Would you consider a Bolt?

[electracity]

The Cadillac high end ICE is very good now. But who cares. 20 years too late. Cadillac is now a China focused brand. I can not imagine a car that I would be less likely to buy than a Cadillac built in China.

GM overall seems to be doing well and building good cars.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

You don't buy GM's most likely because of image. You are afraid to buy cars based on how they feel, you need to buy them based on how other people feel. Which is fine, because that's how most cars are sold.

People don't buy GM because the image is that they built crap vehicles. Because they did build crap vehicles for a LONG time, and only recently have stepped up their game.

GM will begin to make inroads if they can continue releasing reliable vehicles. However, you cannot fault people for disregarding GM when their quality was below their competitors for at least 3 decades.

 

[wdolson]

How was the quality of the 60's VW/MB/BMW? Oh right. They sucked AND OEM parts were crazy expensive. Or did you forget that? The Japanese stuff was trash in the 1960's but at least they were cheap enough to abandon when they broke.

Cadillac today makes very powerful, eurokiller sedans that handle far better with better build quality than the euros. Live with it. A CTS-V would make you crap yourself with the babysitters off on a racetrack. Yeah, they can exceed 200mph.

But we do not buy them. We "claim" we want certain cars (like coupes and verts) but we don't actually buy them. We would rather have a car that "looks" fast than is actually fast.

We want color choices, but Black and White still dominate what we buy.

You don't buy GM's most likely because of image. You are afraid to buy cars based on how they feel, you need to buy them based on how other people feel. Which is fine, because that's how most cars are sold.

As someone who bought a brand new "old man's car" in my 20s and I'm still driving it 24 years later, I can say I give a rat's backside what other people think of my car choices. I've caught crap for driving that car since I bought it.

And car colors go through fads, black and white is the current fad. Last decade it was silver and in the 90s it was green.

Before you start touting the superiority of the Cadillac over other cars, I suggest you watch the Top Gear US episode where they pit a Dodge Hellcat vs a Tesla P90D vs a Cadillac CTS. All had insane horsepower ratings. In one match up they had a mile long drag race between the three. The Hellcat won pulling it out in the last 1/8 mile because the Tesla reached the governed speed of 155 and the Hellcat was able pull it out. The Cadillac was never in the race a distant third off the line.

In any case, yes the Hellcat and the CTS have better top speeds than the governed P90D, but in just about every other performance aspect the P90DL is a better performer. There are some super cars that can beat the P90DL in a drag race and many that could outlast it in a long race, but there is nothing GM makes that could come even close to outperforming a P90DL in a drag race.

 

[SmartElectric]

GM = fail

Heard an ad on the radio yesterday on the way home for a GM Yukon SUV, only $60K, and "best gas mileage for any full sized vehicle in it's price range". FFS really?! 15L/100km in the city is leading efficiency?

I cannot in conscience personally buy a GM. That said, I have told my parents to consider the Volt for their next car purchase.

 

[glenhurst]

How was the quality of the 60's VW/MB/BMW? Oh right. They sucked AND OEM parts were crazy expensive.

The numerous VWs my extended family drove in the 1960s were actually quite reliable. But to be fair, in the 80s, the reliability of VWs declined and most everyone in my family drifted away from them.

 

[GoTslaGo]

As someone who bought a brand new "old man's car" in my 20s and I'm still driving it 24 years later, I can say I give a rat's backside what other people think of my car choices. I've caught crap for driving that car since I bought it.

Buick LeSabre or Park Avenue? I'm guessing here, but those were my favorite Buicks from that era.

Folks are 100% GM. Okay one Ford. But they went back to the Buicks. When I told them Tesla is American made, they were impressed.

 

[wdolson]

Buick LeSabre or Park Avenue? I'm guessing here, but those were my favorite Buicks from that era.

Folks are 100% GM. Okay one Ford. But they went back to the Buicks. When I told them Tesla is American made, they were impressed.

Roadmaster. I always hated the name though.

 

[EarlyAdopter]

Why I'd never buy a GM Bolt:

1. GM. Irresponsible recall policy resulted in over 100 unnecessary deaths. Pervasive corporate culture of denial and dodging responsibility. Plus, GM still owes taxpayers a few billion dollars.
2. LG. Speaking of denial and dodging responsibility, the GM Bolt is actually made by LG, not GM as they have decided to outsource their future. I've had no end of problems with LG appliances. No Thanks.
3. CCS. No rapid charging network. To the extent GM deploys one you better bet it's going to be at dealers. Yuck. Not where you need them, in between major cities, for long distance travel.
4. Dealers. Need I say more?

