Tesla Model 3 vs Chevy Bolt

[jgs]

*bolded underlined*. What the what?

I think the assumption was that Leaf drivers must be using an ICE car for long-distance trips. Because everyone takes long-distance trips in cars, I suppose. Which isn't true, of course.

EREV - that unique subset represented by Chevy VOLT and BMW I3-REX.

You could create a Tesla (or Bolt) equivalent if you placed a Volt genset on a small trailer and pulled it behind you on trips. Your continent would now be your oyster.

GM has done most of the heavy lifting already in creating the Volt's systems - talk about readymades! I'm off to find a proper wreck.
--

It's been talked about of course. The fact a Tesla is immobilized while charging might cramp your style, though.

 

[Jeff N]

The Bolt EV is not competition for the Model 3. Neither are any of the other 200+ mile cars without DC fast charging networks.

Roadtrip limitations are true in most areas today but for people in certain areas in western coastal and perhaps eastern coastal areas of North America a Bolt EV can plausibly be used for typical roadtrips although it may be somewhat less convenient than a Model 3 with a standard battery pack.

I rarely drive farther than Oregon or San Diego from the San Francisco area and can plausibly do that in a Bolt when it becomes available late this year even though such a round trip could be over 1,000 miles.

EREV - that unique subset represented by Chevy VOLT and BMW I3-REX.

The main limitation to making a plugin hybrid be an EREV is battery capacity. An EREV needs a sufficient battery that can power the car up to highway speeds and provide adequate acceleration on battery alone. With today's battery technology that usually aligns with having a 10+ kWh pack. I expect EREV cars to become more common in another 5 years as batteries get smaller and cheaper and conventional car companies get smarter about packaging the powertrains.

It's been talked about of course. The fact a Tesla is immobilized while charging might cramp your style, though.

I don't know about Tesla, but people have figured out how to tap into the LEAF battery cabling to enable towed generators to supply power while the car is on the road. I would expect that something similar can be done for Tesla cars. Folks just haven't been compelled enough to do it with Tesla's larger battery packs and available Supercharging.

 

[EVNow]

However the % miles electric is likely higher for the Volt drivers, since any trip regardless of length starts with about 40 EV miles, and they can have opportunities to charge when stopped at destinations during the day. Leaf drivers have to use their IC engine for the entire trip, unless ther long range car is a Volt or a Tesla.

Have GM fans completely lost their mind or they can't think beyond their own situation in life ?

Let me tell you why that little statistic (comparing Volt EV miles vs Leaf) is absurd. It doesn't control for anything else in life. Do the drivers drive more miles in total ? Do they have multiple cars ? Do they have longer commutes ? Etc Etc Etc.

In other words, it is not that people who own Leaf drive less, it is that people who drive more chose Volt. If you make Leaf owners switch to Volt, their % EV miles would probably drop, instead of increase.

In my own case, in the last 5 years we've not driven long distance (little babies do that to you). We just fly. So, my % EV miles in 100%. How would Volt EV miles % be better ? OTOH, we do drive more than 50 miles regularly on weekends. Some of those would have been on stinking ICE with Volt.

Your weird quote above assumes that some how people are going to drive long distance so often and for so long, that weekend driving over 40 miles will be trumped by that. No doubt that is the case for some - but hardly the norm.

Second, most families drive larger cars when they drive far. I can't imagine driving in a Volt for long distance with kids. So, if I had a Volt instead of Leaf - we'd still have taken our CUV, if we drove long distance. Besides, my wife refuses to sit in a low car like Volt (see next paragraph) because of ingress/egress issues.

Let us just say Volt form factor is a poorly thought out solution to a genuine problem - probably because Lutz was more interested in building a faux-muscle car than a real PHEV with utility.

