Would you consider a Bolt?

[roblab]

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

Since you drive a Volt, I guess it makes sense to think that a weak sister of a charger can be part of a long distance charging route. I have never used EVgo, don't think I ever will. I use motels with a 14-50 outlet at night, superchargers during the day, and once in a great while I will use an RV park.

The EVgo site was vague to worse about charging rates, but I would estimate they are far slower than Tesla, and probably slower than an outlet. And their map is worse than Tesla's map, too. Since they have to sign you up and bill you for using their system, I figure they will go out of business.

 

[stopcrazypp]

So? BEV drivers have no other choice -- they're not driving a PHEV.

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.

See my latest edit:
"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."

Keep in mind a charging network has to amortize their station over a 5-10 year period and given their core business is charging (with relatively low revenue), they can't easily write off stations as advertising expense, like Tesla is doing (and likely other automakers who are also subsidizing stations).

Charging networks are likely to determine those stations are not worthwhile to pursue. And people aren't going to want to buy non-Teslas for long distance if those stations are not available and at a reasonable price. Something has to break that chicken and egg scenario. Manufacturer supported stations seems to be the answer in the US.

 

[Jeff N]

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."

Let's work the calculator... Let's say during a year that I make 2 round trip drives each year from Fresno, CA to Ashland, OR. Each way is about 470 miles and I stop to charge 2-3 times along the way in addition to my overnight charge at home (or at my motel in Ashland) before leaving. The road charging amounts to about 100 kWh of energy each way. Not long ago I would have paid $4 a gallon for 12 gallons in my old 25 mpg sedan to make that trip. The equivalent charging price works out to a little over $.50 per kWh. In all, my 300 miles of "EVgo" charging would work out to about $50 each way or $100 per round trip. Twice a year means $200.

You are proposing that the $200 a year in on-road charging costs would cause me to buy a different car, rent an ICE, or not buy a BEV at all? Seriously?

Now, let's say EVgo pays their electric utility $.25 per kWh. Since they are collecting $.50 per kWh from me that means everyone who stops to add 100 miles of range or ~33 kWh would result in $8 of gross profit. If 5 people a day stopped at each charging stall on average that would be $40 a day. At 365 days a year it would amount about $15,000. If the charger HW and installation plus maintenance cost $75,000 over five years EVgo would break even and then be collecting $15,000 in profits per year minus maintenance until the chargers need to be replaced. With multiple stalls per site and intelligent charging HW sharing similar to what Tesla does plus sharing installation labor across multiple stalls at once and you might be able to shave a year or two off the paydown schedule. Or charge more than $.50 per kWh -- how about $1 per kWh which would be about the price that people paid for their routine weekly gasoline "fix" in Europe a few years ago. That would probably pay off the charging facilities in less than 2 years. Or put in solar panels if that brings down utility electricity costs.

I'm not a business genius but it all seems ballpark plausible to me.

 

[Jeff N]

I would estimate they [EVgo] are far slower than Tesla, and probably slower than an outlet.

Their chargers are clearly slower than Tesla's superchargers during the first part of a charging session. My impression is that most metro-oriented EVgo CCS plugs today are 35-50 kW. New interstate CCS stations would presumably be around "100 kW" meaning 60-80 kW when charging actual cars. EVgo has said they may update some older existing stations as well. At least one CCS HW vendor says they will sell stations capable of up to "120 kW" per plug as soon as this summer.

As for EVgo CCS being slower than an outlet... I don't think so. Your 14-50 outlet implies about 10 kW AC.

Since they have to sign you up and bill you for using their system, I figure they will go out of business.

EVgo does not require you to have a subscription in order to get individual charging sessions at their stations. They are also part of the ROEV coalition so people with ChargePoint accounts (for example) will be able to use EVgo stations without getting a separate EVgo account.

 

[GoTslaGo]

If it's more options for people to do longer distance EV driving and thereby increase EVs on the road. While I might not be using them, I'll be rooting for them... (EVgo that is).

 

[wdolson]

Let's work the calculator... Let's say during a year that I make 2 round trip drives each year from Fresno, CA to Ashland, OR. Each way is about 470 miles and I stop to charge 2-3 times along the way in addition to my overnight charge at home (or at my motel in Ashland) before leaving. The road charging amounts to about 100 kWh of energy each way. Not long ago I would have paid $4 a gallon for 12 gallons in my old 25 mpg sedan to make that trip. The equivalent charging price works out to a little over $.50 per kWh. In all, my 300 miles of "EVgo" charging would work out to about $50 each way or $100 per round trip. Twice a year means $200.