 

[Clomer]

My main issue with the Bolt is the lack of a cohesive long-distance charging network. I don't go on long road trips very often (averages about once a year), but any car I ever purchase will have to be able to meet that use case. GM will need to put something out that competes with the Supercharger network in usability, convenience, and coverage, if not cost. Personally, I'd like to see them take Tesla up on the offer to allow other manufacturers to use the Superchargers.

If they were to do this, the Bolt would be a serious contender for my next car. Without it, the Bolt is a non-starter, and the Model 3 will most likely win out.

(to the OP, you may quote this post if you would like)

 

[wdolson]

Why I'd never buy a GM Bolt:

1. GM. Irresponsible recall policy resulted in over 100 unnecessary deaths. Pervasive corporate culture of denial and dodging responsibility. Plus, GM still owes taxpayers a few billion dollars.
2. LG. Speaking of denial and dodging responsibility, the GM Bolt is actually made by LG, not GM as they have decided to outsource their future. I've had no end of problems with LG appliances. No Thanks.
3. CCS. No rapid charging network. To the extent GM deploys one you better bet it's going to be at dealers. Yuck. Not where you need them, in between major cities, for long distance travel.
4. Dealers. Need I say more?

Ford still owes the US government on loans made during the bailout, but GM's debt was wiped out by the bankruptcy. The US government took control of a large block of GM stock as part of the bailout, but they have sold it all now. Overall the US took a $10.5 billion loss, which is pretty small potatoes compared to the economic impact if GM had failed.

I haven't had any problems with our LG washer, but that's the only LG appliance we've owned.

But the other points you make are all valid. By having LG make the car does leave GM as outsourcing what will probably be the next wave of automotive tech. They are putting LG in the position of becoming an EV maker in their own right and they may become a competitor to GM in a few years.

 

[Jeff N]

By having LG make the car does leave GM as outsourcing what will probably be the next wave of automotive tech.

This is a little ridiculous. The GM-engineered Volt acts as both an electric car and as a gasoline hybrid. It's a superset of both. I know GM executive Mark Ruess made some statement about how GM didn't have all of the skills to design the Bolt but that really makes no sense. Besides the Volt, GM has already designed and is selling the Spark EV. The Bolt contains nothing fundamentally different than what is already in the Volt and Spark EV plus the usual incremental improvements.

More realistically, GM had aggressive time-to-market goals and wanted to swing a business deal that would give them access to aggressively discounted LG battery cells all at the same time that overlapped GM's complete reengineering of the 2nd generation Volt, the integration of that work into the Malibu non-plug hybrid along with a new exhaust heat recovery system and a new hybrid-specific 1.8L gas engine, and designing a new plugin hybrid RWD transmission for the CT6 based on an extension of the design of the new Volt/Malibu FWD transaxle. The Volt/Malibu transaxle will likely be spread across other FWD models in both non-plugin and plugin hybrid forms. The CT6 transmission will likely be spread to pickups and SUVs.

GM is a big company with many resources but there are only so many major projects they can take on at the same time (and also all of the conventional transmission and engine work they are doing). GM designed the Bolt EV motor, plus reduction gear and differential gear sets. GM also designed the body, interior and the structural aspects of the battery pack which is an integral part of the Bolt EV body along with a lot of testing and integration engineering. Finally, GM is manufacturing all of the aluminum body panels and steel unibody frame and assembling the completed car in a plant in Ohio.

Many of the aspects that LG is contributing beyond the battery cells and pack circuitry would have been co-designed and manufactured by a 3rd party auto parts supplier in any GM car. LG is supplying parts and subcomponents that typically would be spread across multiple suppliers but nonetheless outsourced by GM. This stuff about "having LG make the car" thus leaving GM helpless and unable to compete in future electrified cars is a silly exaggeration.

 

[wdolson]

I'm not one of the naysayers who don't think GM can build an electric car. My point is they are giving a potential future competitor a leg up by having them build the guts of the Bolt. According to what I've read, final assembly of the Bolt will be in Detroit, but the battery, motor, and drive units are all built in South Korea. That is the heart of an EV.

