So, you think that you’re ready for the Electric Vehicle lifestyle. In that case, we recommend asking yourself the following:
- Do you have access to a Level 2 or Level 3 charger on a daily basis?
- Are you familiar with the availability/accessibility of charging stations in your area?
- Do you have a back-up vehicle?
- Are you comfortable staying within the confines of the vehicle’s driving radius?
- Do you love waiting for extended periods of time for your EV to charge?
If you answered “no” to any of these questions, you might not be ready for an EV just yet. Or rather, the EV landscape might not be ready for you. We’ll try to explain our reasoning in this 2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV review.
The 2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV has done wonders in providing the world with a not-too-expensive electric car with a range that’s far from upsetting. The Bolt EV has also proven to be more fun than it looks, as we’ve experienced in an autocross event. The Bolt EV also launched to market with nary a delay, being delivered to customers across the country on-time, and on-schedule. Tesla can’t say the same with the Model 3, which is just now trickling into the hands of customers, slowly. To cap off those accomplishments, the Bolt EV has set a new sales record for each of the last nine months, with the most recent being 3,227 units delivered in December 2017.
Yet even in this market space of one percent, there appears to be room for compartmentalized offerings.
This is where Tesla has made strides for its owners. Instead of waiting for somebody else to do it, Tesla went on to build a cross-country charging network infrastructure. At the present, a Tesla Model 3 can drive coast-to-coast in as little as 50 hours, as we’ve seen proven by seasoned Cannonball veteran Alex Roy. This is impossible with a Chevrolet Bolt EV.
That’s because the Tesla Superchargers are completely proprietary units, meaning that they do not follow any SAE standard for charging. For those that need a refresher, the Society of Automotive Engineers is an independent, non-government consortium of engineers from various global automakers and suppliers. Besides housing archives containing years of published engineering research and technical papers for the world to read, the SAE has provided just about every rating and measuring standard for your vehicle, from how much horsepower your engine officially makes, to how much trucks should be able to tow. And even charging standards – otherwise known as “J1772.”
Tesla, in a very Silicon Valley fashion, decided to hell with J1772. Because even though Silicon Valley firm has yet to turn a profit or deliver any product on time in its 14 years in business, it assumes to know what’s best. Especially more so than a bunch of conventional, old-fashioned automakers from a snowed-in, rusty city. Or so the rhetoric goes, at least.
In doing so, Tesla’s charging nozzles and ports are different, and use a different current flow than SAE standardized charge units from providers such as Chargepoint, or Blink. This means that vehicles like the Bolt EV and Nissan Leaf can’t use Tesla’s charging network. But this also means that Tesla vehicles can’t in turn use the myriad of SAE standardized charging stations randomly peppered across the country, without some sort of adapter. It’s like bringing a European electronics device and expecting its different prong design to fit somewhere here in the United States, and vise versa. Nobody really wins, everybody looks silly, and customers are left doing extra homework. Any fellow plug-in driver will readily observe this.
All of that is to say that a roadtrip from Detroit to Columbus, Ohio and back took fourteen hours. In a gas-powered car, the trip would have taken an estimated 8-9 hours. If I took my 2017 Chevrolet Volt – which of course has a gasoline generator engine to propel the vehicle after its batteries run out of energy – I could have made that estimate. But sometimes the hard way needs to be done, because nobody is going to test the true potential of electric cars by driving in a bubble.
The way down and the way back up consisted of two stops at level 3 chargers. With the Bolt EV’s 238-mile EPA range, it is possible to have done one charging session each way, but that would also have meant putting complete trust in a sparse network. I opted for the safer, more conservative strategy. For example, the first planned charging stop was the only level 3 charging station in northern Ohio, at the University of Toledo. It’s a Greenlots charging station just outside of a parking garage, which, like other charging networks like Chargepoint and Blink, requires a registration for usage. In other words, your personal information.
But when I got there, the station was flashing an error message on the screen, preventing any power flow or usage. The oasis in the desert didn’t have any water.
Eventually I found a number to call, and thankfully there was somebody on the other end to receive that call. A rather courteous Greenlots representative was able to remotely reboot the charging station, and I was able to utilize the SAE-approved Combo Charging System (CCS). It takes 30 minutes to put 80 miles of range in a Chevrolet Bolt EV in a Level 3 CCS charger, and that’s about as good as it gets right now. Of course a simple 80 miles isn’t enough to make it to the next stop, so I sat in an empty parking lot for an hour, waiting for the Bolt EV to replenish itself. Thankfully, the OnStar 4G LTE with Wi-Fi was activated and I was at least able to pass the time to make notes for this 2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV review on my laptop, and by browsing internet memes.
From there, Toledo was another 130 miles to the next charging station, another level 3 CCS charger in a Walmart parking lot in Dublin, Ohio. The setup was actually quite impressive, since it had CCS, CHAdeMO, and IEC type 2 chargers that were vacant, and open for business. It was also on that day that I realized Walmart sold kombucha.
Another hour goes by of charging before I’m comfortable with unplugging the Bolt EV. Afterwards, a stop for dinner, and then it was time to turn go back. But just the distance driving from Dublin to Columbus and back required a second stop at the Walmart on the return trip. Remember, this was a conservative charging strategy.
