileage terms.
Even though the S60 charges over 200A from empty for the first 8 minutes it ends up adding only 145 km or 90 miles in the first 30 minutes on the Bjorn video when it is charging at its fastest kW rates.
GM claims the Bolt EV will charge the same 90 miles also in 30 minutes on CCS. At higher states of charge the kW rate is ramping down on the S60 so this implies that the Bolt EV charges on CCS at least as fast as an S60 on a Supercharger in mileage terms.
Even assuming the Bolt is somewhat more efficient than the S60, this may imply that the Bolt EV charges at a somewhat higher peak rate than 50 kW and at voltages well under 400V so that in turn essentially confirms that the Bolt EV will take advantage of amperage rates reached only under the CCS 200A specification.
Even though the S60 charges over 200A from empty for the first 8 minutes it ends up adding only 145 km or 90 miles in the first 30 minutes on the Bjorn video when it is charging at its fastest kW rates.
GM claims the Bolt EV will charge the same 90 miles also in 30 minutes on CCS. At higher states of charge the kW rate is ramping down on the S60 so this implies that the Bolt EV charges on CCS at least as fast as an S60 on a Supercharger in mileage terms.
Even assuming the Bolt is somewhat more efficient than the S60, this may imply that the Bolt EV charges at a somewhat higher peak rate than 50 kW and at voltages well under 400V so that in turn essentially confirms that the Bolt EV will take advantage of amperage rates reached only under the CCS 200A specification.
Agree. Bolt and Model 3 are not even in the same league.
Like Elon said many times before. Car manufacturers around the world are basically doing the absolute minimum in EV programs, so that they can pass gov's green regulations in order to keep selling ICE cars.
GM is one of them. Pretty sure that they won't even bother paying and setting up the EV support/infrastructure.
GM seems to be paying people to write favorable articles: Tesla Model 3 vs. Chevrolet Bolt: Battle of the long-range EVs
But could they also be paying people to tweet and comment? If not, I'm truly perplexed by some of the discussions I'm reading around the web comparing the Bolt vs Model 3. It's feels like someone compiled a list of ( poor ) talking points and is pushing hard to get them out there.
But could they also be paying people to tweet and comment? If not, I'm truly perplexed by some of the discussions I'm reading around the web comparing the Bolt vs Model 3. It's feels like someone compiled a list of ( poor ) talking points and is pushing hard to get them out there.
I would say the death of the Bolt might be a combination of the Model 3 and the next gen Leaf. Nissan will try to do anything to get the customers that want to spend less than 35k, so will VW, probably, with their next eGolf. And even if they won't achieve 200 miles with their offerings, they will be cheaper and I can't see any reason why you would buy the Bolt over the Model 3, unless its cheaper. Or maybe because you work at GMs EV team, or you don't care about the price but need a very small car, with a range of 200 miles.
Thats all the reasons I can think of and that amounts, probably, to less than 10k people in the world.
Thats all the reasons I can think of and that amounts, probably, to less than 10k people in the world.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Volt owners should be more worried about GM's ability to survive.
GM is simply in between bankruptcies.
Bimbels
GoldMember
Of first time BEV buyers, what percentage would choose the Bolt over the Model3?
I can see those already in the EV world considering them. But the supercharger network is huge peace of mind to someone who isn't already versed in charging options. Switching to EV is a big leap for most people - and a new way of thinking in terms of refueling.
Our model S is our first EV - because it was the first one that made sense to us since our commutes are long. Supercharging was a main selling feature. If I had to figure out public stations for my 200mile commute, I probably would have dismissed an EV as my next car, thinking the network just wasn't there yet.
I can see those already in the EV world considering them. But the supercharger network is huge peace of mind to someone who isn't already versed in charging options. Switching to EV is a big leap for most people - and a new way of thinking in terms of refueling.
Our model S is our first EV - because it was the first one that made sense to us since our commutes are long. Supercharging was a main selling feature. If I had to figure out public stations for my 200mile commute, I probably would have dismissed an EV as my next car, thinking the network just wasn't there yet.
I've followed Tesla since its inception. Also tzero, Fisker as well as EV production by legacy makers. Tesla's future is guaranteed. GM is creating FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) towards Tesla.
Toyota's Prius received a lot of FUD through years. Especially early. You had automotive journalists who said the Prius would corrode in the real world and not make it beyond 30k.
Tesla in a strong position. They will not fail or go under. As previously said, Tesla had backing if it heads into financial straits. The new CFO ran Google for years. Positive cash flow was expected to occur much sooner. Model 3 reservations blew far past even optimistic expectations. Anyone who believes Tesla is at risk is not informed or intentionally misleading.
Toyota's Prius received a lot of FUD through years. Especially early. You had automotive journalists who said the Prius would corrode in the real world and not make it beyond 30k.
Tesla in a strong position. They will not fail or go under. As previously said, Tesla had backing if it heads into financial straits. The new CFO ran Google for years. Positive cash flow was expected to occur much sooner. Model 3 reservations blew far past even optimistic expectations. Anyone who believes Tesla is at risk is not informed or intentionally misleading.
Similar threads