You are proposing that the $200 a year in on-road charging costs would cause me to buy a different car, rent an ICE, or not buy a BEV at all? Seriously?

Now, let's say EVgo pays their electric utility $.25 per kWh. Since they are collecting $.50 per kWh from me that means everyone who stops to add 100 miles of range or ~33 kWh would result in $8 of gross profit. If 5 people a day stopped at each charging stall on average that would be $40 a day. At 365 days a year it would amount about $15,000. If the charger HW and installation plus maintenance cost $75,000 over five years EVgo would break even and then be collecting $15,000 in profits per year minus maintenance until the chargers need to be replaced. With multiple stalls per site and intelligent charging HW sharing similar to what Tesla does plus sharing installation labor across multiple stalls at once and you might be able to shave a year or two off the paydown schedule. Or charge more than $.50 per kWh -- how about $1 per kWh which would be about the price that people paid for their routine weekly gasoline "fix" in Europe a few years ago. That would probably pay off the charging facilities in less than 2 years. Or put in solar panels if that brings down utility electricity costs.

I'm not a business genius but it all seems ballpark plausible to me.

However there are no ICE makers today that give away gasoline for long distance travelers and there is a company that gives away free electricity for long distance BEV travelers. When potential buyers are comparing cars from traditional car makers to Tesla's cars with free supercharger access many will opt for Tesla even those who don't need to make a lot of road trips.

Nobody ever thought of giving away free fuel before, but once one company starts doing it, customers will begin to expect it. It happened in the software business.

 

[Jeff N]

The Volt has much better than average crash safety and rollover scores. We haven't seen crash tests for the Bolt EV or Model 3 yet. Based on the history of the Model S and Volt, I expect that the Model 3 and Bolt will both have much better than average scores.

I finally got around to looking up the crash safety scores from IIHS and safercar.gov.

The IIHS gives its Top Safety score to the 2015 Chevrolet Sonic, Trax, Spark and Volt to which the upcoming Bolt EV are often compared. They all had good 'G' ratings in all categories except the Volt had an 'A' acceptable rating for the small offset crash test. Results were not complete for 2016 for these cars but those that were available matched the 2015 scores.

The safercar.gov US crash test scores are a perfect 5 star in all categories for the Sonic, Spark, and Trax except a 4 star for rollover (the Bolt is assured a 5 star in this due to low center of gravity). The 2015 Volt is a perfect 5 star except a 4 star in the front passenger crash test. All of these cars received an overall 5 star crash test rating. The Spark EV was not separately tested from the regular Spark by either IIHS or safercar.gov due to its relatively low volume production.

Given all this, its reasonable to assume the Bolt EV will get a strong crash safety score until proven otherwise.

 

[Skotty]

Hi all -- I'm a journalist who has been lurking here for some time and learned a lot (thanks all).

I'm working on an article for an online pub, and I have a question: Would you consider a Chevrolet Bolt EV over a Model 3? And if so, under what circumstances? (i.e. will consider them equally, might consider if Model 3 is late/expensive, etc.)

Why or why not?

I'd like to be able to quote responses and can use forum handles if need be.

Thanks in advance!

Aaron

I'm not sure I ever responded to this thread.

I am a former Chevy Volt driver. However, I would NOT consider a Bolt over a Model 3.

There are 2 primary reasons for this, outside of the potential for the Model 3 to just be a better car, though we can't really speak to that yet (though I do think the 3 looks much better).

1) The mission. I believe in what Tesla is trying to accomplish, and want to support Tesla in that goal. Chevrolet has no such mission.

2) The Supercharger network. I need to be able to regularly drive across the state for work, and as a bonus it would be nice to be able to take the car on vacations or trips to visit family as well. As such I _require_ a quality fast charge network. A quality coherent CCS network for the Bolt and other CCS equipped EVs is still just a glimmer in it's daddy's eye, with no guarantees of ever coming into existence. Meanwhile, the Tesla Supercharger network _already_ meets _all_ of my needs, and is still growing.

Overall, huge advantage Tesla.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Let's work the calculator... Let's say during a year that I make 2 round trip drives each year from Fresno, CA to Ashland, OR. Each way is about 470 miles and I stop to charge 2-3 times along the way in addition to my overnight charge at home (or at my motel in Ashland) before leaving. The road charging amounts to about 100 kWh of energy each way. Not long ago I would have paid $4 a gallon for 12 gallons in my old 25 mpg sedan to make that trip. The equivalent charging price works out to a little over $.50 per kWh. In all, my 300 miles of "EVgo" charging would work out to about $50 each way or $100 per round trip. Twice a year means $200.

