It's not so much a slow ramp up as a non-existent one. They've come out and said they are only going to make between 30 and 50,000 of them this year. For a company that makes millions of vehicles a year that doesn't sound like they really want to sell as many of them as they can.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
It's not so much a slow ramp up as a non-existent one. They've come out and said they are only going to make between 30 and 50,000 of them this year. For a company that makes millions of vehicles a year that doesn't sound like they really want to sell as many of them as they can.
Bolt's ramp-up is faster than that of Model X already.
I would imagine the common argument on TMC is they can't make much more due to battery supply. That is why Tesla is building the Gigafactory, right, to get above these kinds of figures? GM is making millions of ICEs, sure, but EV is a different supply chain.
Look, I get the idea that GM is not 100% behind EVs and that their efforts are small compared to the size of the company. That is not at dispute here. I also know their history.
But a compliance car has certain meaning and diluting the term just to ridicule the first affordable large-battery EV does nobody any services.
Actually, they said:
“Since last year, rumors have perpetuated a notion that GM and supply partner LG Chem have production capacity of only 20,000-30,000 Bolt EVs per year, but this is not true, said Kevin Kelly, manager, Electrification and Fuel Cell Technology Communications.”
“There is nothing constraining us from doing that,” said Kelly when asked how Chevrolet might handle a potential deluge of 50,000 orders that would far surpass conservative analyst projections for the Bolt’s first year of sales.”
The record US sales for any EV in a single year in the USA is the Nissan Leaf at 30,200.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
I expect Bolt to sell about the same as Volt. Not a compliance car - but also doesn't move the EV volumes up significantly.
To GM - Volt and now Bolt are essentially green halo cars. Kind of like i3 to BMW. Not compliance but also not full blown.
To GM - Volt and now Bolt are essentially green halo cars. Kind of like i3 to BMW. Not compliance but also not full blown.
What would call full blown? A car for the rich? It will be here in 2 months most likely.
Oddly enough my wife was rather cavalier when we first met.
Last edited:
I think your sales estimates are fair. As is the green halo car comment. Also, Bolt is probably a bit of a hedge bet. Should the EV thing gain faster than expected traction, GM is positioned to move faster.
That said, I do think Bolt can move the EV volumes significantly in the sense that they are reaching new audiences with large-battery vehicles. 50 000/year would be a considerable addition to current volumes both in absolute numbers as well as in reaching new audiences.
I get it, it is not much compared to where Tesla says there will be with Model 3 volumes. It remains to be seen if Tesla reaches those (and when) and if GM reaches the 50 000/year level or pehaps even something beyond. We shall see.
Tesla has been overly optimistic before, of course.
p.s. I think Bolt is a much more serious effort than the i3 is. Bolt is not a weirdmobile.
jgillispie
Member
At 30,000 units it won't even break the top 125 models sold. I'm guessing that's what the person is referring to. The Bolt and the 3 are/will be the first long range EVs to come close to getting into the sweet spot pricewise. The higher initial cost is going to scare some people, even with the long-term fuel saving.
Looking over the top 10 sedans sold per year, they sell closer to the $25,000 mark.
2016 sales / MSRP
1. Camry $23-31,5
2. Corolla $18,5-23
3. Civic $18,750-27,5
4. Accord $27,5-35,7
5. Altima $24,750-35,5
6. Fusion $24-30
7. Malibu $24-32
8. Sentra $18-23
9. Elantra $18-23,5
10. Sonata $22,5-35
What is a "publicity-compliance car"?
What I meant by "publicity-compliance" was that it is meant for publicity, to give the impression that GM is making EVs available. I'm afraid my term does not do a good job of expressing my intent. EVNow, quoted below, expresses the idea much better than I did, by calling it a "green halo" car.
GM already made a Green Halo car. 4.7 miles per kWh. Cd of .19. Inductive charging. Top speed of 187mph. And it ran off lead acid cells.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
You are still missing the point. Yes, they both have different reasons for doing staggered launches, and a slow ramp-up does not necessarily mean a compliance car, but the major difference is:What is a "publicity-compliance car"?
Ask yourself this: In what way is Bolt a compliance car? If it is just because of a slow ramp-up then there isn't much of a case.
GM is optimizing their ramp-up for compliance
Tesla is optimizing their ramp-up for logistics
It's really that simple.
Electrek is hung up on this because they made a big story about how GM was going to launch the car like a regular car (unlike the compliance-optimized Spark EV and 2016 Volt).
I do not have any numbers, but as far as I know they did at least deliver Model S Signatures "nation wide" in 2012. Maybe even to Canada?
So, tell me, why do they want to let customers here in Norway have to wait for over a year to get the cars they have ordered if they can increase the production so easily?