LG is probably looking long term and they want to build their experience with an eye towards making their own BEV some day. If the Model 3 takes off, it could balkanize the car business opening the door for new players to get into the market. LG is already a manufacturer of major appliances, they have the know how and the facilities to bend metal and make complex machines. They cut a deal with GM on the cost of batteries in exchange for the ability to build the guts of the car. I suspect that deal was made so they could learn the details of car building from GM on GM's dime, then when the partnership ends, they will be in a position to make their own BEV.

When an industry is disrupted, other companies that are making related products often jump in. We saw that when the world began to shift from film to digital cameras. The old camera makers continued to make cameras, but a lot of electronics companies jumped in too. The same could happen with the automotive industry if BEV demand took off. I think LG is positioning themselves to do that if the Model 3 is a hit.

 

[Jeff N]

I expect it to be chaotic. Some states like CA, Oregon, and Washington will fund and coordinate installations. In other areas it may be mostly private business. Some car makers (other than GM) may fund some installs. It doesn't really matter who puts them in or why as long as they are there. I expect the east and west coasts to fill in further first and then slowly spread out from other urban areas in the middle states. That means road trips may not be viable in many areas (where few EVs are sold anyway today) but will be viable where 50% - 70% of plugins are sold now.

EVgo just got another round of investment to help them expand their charging network.

Yes, it's "only" $100 million but that can go a long way towards filling in interstate charging routes if they focus their ambitions (as I mention in my comment on the article at InsideEVs):

EVgo Gets Major Investment From Vision Ridge Partners

 

[stopcrazypp]

EVgo just got another round of investment to help them expand their charging network.

Yes, it's "only" $100 million but that can go a long way towards filling in interstate charging routes if they focus their ambitions (as I mention in my comment on the article at InsideEVs):

EVgo Gets Major Investment From Vision Ridge Partners

The EVgo story is troublesome. It used to be part of NRG (and a lot of their stations were mandated from a settlement with California from the Enron scandal), but recently got restructured and broken away from NRG, since EVgo (as well as the NRG's solar division) was such a big money loser.
NRG Restructures Its Business - Money-Losing EVSE Division Shifted To GreenCo.

All of the EV charging networks have a similar story. The overhead costs are massive compared to the revenues they get from the charging stations. If they charge a "fair" price, it is multiple times more expensive than home charging and people don't charge at the station. If they charge a subsidized price, they lose a massive amount of money to overhead.

And it is issues like this why these networks will be hesitant to install many quick chargers in one station or quick chargers in the middle of nowhere (like Tesla is doing) to facilitate road trips. Rather, they like to install "clusters" of single/dual charger stations in or near the cities where EVs are located and have the chargers serve primarily local charging.

So what needs to happen are government grants or manufacturer grants/stations to facilitate long distance charging.

 

[techmaven]

All of the EV charging networks have a similar story. The overhead costs are massive compared to the revenues they get from the charging stations. If they charge a "fair" price, it is multiple times more expensive than home charging and people don't charge at the station. If they charge a subsidized price, they lose a massive amount of money to overhead.
[...]

So what needs to happen are government grants or manufacturer grants/stations to facilitate long distance charging.

There is no money in DCFC. The numbers simply don't make sense, especially given the current state of DCFC standards. Using government grants for this is just wasting money. CCS/CHAdeMO at this stage should not be installed at all. Force SAE to come out with reasonable 400 amp standard that then nominally 150-200kW, depending on what voltage you want to state that at (we know it's really 135 kW) and then we can start talking about ROI.

Simply, in order to make money on an existing DCFC, it has to cost a tremendous amount of money per kWh and the utilization rate has to be high enough that people are likely frustrated to use that charging network, as there can't be many idle, non-charging stations. Right now, the Tesla Superchargers are often far under-utilized, with many, many hours a day where there is zero charging or 1 vehicle charging. On a 6 or 8 plug station, utilization rates are likely under 5% on a daily basis.

 

[stopcrazypp]

There is no money in DCFC. The numbers simply don't make sense, especially given the current state of DCFC standards. Using government grants for this is just wasting money. CCS/CHAdeMO at this stage should not be installed at all. Force SAE to come out with reasonable 400 amp standard that then nominally 150-200kW, depending on what voltage you want to state that at (we know it's really 135 kW) and then we can start talking about ROI.