You are proposing that the $200 a year in on-road charging costs would cause me to buy a different car, rent an ICE, or not buy a BEV at all? Seriously?

You are presuming people do the math that way. More likely what they see is that it costs more than gasoline to charge and then they might consider those options which lowers the utilization rate of those stations (and make it unattractive to install).

Now, let's say EVgo pays their electric utility $.25 per kWh. Since they are collecting $.50 per kWh from me that means everyone who stops to add 100 miles of range or ~33 kWh would result in $8 of gross profit. If 5 people a day stopped at each charging stall on average that would be $40 a day. At 365 days a year it would amount about $15,000. If the charger HW and installation plus maintenance cost $75,000 over five years EVgo would break even and then be collecting $15,000 in profits per year minus maintenance until the chargers need to be replaced. With multiple stalls per site and intelligent charging HW sharing similar to what Tesla does plus sharing installation labor across multiple stalls at once and you might be able to shave a year or two off the paydown schedule. Or charge more than $.50 per kWh -- how about $1 per kWh which would be about the price that people paid for their routine weekly gasoline "fix" in Europe a few years ago. That would probably pay off the charging facilities in less than 2 years. Or put in solar panels if that brings down utility electricity costs.

I'm not a business genius but it all seems ballpark plausible to me.

EVgo charges $4.95 a session plus $0.20/minute (this is the statewide cost). A 40 minute (33kWh) session as above would cost $12.95, which works out to $0.392 per kWh. This is for the average station however (not considering a "fair" cost yet for an under utilized station).

Blink DC charging costs $0.69/kWh in California.
Blink - Membership FAQs

I have no visibility on the profit they make, but I highly doubt they make half of the charge in pure profit.

The CPUC report actually gives great insight on costs.
EVgo spent $31 million in development (page 35) on 105 stations with 217 DC chargers (page 51), although I should note those include one L2 AC charger typically.
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=10411
That averages to $295,238 per station or $140,589 per DC charger (using a 10:10:1 cost split for DC: DC:AC).

I did the math on utilization rates from the chart in page 51 and got the below:
Region: session per day (location), session per day (charger)
San Francisco Bay Area: 9.36, 4.28
San Diego County: 6.09, 2.81
Los Angeles Basin: 5.04, 2.55
San Joaquin Valley: 0.97, 0.51
Total: 6.37, 3.08

So the average utilization per charger is 3.08 per day over the entire network. At $8 per session profit as you assumed (a profit amount which I doubt they make), $140,589/8/3.08 = 5705 days or 15.6 years to break even on development costs alone. For the low utilization stations (for example in San Joaquin Valley) it makes even less business sense.

Of course NRG/EVgo is willing to give a lower rate because they are required by the CPUC settlement to install these stations, but for a business that needs to make a profit, it is a really poor proposition.

 

[Jeff N]

EVgo charges $4.95 a session plus $0.20/minute (this is the statewide cost). A 40 minute (33kWh) session as above would cost $12.95, which works out to $0.392 per kWh. This is for the average station however (not considering a "fair" cost yet for an under utilized station).

Blink DC charging costs $0.69/kWh in California.

I can't think of any reason why DC charging needs to have the same identical pricing model for both slower metro-style chargers and faster interstate-style chargers.

The CPUC report actually gives great insight on costs.
EVgo spent $31 million in development (page 35) on 105 stations with 217 DC chargers (page 51), although I should note those include one L2 AC charger typically.

Some costs like the labor involved in trenching through parking lot asphalt, installing power line drops, etc. will be cheaper when spread across multiple charging stalls rather than just one or two. It makes sense for interstate-style charging locations to scale up vs metro stations which need to be scattered around town near various destinations. Everyone on the highway is driving in the same narrow roadway.

How much does a Tesla Supercharger station cost to install per slot? Why should EVgo's costs be much higher with multi-stall DC charging? Maybe a bit more for having both CHAdeMO and CCS (eventually I expect CHAdeMO to go away but might take a decade).

