The New Chevy Bolt vs Tesla Model 3: Which is better EV?

[JohnSnowNW]

The 2016 LEAF SV (base trim with 30 kWh battery) is $35,000. It is equivalent to a $37,500 base trim Bolt EV except it includes a DC charging port. So, the Bolt has 2x the battery and 2.2x the range for about $3,300 more (including DC charging in Bolt).

Except that in reality you don't pay that for the LEAF...and unless sales are really slack the Bolt will be quite a bit more at signing.

 

[Red Sage]

I don't think GM is targeting the economy market. While there are good people at GM who want to see the Bolt succeed, I doubt there's much of a corporate ladder available to them. They're off on their own, like the Saturn folks. In the end, I think what GM did with the Bolt was to use the same bland, "me-too" design language they have used for other cars that are not important to them. The Model 3 is central to Tesla's mission. The Bolt is peripheral to GM's mission, at best. Tesla is all about changing what we all want to drive. GM is all about pushing 20th-century tin at maximum margins. Tesla want to build cars that aren't just as good as their ICE counterparts, but better. GM is happy with good enough to say "See? We did something."
Looking at what they came up with in the Bolt, it shows.

I concur on all points. Beyond that though, is the continual perception by some that somehow, economy cars are big sellers. They aren't really. Quite a few cars that cost very little are outsold by vehicles that cost over twice as much. And certain cars that may start just under $18,000 can be configured to cost over $25,000. GM seems content to be good enough to claim they are the best to anyone who isn't willing to investigate the claim.

 

[Red Sage]

I think there are more important reasons why the Model S outsells the LEAF at a much higher price. Among them are driving range (at least 2.5x farther), aesthetic appearance, acceleration performance, and fast charging.

The Bolt EV addresses the range and to a large extent the performance issues. It also substantially addresses the aesthetic issue -- the Bolt isn't a beauty queen but is also not a weirdmobile like the LEAF.

Finally, the Bolt partially shares the LEAF's fast charging weakness but with a bigger battery it charges faster, doesn't ramp-down nearly as soon or as much, is selling in an environment with better coastal DC charging availability than in 2011-2015, and may well be capable of faster DC charging than GM has revealed so far.

People regularly comment that Tesla's ICE-competitive offerings do not match the same interior design comfort and quality at the same price point. Perhaps it's a stretch, but the Bolt EV has similar interior space dimensions and much faster performance (0-60 6.5 seconds vs. 8.5 seconds) as a Lexus NX crossover at roughly the same $35-37 thousand price point.

If a car with a base price under $30,000 is being outsold by a car with an average sale price over $100,000 there is something wrong. Fixing a handful of perceived issues in a car that costs $8,490 more is not likely to reverse the trend. Especially when the manufacturer of the $100,000 car is planning to soon release a car with a $42,000 average sale price with similar advantages.

 

[aronth5]

Another interesting article

Can the 2017 Chevy Bolt EV really go 383 kilometres with no recharge? We try it

"To find out, I got into a prototype of the 2017 Bolt EV and attempted to drive from Monterey to Santa Barbara without stopping to recharge — or running out of juice........
I finished the drive with 240.5 miles on the trip meter, just above the EPA number of 238"

 

[HeyRay]

Apologies if this link is redundant. Received it earlier today. Hoping to pickup a Model S in early October. Thought this thread would be a good place to park the link.

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/technology/20160917/wolverton-chevy-bolt-could-spark-a-revolution

 

[Red Sage]

In case anyone cares at all, I have been checking periodically since these announcements began and the official numbers are now in and on the EPA's website... As of 10:26 am PDT, September 19, 2016:

Compare Side-by-Side: Chevrolet BOLT, Fiat 500e, Ford Fusion Energi Plug-in Hybrid, Chevrolet VOLT

2017 Chevrolet BOLT
123 Combined MPGe
128 City MPGe
110 Highway MPGe
270 kWh per 100 miles
246 Miles Total Range​

Impressive. What say ye?

CORRECTION: Oops! My bad! I didn't realize my browser had saved some 'Personalize' settings I was playing around with before... I set the form back to its defaults, and this is the result instead:

 

[stopcrazypp]

In case anyone cares at all, I have been checking periodically since these announcements began and the official numbers are now in and on the EPA's website... As of 10:26 am PDT, September 19, 2016:

Compare Side-by-Side: Chevrolet BOLT, Fiat 500e, Ford Fusion Energi Plug-in Hybrid, Chevrolet VOLT

2017 Chevrolet BOLT
123 Combined MPGe
128 City MPGe
110 Highway MPGe
270 kWh per 100 miles
246 Miles Total Range​

Impressive. What say ye?