Simply, in order to make money on an existing DCFC, it has to cost a tremendous amount of money per kWh and the utilization rate has to be high enough that people are likely frustrated to use that charging network, as there can't be many idle, non-charging stations. Right now, the Tesla Superchargers are often far under-utilized, with many, many hours a day where there is zero charging or 1 vehicle charging. On a 6 or 8 plug station, utilization rates are likely under 5% on a daily basis.

Well, I am talking about in the context of the non-Tesla manufacturers. CCS 2.0 is still in development right now with no official planned release date (but everything is pointing to 2018 at the earliest). Those manufacturers can't wait around doing nothing in the mean time, since they are already selling EVs.

Nissan and BMW are subsidizing stations to help provide for their EVs.
Nissan and BMW partner to deploy dual fast chargers across the U.S. to benefit electric vehicle drivers
BMW & EVgo Will Add 500 DC Fast Chargers In 25 Major U.S. Markets Under ChargeNow DC Fast

 

[Jeff N]

If they charge a "fair" price, it is multiple times more expensive than home charging and people don't charge at the station.

Exactly.

With interstate highway charging sites EVgo can get away with charging realistic fees that actually make business sense without subsidies and drivers have no choice and must pay up. Drivers will grumble but will also be willing to pay up since this will be for occasional trips rather than daily commuting. Frequent road trippers can be offered lower price plans. Great business opportunity.

It wasn't possible before because the only roadtrip-capable cars were from Tesla and already had a charging network.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Exactly.

With interstate highway charging sites EVgo can get away with charging realistic fees that actually make business sense without subsidies and drivers have no choice and must pay up. Drivers will grumble but will also be willing to pay up since this will be for occasional trips rather than daily commuting. Frequent road trippers can be offered lower price plans. Great business opportunity.

It wasn't possible before because the only roadtrip-capable cars were from Tesla and already had a charging network.

The problem with roadtrip charging sites in the middle of nowhere is they have too low utilization rates to make sense (without being subsidized some other way). A "realistic" price for a station in the middle of nowhere will be multiple times higher than the price for the local (which itself is multiple times higher than home charging). So the cost at such stations would easily be much higher than gasoline (some of the local stations already cost more than gasoline). And amortization takes way longer.

That's a really poor business opportunity, and makes it unattractive for charging networks to install such stations (and especially with more than two chargers).

Right now, the workable model being adopted is manufacturers (as in Nissan/BMW in my links above) or government (as in Europe) paying for such chargers. Of course, GM has indicated they have no interest in doing so for the Bolt.

The way Tesla makes low utilization stations work out is by writing it off as advertising expense (according to their SEC filings). Charging networks can't really afford to do so, since they get very little revenue even from their core business (the local charging stations).

And consumers do have a choice: if long distance charging is ridiculously expensive for non-Teslas, it makes other options more attractive, for example a Tesla, renting an ICE car, or not buying an EV at all in the first place.

 

[Jeff N]

Simply, in order to make money on an existing DCFC, it has to cost a tremendous amount of money per kWh and the utilization rate has to be high enough that people are likely frustrated to use that charging network, as there can't be many idle, non-charging stations. Right now, the Tesla Superchargers are often far under-utilized, with many, many hours a day where there is zero charging or 1 vehicle charging. On a 6 or 8 plug station, utilization rates are likely under 5% on a daily basis.

On on interstate road trip most plugin cars will be stopping at most charging stations which means heavy utilization once enough cars are on the road. Stations can be designed in advance to scale up over time as needed.

 

[Jeff N]

So the cost at such stations would easily be much higher than gasoline (some of the local stations already cost more than gasoline).

So? BEV drivers have no other choice -- they're not driving a PHEV. I suppose they could drive their other (gas) car instead or rent a gas car for their trip but many BEV owners won't want to do that. They will want to drive their own car and will pay extra for that privilege at least in the early years when interstate charging prices are higher and gasoline is cheap.

If the road trips are occasional the high cost of charging a few times doesn't amount to much when averaged over a full year of driving and charging at home. And, as I noted, frequent road trippers can be offered volume discounts to lessen their cost burden somewhat. I fail to see why this can't be made cost competitive versus Tesla's effectively "pre-paid" Supercharging for many CCS drivers. Truly frequent road trippers will probably drive on gas anyway.

As more BEV hit the interstates the upfront investments on the stations will be paid off and increasing competition will put pressure on pricing.