I did the math on utilization rates from the chart in page 51 and got the below:
Region: session per day (location), session per day (charger)
San Francisco Bay Area: 9.36, 4.28
San Diego County: 6.09, 2.81
Los Angeles Basin: 5.04, 2.55
San Joaquin Valley: 0.97, 0.51
Total: 6.37, 3.08

Those are metro-style stations. I see no reason why those stats should be particularly relevant to interstate-style stations. Tesla charging locations in metro areas have high utilization but that's because they are "free" after purchase so locals use/abuse them.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I can't think of any reason why DC charging needs to have the same identical pricing model for both slower metro-style chargers and faster interstate-style chargers.

Well, both are subject to the same upper bound of the customer comparing to gasoline (interstate even more susceptible given people might choose to rent). If they adopt a different price model for low utilization interstate station, it'll likely cost even more to charge at the station and make it even more unattractive to use. Right now with a uniform price model, the metro chargers are pretty much subsidizing the interstate chargers.

Some costs like the labor involved in trenching through parking lot asphalt, installing power line drops, etc. will be cheaper when spread across multiple charging stalls rather than just one or two. It makes sense for interstate-style charging locations to scale up vs metro stations which need to be scattered around town near various destinations. Everyone on the highway is driving in the same narrow roadway.

How much does a Tesla Supercharger station cost to install per slot? Why should EVgo's costs be much higher with multi-stall DC charging? Maybe a bit more for having both CHAdeMO and CCS (eventually I expect CHAdeMO to go away but might take a decade).

That presumes the charging networks actually see a plaza style charging location as a viable business. Instead, what they are seeing from their own data is that metro stations are the most popular and they develop a station model that favors that (clusters of stations with 1-2 DC chargers each). And currently the average utilization rates do not justify investing in plaza style locations (chicken and egg scenario). Tesla got around that by writing off unpopular stations as "advertising" expense related to selling cars, but the charging networks can't afford to do that. Also Tesla has spent a lot of effort to promote going on roadtrips using their EVs, but other car manufacturers have not.

Those are metro-style stations. I see no reason why those stats should be particularly relevant to interstate-style stations. Tesla charging locations in metro areas have high utilization but that's because they are "free" after purchase so locals use/abuse them.

These are relevant because it shows that even when including more popular metro stations (keep in mind the stats include both metro and interstate stations), utilization of DC charging is much lower than what you estimate. This directly affects how charging network operators view the viability and attractiveness of interstate-style stations. From what I see so far, whenever the charging network operators have to install stations on their own dime, they all gravitate to stations in metro areas where EVs are more popular. The only viable interstate style networks are either manufacturer or government subsidized (or in EVgo's California case required by legal settlement).

The most worrisome about EVgo is if NRG will let it fend for itself once the government pressure is off (same with how Ecotality went belly up once the $100 million in DOE grants were finished). They are scheduled to finish their obligated 200 stations in the next 1-2 years (none of which are plaza style stations as you suggest). They have already recently separated EVgo off into a different company, so essentially NRG will not be obligated to keep supporting the network from earnings in their energy business.

 

[nexsuperne101]

I'm sorry, I would have replied sooner, but I have only just stopped laughing at the question. Why would anyone drive a Bolt instead of a Model 3? There is no comparison.
The Bolt is ugly, slow, takes ages to charge.
I'm sure there is a market for it. Perhaps it would be OK for people that need something more sedate that doesn't bite them when they use more than 10% of the available power, but aren't quite at the electric wheelchair stage of life yet.

Bolt?

 

[heysteveh]

Tesla decided to have both the chicken and the egg at the same time. They released the Model S, and at the same time started building out the supercharger network

In attempting to bring EV's to the masses, Elon always takes on a "chicken and egg" problem head on... instead of waiting for someone else to do it he said, "since no one else is doing it, we'll build our own charging network... we'll build our own gigafactory... we'll build our own parts, etc." What a refreshing difference.

 

[Jeff N]

Well, both are subject to the same upper bound of the customer comparing to gasoline (interstate even more susceptible given people might choose to rent). If they adopt a different price model for low utilization interstate station, it'll likely cost even more to charge at the station and make it even more unattractive to use.

Your theory is that people spend extra money (sometimes a lot of extra money) to buy BEVs with road trip capable battery range but if an occasional trip would cost more to recharge than an equivalent gasoline car then they will leave their car at home and pick up a gasser at Hertz? They will forget about the comfort, convenience, and drivability of their usual car because gas is just a little cheaper?

Actually, gas would have to be a lot cheaper in order to make up for the rental fees. I just checked: if I decided today to do a 3 day weekend roadtrip to Disneyland starting on Friday it would cost me about $60-70 a day before taxes and fees. If I plan another week in advance I can get that down to $30 a day in rental fees which is still $90 plus taxes and fees for 3 days.