View attachment 195103

That doesn't match the announced 238 miles and 119 Combined MPGe rating. It is about 3.3% higher for both.

However, city and highway mpge matches announced. By my math I get 119.2 MPGe combined from 128 city and 110 highway.

Maybe someone entered the wrong data.

 

[bro1999]

Can finally put the city/highway range debate to rest. 255 city/217 highway.

 

[bro1999]

That doesn't match the announced 238 miles and 119 Combined MPGe rating. It is about 3.3% higher for both.

However, city and highway mpge matches announced. By my math I get 119.2 MPGe combined from 128 city and 110 highway.

Maybe someone entered the wrong data.

They fat-fingered it. Back to 119 MPGe/238 miles range.

Maybe the 123 MPGe/246 miles range is for the 2018 Bolt.

 

[Neohippy]

Can finally put the city/highway range debate to rest. 255 city/217 highway.

No debate on how ugly it is though

 

[stopcrazypp]

Can finally put the city/highway range debate to rest. 255 city/217 highway.

Was there really a debate? Some people just used the wrong formula for combined efficiency/range, but it's easy to derive both by knowing the formula and keeping in mind the two numbers are harmonically averaged to get the combined (not a straight 55%/45% multiplication).

 

[McRat]

That doesn't match the announced 238 miles and 119 Combined MPGe rating. It is about 3.3% higher for both.

However, city and highway mpge matches announced. By my math I get 119.2 MPGe combined from 128 city and 110 highway.

Maybe someone entered the wrong data.

Mine matches the 238 mile range.

Compare Side-by-Side

However, look at the highway MPGe. Better aero than the Model S 60, or just more efficient use of an electric motor?

 

[Red Sage]

That doesn't match the announced 238 miles and 119 Combined MPGe rating. It is about 3.3% higher for both.

Hence, why I noted it was, "Impressive." Possibly a case of under-promise, over-deliver by GM? Or, it was a case of the earlier announcement being premature, based upon earlier, non-finalized testing.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Hence, why I noted it was, "Impressive." Possibly a case of under-promise, over-deliver by GM? Or, it was a case of the earlier announcement being premature, based upon earlier, non-finalized testing.

It's been fixed since you posted. Looks like it was just a typo. All 5 numbers should have been changed if it was a real change, but it's a red flag when the numbers are not consistent with each other.

 

[McRat]

There is a "CUSTOMIZE" button on the EPA site. If you alter the settings, the range changes.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Mine matches the 238 mile range.

Compare Side-by-Side

However, look at the highway MPGe. Better aero than the Model S 60, or just more efficient use of an electric motor?

EPA highway still has rolling resistance (AKA weight and tire choice) playing a big factor given the lower average speeds. Also, MPGe includes charging efficiency also, so that can give a boost to the numbers independent of the driving part.

What would be most telling about aero is at what speed does a car match EPA. For the original S that was at 65mph. A more aerodynamic car would trend higher, a less aerodynamic car would trend lower.

 

[Red Sage]

There is a "CUSTOMIZE" button on the EPA site. If you alter the settings, the range changes.

Ah. Thanks. I put it back to the defaults. Didn't realize the 'Personalize' settings were at something else. Here is the result:

My bad. False alarm, and stuff. Still pretty OK.

 

[bro1999]

The Bolt is (officially) the most efficient highway cruiser EV. And overall efficiency king as well.

 

[McRat]

EPA highway still has rolling resistance (AKA weight and tire choice) playing a big factor given the lower average speeds. Also, MPGe includes charging efficiency also, so that can give a boost to the numbers independent of the driving part.

What would be most telling about aero is at what speed does a car match EPA. For the original S that was at 65mph. A more aerodynamic car would trend higher, a less aerodynamic car would trend lower.

Oh, I have no doubt that a Model S is more slippery than a Bolt.

However, not long ago, many folk said the Bolt could NEVER get 200 miles highway range because it's tragically lousy aero (Same Cd as a 2002 Corvette Z06) would trash it's highway numbers.

At that point, I mentioned that Cd is neither CdA nor is it the whole story on efficiency.

People get caught up numbers who don't necessarily know what effect the numbers have, or knowing all the variables that come into play.

 

[Red Sage]

The Bolt is (officially) the most efficient highway cruiser EV. And overall efficiency king as well.

Hmmm... Try plugging in the 2017 BMW i3 BEV (60 amp-hour battery)... It gets 27 kWh per 100 miles, 111 MPGe Highway, and 137 MPGe City according to the EPA.