They will start to deliver cars here in this summer (at about the same time they start to deliver to other none-CARB states), but if you order one now, you will have to wait until next (late?) spring/summer to get it delivered. They had sold out all they could deliver in 2017 before production of the Bolt had started.
I did for a while considered to get a Bolt/Ampera-e to not have to wait for the Model 3, but I was a bit late at the party, and soon found out that I probably would get the Model 3 sooner then I could get the Bolt/Amperea-E.
diamond.g
Active Member
I thought that the issue with the Model X was the FWDs? That held up production ramp. Is there anything that is 'difficult' on the Bolt that would have had the same effect?Bolt's ramp-up is faster than that of Model X already.
I would imagine the common argument on TMC is they can't make much more due to battery supply. That is why Tesla is building the Gigafactory, right, to get above these kinds of figures? GM is making millions of ICEs, sure, but EV is a different supply chain.
Look, I get the idea that GM is not 100% behind EVs and that their efforts are small compared to the size of the company. That is not at dispute here. I also know their history.
But a compliance car has certain meaning and diluting the term just to ridicule the first affordable large-battery EV does nobody any services.
The actual reasons of the Model X delay are of course clouded in secrecy. There were many issues, falcon wings probably one, but other part issues as well, including the seating and perhaps surprisingly seals. Then again, Model S without any falcon wings was similarly riddled with a slow ramp-up.
What could affect Bolt? I agree as an established manufacturer GM should be able to crank out the frame of the car faster and more reliably than Tesla did with either Model S (their first own car) or Model X (a rather complex build). But I would imagine their battery/EV powertrain logistics is one new area where a slow ramp-up certainly could result quite naturally.
And they refused to actually sell the car, only leasing it, and refusing to build enough to meet the demand, and refusing to make it available outside of California, and when lessees begged to buy it after the lease period, GM refused, took them back, and crushed them, losing all their green credibility and more, because they'd shown they could make an EV that people wanted to buy, but were simply unwilling to do so.
The EV1 was clearly nothing but a compliance car, and was discontinued and destroyed as soon as CA could no longer force them to make it.
But when Tesla showed what an EV could be, GM's credibility dropped so low they had to make another EV, and they're still making only as many as they think they need to do to counteract that public perception that GM's first priority is maximizing the use of fossil fuels.
EV1 was a compliance car.
Bolt is a green-halo car.
@daniel I pressed Like on the above because I 99% agree. I still think GM may well run with the Bolt more so than the sceptics believe, as in more than they need to counteract public perception. I guess what I disagree is stating it as a fact that GM are only making so and so many for that and that reason. We don't quite know yet. We are speculating.
We shall see.
We shall see.
Actually, I was a car buyer back then, and was slammed with offers to lease the EV1. Even though they were losing boatloads of cash on each car, they had to lower the lease rates and beg people to take them. When the program was halted there was still inventory.
58 people requested to extend their leases. Somewhere north of 100 turned their cars in early.
It won the dubious honor of making Time's Worst Cars of All Time list, and the WSJ trashed the car in a scathing article.
Football victories in HS always get more glorious, and your first date always gets a lot sweeter. The EV1 was both a financial and engineering disaster. Not because it was wrong, but because it wasn't right. A 2 seat $100k EV that weighed 3000lb just wasn't the wise decision when everybody was just slapping car batteries in their cheapest gas model.
I hope you are right. GM's track record from the very beginning has been terrible. But I will be happy if you are right because we need as many EVs on the road as the car makers are willing to build.
My dislike of GM goes way back. I was born in L.A. and when I was very young L.A. had a marvelous system of trollycars: Electrified public transportation. GM was part of the consortium that bought that system, dismantled it, and replaced it with (GM-built) fossil-fuel busses that ran so seldom that nobody who could manage to buy a car would use them. My last few years in L.A. I spent many cumulative hours waiting at bus stops for connections to busses that ran once an hour. In order to sell cars, GM forced poor Angelinos (those who couldn't afford a car) into transportation hell. And did it by tearing out a wonderful public transportation system. Just to force people to buy cars which turned the air into carcinogenic filth.
diamond.g
Active Member
Somebody fed you false data. The Opel ordering began less than 6 weeks ago for summer delivery.
Norway to Kick-off Start of Opel Ampera-e Sales in Europe
You do not have to believe GM, it's not a requirement. They said they would make a car that would go 0-60mph in 7 seconds, and get 200 miles of range, and sell it for 1/2 what a 200 mile EV costs. Perhaps they won't. Who knows but the folks who bought them and driving them. On the interwebbythingy it is possible that the Bolt goes 150mi, hits 60mph in 20s, and costs $100k. Just like ordering for Opels started last summer.