My theory is that if their BEV is otherwise capable of making the trip then many people will clearly prefer to take their own car.

These are relevant because it shows that even when including more popular metro stations (keep in mind the stats include both metro and interstate stations), utilization of DC charging is much lower than what you estimate. This directly affects how charging network operators view the viability and attractiveness of interstate-style stations. From what I see so far, whenever the charging network operators have to install stations on their own dime, they all gravitate to stations in metro areas where EVs are more popular. The only viable interstate style networks are either manufacturer or government subsidized (or in EVgo's California case required by legal settlement).

Your mindset is so 2015.

Non-Tesla owners don't take road trips in their BEVs today because they are all sub-100 mile range. A 2015 LEAF has an EPA highway range estimate of around 75 miles (50 miles if you leave 25 miles in reserve). How many people are going to drive 50 miles in about 45 minutes and then plug into CHAdeMO for ~45 minutes over and over for 400 miles? That 400 mile trip would require at least 7 charging stops in the LEAF where a 200 mile car might need only 2-3. Almost nobody would drive that 2015 LEAF as proven in your statistics.

That is the reality behind the charging statistics that you are quoting. You think those statistics are useful and relevant policy guidance for the 200+ mile cars coming out from GM, Hyundai, and Audi and others over the next 2-3 years?

I think those 2017-2019 owners will be wanting to drive their cars on the interstate just like 200+ mile cars from Tesla. And all of those cars will need to stop every 100-150 miles to charge along the same narrow highway corridor. To me that says high utilization because those drivers have no other choice -- they have to charge at the DC stations located for their convenience along the highway. This will only become more true over time as more and more 200+ mile BEV are sold.

 

[ZsoZso]

I choose maybe for the poll, and here is the reasoning:

I have a family with 3 drivers currently (including my teenage daughter) and have 3 cars: an ICE, a Tesla Model S and a small EV, shown on my avatar (Mitsubishi iMiev). For long range and family trips, we use the Tesla, for short errands in the city the iMiev. The ICE gets used when the Tesla is taken and a 2nd driver needs a car for another trip that is beyond the iMiev's short range (~63 miles). I'd like to get rid of the ICE and become a full-EV household. I have reserved a Model-3 on March 31st, so I prefer that over the Bolt.

However, I anticipate that here in Canada, it will be somewhere around late-2018 when I can get that Model 3. If the Bolt becomes available this year in the area, I may lease one in the meantime.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Your theory is that people spend extra money (sometimes a lot of extra money) to buy BEVs with road trip capable battery range but if an occasional trip would cost more to recharge than an equivalent gasoline car then they will leave their car at home and pick up a gasser at Hertz? They will forget about the comfort, convenience, and drivability of their usual car because gas is just a little cheaper?

Actually, gas would have to be a lot cheaper in order to make up for the rental fees. I just checked: if I decided today to do a 3 day weekend roadtrip to Disneyland starting on Friday it would cost me about $60-70 a day before taxes and fees. If I plan another week in advance I can get that down to $30 a day in rental fees which is still $90 plus taxes and fees for 3 days.

My theory is that if their BEV is otherwise capable of making the trip then many people will clearly prefer to take their own car.

The scenario I see is actually the opposite. It is people who previously may have preferred renting a car deciding to take a roadtrip in their own EV because the costs are free or a lot cheaper. I have heard plenty of accounts by Tesla owners who have done that because charging is free. If charging is significantly more expensive than gasoline, they might just fall back to what they do by default (AKA rent or take their second ICE car).

And my contention is not necessarily that they would buy a different EV, just that if charging costs too much money at such interstate stations, people won't choose to charge there and that drops down utilization of such stations. Station operators are going to be aware of that in setting up their pricing and calculating how feasible a station is.

Your mindset is so 2015.

Non-Tesla owners don't take road trips in their BEVs today because they are all sub-100 mile range. A 2015 LEAF has an EPA highway range estimate of around 75 miles (50 miles if you leave 25 miles in reserve). How many people are going to drive 50 miles in about 45 minutes and then plug into CHAdeMO for ~45 minutes over and over for 400 miles? That 400 mile trip would require at least 7 charging stops in the LEAF where a 200 mile car might need only 2-3. Almost nobody would drive that 2015 LEAF as proven in your statistics.

That is the reality behind the charging statistics that you are quoting. You think those statistics are useful and relevant policy guidance for the 200+ mile cars coming out from GM, Hyundai, and Audi and others over the next 2-3 years?