My ideal solution in 2011 was to buy an EV like Leaf and a CUV PHEV - which we never got.

ps : I welcome you to come and look at FB Seattle Leaf group posts. You'll see a ton of people doing inter city travel with Leaf.

pps : I just checked. You are in IN ? Having been in STL for a while, I understand why you would think driving long distances in cars is the norm.

 

[EVNow]

Well... That's not how governments work:

At first the problem was covered up, which is normal for government bureaucrats, but after that things went nuts. The coverup was discovered, and the CARB vowed to take immediate action.

The pseudo-scientist kept his job, he was not fired. A letter of reprimand I think was his punishment?

Wow. I imagine in private sector it is very different ? Like in VW, Mitsu and a thousand others ?

His study on diesel particulates is so ingrained into the environmental programs that it is still used and considered hard facts for calculations. Yes, the agencies do know the report was made up and the numbers are wrong. But there is not enough time to start all over again, so they just use his fictitious numbers.

Do you have a solid source on this ?

 

[GSP]

Have GM fans completely lost their mind or they can't think beyond their own situation in life ?

Let me tell you why that little statistic (comparing Volt EV miles vs Leaf) is absurd. It doesn't control for anything else in life. Do the drivers drive more miles in total ? Do they have multiple cars ? Do they have longer commutes ? Etc Etc Etc.

In other words, it is not that people who own Leaf drive less, it is that people who drive more chose Volt. If you make Leaf owners switch to Volt, their % EV miles would probably drop, instead of increase.

In my own case, in the last 5 years we've not driven long distance (little babies do that to you). We just fly. So, my % EV miles in 100%. How would Volt EV miles % be better ? OTOH, we do drive more than 50 miles regularly on weekends. Some of those would have been on stinking ICE with Volt.

Your weird quote above assumes that some how people are going to drive long distance so often and for so long, that weekend driving over 40 miles will be trumped by that. No doubt that is the case for some - but hardly the norm.

Second, most families drive larger cars when they drive far. I can't imagine driving in a Volt for long distance with kids. So, if I had a Volt instead of Leaf - we'd still have taken our CUV, if we drove long distance. Besides, my wife refuses to sit in a low car like Volt (see next paragraph) because of ingress/egress issues.

Let us just say Volt form factor is a poorly thought out solution to a genuine problem - probably because Lutz was more interested in building a faux-muscle car than a real PHEV with utility.

My ideal solution in 2011 was to buy an EV like Leaf and a CUV PHEV - which we never got.

ps : I welcome you to come and look at FB Seattle Leaf group posts. You'll see a ton of people doing inter city travel with Leaf.

pps : I just checked. You are in IN ? Having been in STL for a while, I understand why you would think driving long distances in cars is the norm.

Good points.

I certainly consider driving 100 miles to another town, and back the same day to be normal, and it would take a lot more time, money, and hassle to fly and rent a car for such a trip. If DC Fast Chargers were available, I would certainly take such trips in a Leaf, but around IN, only Tesla has reliable chargers placed where they are needed.

I grant that not everyone's situation is the same, but certainly that works both ways?

GSP

PS. For longer trips of 400-600 miles per day, I do take my larger car instead of the Volt, so you called that one.

 

[EVNow]

I certainly consider driving 100 miles to another town, and back the same day to be normal, and it would take a lot more time, money, and hassle to fly and rent a car for such a trip. If DC Fast Chargers were available, I would certainly take such trips in a Leaf, but around IN, only Tesla has reliable chargers placed where they are needed.

Around here there are more CHAdeMO than SC (but, obviously not as reliable). Distances are also somewhat less compared to the great flatlands of Midwest.

I've colleagues - who bought Leaf mainly as an in-town car. They show little or no interest in a long distance EV (or a small PHEV for long distance - which includes out out town 100 mile day trip). They are even surprised I extended my lease to wait for a long range EV like Bolt (at the end of the year) instead of getting another Leaf on lease now.

 

[e-FTW]

Have we looked at how much longer you will have to wait at DC fast-charging stations vs a Supercharger? Because I certainly don't see that as a great thing for the Bolt.