I think those 2017-2019 owners will be wanting to drive their cars on the interstate just like 200+ mile cars from Tesla. And all of those cars will need to stop every 100-150 miles to charge along the same narrow highway corridor. To me that says high utilization because those drivers have no other choice -- they have to charge at the DC stations located for their convenience along the highway. This will only become more true over time as more and more 200+ mile BEV are sold.

We shall see what happens, but all of the charging station operators are investing in stations consistent with current trends (AKA clustering in major metropolitan areas). Privately funded multi-charger plaza style stations akin to Tesla's have been non-existent nor are they planned (EVgo's plans from that document is still 1-2 charger installations, 2-4 at mos). None of the non-Tesla manufacturers have really pushed the idea of using EVs for road trips (GM isn't doing so for the Bolt either, rather they want to you to buy a Volt if you are the type to go on road trips).

Even though in the future a DC station along an interstate highway will see more sessions than one today, I'm not convinced DC stations along highways would necessarily see more charge sessions than one in a metropolitan area today. Even though Tesla focuses on roadtrips when designing stations, the most utilized supercharger station is a city supercharger in Hong Kong.

Long story short, I'm not holding my breath in expecting charging network operators to install stations on interstate routes in the middle of nowhere (for example a route from LA to NY) on their own dime.

 

[wdolson]

The scenario I see is actually the opposite. It is people who previously may have preferred renting a car deciding to take a roadtrip in their own EV because the costs are free or a lot cheaper. I have heard plenty of accounts by Tesla owners who have done that because charging is free. If charging is significantly more expensive than gasoline, they might just fall back to what they do by default (AKA rent or take their second ICE car).

Renting a car for a roadtrip adds extra hassles to the trip, you have to arrange the rental, pick it up, drop it off at the end, you know the size of the car ahead of time, but you don't know the exact car which may not be comfortable, you might end up with a car that had something funky left in it they missed when cleaning the car (I once got a car with a melted candy bar in one of the cup holders I didn't notice until we were 50 miles down the road), and people like to take their own cars because most people stash stuff they use in their car and they either need to think about putting it in a rental or not have it. Last time we had a rental car, my nose started running about 100 miles into the trip and we had to stop at a convenience store and buy a box of Kleenex when I would have just grabbed the packet of stashed Kleenex in my own car.

When I have taken rented cars on road trips it's ever so painful at the end of the trip taking the car back to the airport when I just want to drag the luggage into the house and collapse. It adds an extra hour on the end of the trip. We're lucky and we're not all that far from the airport, but there are a lot of places where picking up a car from a rental agency and dropping it off again is not easy. There are a lot of off airport locations around, but their hours are usually very limited compared to airport rental desks. Most of the off airport rental places in Clark Co, WA are only open weekdays 8-5 and are closed on all holidays.

Being able to take road trips in my EV is a major requirement, which is why I'm getting a 90D Model S. It's the longest range EV out there right now.

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

I'd think about a Bolt if the price and specs were OK compared to the Model 3. It doesn't look like that'll happen, but who knows.

 

[heysteveh]

First, let ME ask a question. Would you consider the Bolt over a Mercedes C-Class if the Bolt were NOT an EV? They would not be competing in the same class of vehicle would they? My current vehicle IS a Mercedes C 250 Coupe and I am considering a Model 3 (I have even made a reservation but could still change my mind). Would I consider a Bolt? The short answer is "NO". A longer answer would be "if it was an entry level luxury vehicle like the BMW i3, then yes". When I was looking at purchasing my current Mercedes I didn't even think to consider a Chevy Cruze. Why? Because the vehicles have nothing in common, I was looking for an entry level luxury car, so I considered other 'like' vehicles. I think you are comparing the wrong two vehicles here.

 

[wdolson]

First, let ME ask a question. Would you consider the Bolt over a Mercedes C-Class if the Bolt were NOT an EV? They would not be competing in the same class of vehicle would they? My current vehicle IS a Mercedes C 250 Coupe and I am considering a Model 3 (I have even made a reservation but could still change my mind). Would I consider a Bolt? The short answer is "NO". A longer answer would be "if it was an entry level luxury vehicle like the BMW i3, then yes". When I was looking at purchasing my current Mercedes I didn't even think to consider a Chevy Cruze. Why? Because the vehicles have nothing in common, I was looking for an entry level luxury car, so I considered other 'like' vehicles. I think you are comparing the wrong two vehicles here.

Actually I wouldn't seriously consider any other BEV than a Tesla.