 

[McRat]

Wow. I imagine in private sector it is very different ? Like in VW, Mitsu and a thousand others ?


Do you have a solid source on this ?

The private sector normally puts heads of their minions on pikes surrounding the palace to placate the unwashed hordes when bad things happen.
The government grabs the unwashed hordes and puts their heads on pikes to warn others to shut the fcck the up, or you're next.

Same result different system.

There has a been a huge amount written about the DPF scandal, and billions of dollars of peasant money wasted with no discernable benefit. And a large amount wasted on salaries and studies that never did produce good science. Need to keep budget levels, screw the environment.

Here's a primitive overview by some of the scientist involved at the time. Yeah, people were pissed so take it with a grain and do the deep research:

http://www.scientificintegrityinstitute.org/EnstromPPT062309.pdf

Note all diesels have DPF systems even though the actually benefit was negative. The 20% reduction in CO2 and 40% reduction in HC compression ignition systems yield were squashed for an unknown improvement in carbon dust that hasn't seem to changed after billions were spend on it.

Europeans used the American studies as fact before the truth was revealed. There was no rollback once the fraud was discovered.

I believe crap like the CARB DPF scandal is no different than the bozos who have "scientists" that prove EV's are dirty technology and should be abolished.

The way you fix a problem:

First find if the problem actually exists. Blind scientific studies, not an axe grinding study.
Determine root cause.
Devise a list of systems that could mitigate the cause.
Research the list to find the system that is optimal for the case.
Implement the system.
Verify the result of the system are matching the research, if not find out why, and correct the numbers.
Re-evaluate the effect when compared to other possible systems in the list.

CHANGE SHIIT IF YOU ARE WRONG. This is the step that governments find so hard to deal with. When the make a bad decision, they are incapable of changing directions to achieve the desired outcome. They would rather make things worse than admit they are human, or bluntly, to admit they are just like the normal peasants they enjoy kicking or piking their heads.

 

[Jeff N]

Here's a primitive overview by some of the scientist involved at the time. Yeah, people were pissed so take it with a grain and do the deep research:

http://www.scientificintegrityinstitute.org/EnstromPPT062309.pdf

I mentioned Enstrom in my earlier reply here:
Tesla Model 3 vs Chevy Bolt

He seems to be the primary critic of CARB's particulate health study originally lead by the guy with the bogus Ph.D.

Enstrom was the guy who discovered the bogus degree and who provided the basis for the regulatory challenges that I linked to previously along with CARB's detailed replies giving their view about why Enstrom's study saying that PM is not a significant health risk in California was invalid.

Basically, Enstrom has been aligned with the tobacco industry for many years in arguing that second hand smoke is not a significant health risk and then adopted a similar outlook on diesel exhaust PM and became a vocal opponent of CARB's efforts to reduce exhaust PM as part of a national EPA program that relied primarily on the non-CARB health study that I linked to earlier.

If you google Enstrom you will find lots of conservative opinion sites that have rallied behind him.

Here's an article from the LA Times that helps to give some historical context.

Tobacco funding of research reviewed

Enstrom recently founded the Scientific Integrity Institute to air his views. He says it gets no tobacco money and consists mainly of a website, www.scientificintegrityinstitute.org. The website mounts a spirited and lengthy defense of his life's work.

"The American Cancer Society turned on me because they didn't like my results," he said. "It's outrageous what they have done."

 

[brucet999]

GM still have some advantages, but I think the gap in production costs between 14B in orders and 50B in orders is far smaller than the gap in production costs between 2B in orders and 50B in orders.


I think that depends on what Tesla delivers. I can see a situation where Tesla's tax credit expires, and the reduction in pack costs from the gigafactory allows them to shave another $2500 off the price of the 3, which means a Bolt is only $2500 less than a 3 even after the tax credit. If the 3 provides better acceleration, supercharging for a modest fee (I'm thinking ~$1000-1500 alone), and other advantages, Tesla may retain a sales lead for years.

Your price speculations assume Bolt pricing remaining static. GM's huge assets would enable them to reduce Bolt pricing even at the risk of reducing margin.

 

[EVNow]

The private sector normally puts heads of their minions on pikes surrounding the palace to placate the unwashed hordes when bad things happen.
The government grabs the unwashed hordes and puts their heads on pikes to warn others to shut the fcck the up, or you're next.

Same result different system.

You are letting ideology get in the way of reality. Having worked in large private companies over decades and observed how companies behave all over the world I've a very different view.

Even with all the flaws in our democracy (see Trump, Hillary), US Governments are incredibly transparent compared to large companies. If anything, the reason the governments seem so anti-people is oversized influence the large companies have (I should note secret lobbying in general, not just by large companies).

ps : that "integrity" site you linked to largely sounds like climate change denial sites.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Here's a primitive overview by some of the scientist involved at the time. Yeah, people were pissed so take it with a grain and do the deep research:

http://www.scientificintegrityinstitute.org/EnstromPPT062309.pdf

Putting aside the fact, that half of the presentation was focused on ad-hominem on CARB, the other half didn't present any evidence or argument that the report had falsified data. All it did was present other research that seemingly would suggest the PM factor was not as big as the report suggested. That is an entirely different claim than saying the report was false.

The WHO has issued similar claims (without relying on CARB reports), so certainly the health effects are real:
http://www.euro.who.int/__data/asse...h-effects-of-particulate-matter-final-Eng.pdf

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Your price speculations assume Bolt pricing remaining static. GM's huge assets would enable them to reduce Bolt pricing even at the risk of reducing margin.

Not necessarily. I never said GM would always keep prices static. They'll probably see slightly better prices as they build more Bolts, but the reduction won't be as pronounced as Tesla's b/c GM is already a $50+ billion company which has an entire product line benefiting from their sales volume. Tesla has a fraction of that in terms of sales, and will likely see far larger cost reductions in more than just battery/EV component costs as they ramp up production.

 

[brianman]

(see Trump, Hillary)

I'd rather not.

 

[Menifeer]

Interesting article re: how major automakers develop new models...

How GM Is Conducting Final Testing Of Its Bolt EV, And The Lessons For Tesla

 

[JohnSnowNW]

Interesting article re: how major automakers develop new models...

How GM Is Conducting Final Testing Of Its Bolt EV, And The Lessons For Tesla

So, was GM skipping some of these torture tests in the 90's and OO's?

 

[JeffK]

Interesting article re: how major automakers develop new models...

How GM Is Conducting Final Testing Of Its Bolt EV, And The Lessons For Tesla

It's not that interesting, it's an opinion piece from someone who is probably shorting Tesla. It's a little tamer than the stuff from seeking alpha though.

In short, Tesla does test their cars and the single instance he's referring to (the suspension thing), first off Tesla did not blame the customer but the writer of the article about the suspension. The customer got partial compensation even though it was normal wear and tear for where the guy lived.

 

[trils0n]

Interesting article re: how major automakers develop new models...

How GM Is Conducting Final Testing Of Its Bolt EV, And The Lessons For Tesla

Whole article seems to be implying Tesla doesn't test their vehicles to the same standards as the incumbent automakers, while providing no evidence for that assertion. Weird little opinion piece, not particularly interesting, just standard Tesla bashing.

 

[N5329K]

GM is about to be hit with fines for "overstating" their Acadia's MPG figures (this little lapse may extend to other GMC vehicles, and go back years). I guess they forgot to test them properly.
Robin

 

[Topher]

GM has 124 deaths due to ignition switch issues; Tesla has 1 bad suspension for a guy who drove down a long dirt road every day. I'm sure GM has a lot to teach Tesla. I advise Tesla to plug their ears.

Thank you kindly.