Driving the Chevrolet Bolt EV on US 23 was fairly uneventful, but my lead-foot driving habits wouldn’t have gotten me very far with the car’s unimpressive aerodynamics and fragile range estimates. This meant keeping a speed of around 60-65 mph of right lane driving, taking care to not inconvenience the semi trucks on the road. Always fresh in mind, my 2017 Chevrolet Volt feels more stable and quieter in comparison to the more bulbous and upright Bolt EV. The shorter wheelbase and taller stance of GM’s latest electric darling felt more in line for urban driving than anything. And maybe that’s why the Chevrolet Bolt EV is the platform of choice for GM’s self-driving car initiatives, over the longer range Volt.
For what it’s worth, we clearly took the Bolt EV well outside of its natural element in terms of both distance and driving styles, but for the most part, it behaved like any other B-segment hatchback. Thanks to its impressive well of torque, however, the surge in power makes the Bolt EV the quickest hatchback from 0-60 that Chevrolet sells, at 6.5 seconds, despite not being as well-rounded as something like a Sonic RS, which has a solid setup but is otherwise underpowered. There’s real hot-hatch potential in these electric vehicles, but without the proper suspension, brakes, tires, lower stance, limited slip differential or sharper steering rack, the complete package is left on the table.
Of course all of that performance hardware would inevitably command a higher price point, which would go against the mission of the Chevrolet Bolt EV. The primary objective, first and foremost, was always to sell the most range-capable electric car for the money. GM achieved that with flying colors, and beat Tesla to market, which seems to be a major conversation point for Wall Street. Of course, along with the lack of sporty hardware, some compromises had to made. The spartan interior decorated with a massive 10.2-inch touchscreen and digital instrument panel are the only luxuries to be found here. Then again, anybody who has sat in a Tesla will soon realize that those products aren’t exactly dripping with opulence themselves, despite the brand mystique. And also like a Tesla, the magic and the money is put in places where average consumers will rarely see, let alone fully understand how it works.
The batteries found in the Chevrolet Bolt EV is where the majority of costs go in producing the vehicle, demonstrating what’s possible for the price, right now, at scale. In much of the same way that the first-generation Volt PHEV demonstrated the forefront of electrified engineering, the Chevrolet Bolt EV relays the torch for General Motors. It’s also been the vehicle chosen for all of GM’s current and near-future autonomous vehicle ventures. Whether they will be a success or not is left to the future, as is whether or not EVs like the Bolt will be profitable for GM or not. CEO Mary Barra insists by 2021, but even then, will demand from consumers and sales volume follow?
Back to the drive. It was the middle of the night by now. About 1:00 AM. It was raining. There was a traffic backup from an accident. All I want to do is go home, and go to bed. All I want to do is give my Chevy Volt a big hug for having a range extender. I pulled back up to the University of Toledo’s CCS Greenlots charger, which needed rebooting again because somebody (not me) left the lockbox open for the charging nozzle. That’s how fragile some of these charging systems are. All it takes is for somebody to leave something open, or off the look, or out of the proper position, and it goes to hell. If somebody just left a gas pump out of the slot – all that would need to happen is for it to be re-inserted into position. No phone calls. No waiting times. And no need to register for a mailing list. And yet I had to make another phone call, had to wait for somebody to answer, and had to wait for them to reactivate the terminal. All to just to wait even more for some battery juice to percolate into this four-wheeled smartphone, to just drive another two hours home.
Maybe if gas stations would do it over again, they would implement the same practices as today’s modern EV charging facilities. But it’s hard to see the consumer benefits of this in retrospect, as consumers rarely get any money in return for exchanging their data. I suppose this is a clash of worlds here. The perceived old vs new. Or maybe it’s just Silicon Valley’s relentless self-evangelism creating that perception, boosted by Hollywood.
After another hour of filling up on electrons, it was the final leg of a 440-mile journey that tested the mettle of a regional EV infrastructure as much as it did the Bolt EV itself, enabling us to write this 2017 Chevrolet Bolt review. Of course, none of the inconveniences were inherently the fault of the Chevy Bolt EV. Which, in its own right, is an engineering marvel, and electric vehicles are only bound to improve from here. But currently, especially outside the Silicon Valley Bubble, the world still needs to figure out how to make the EV lifestyle more seamless. There is opportunity here for GM to step up to the plate and oversee the installation of J1772 charging stations. To put it another way, there’s opportunity for GM to incentivize EV ownership by installing chargers and making those stations free for GM product owners, but perhaps charge a usage fee for those that use competitive makes.
Overall, however, electric vehicles remain a small part of the Chevrolet story. It remains a full-spectrum brand that few competitors have been able to duplicate. Its “three-truck strategy” will soon be a four-truck strategy with the reveal and launch of its Silverado 4500HD and 5500HD conventional medium duty trucks, not counting current ventures with Isuzu for medium duty Low Cab Forward trucks. At the same time, no other brand offers such a wide bandwidth of rear-drive performance cars, all of them available with manual transmissions. That’s to say nothing otherwise of the bounty of sedans, hatchbacks, crossovers and SUVs.
As for plug-in cars, my take-home favorite remains to be the Chevrolet Volt – a happy medium between futuristic engineering, everyday practicality, sleek styling, and superior ride and handling qualities to that of the full-on-electric, far-too-closely-named Bolt. Yet somehow it’s the Volt that is rumored to be not long for this world, as GM accelerates an unprecedented strategy to introduce a plethora of future electric cars that the world may not be ready for just yet. If the Chevrolet Bolt EV is just a sample serving of that future, General Motors needs to look at offering more than just a product.
Overview
| Model: | Chevrolet Bolt EV |
| Platform: | GM BEV2 platform (a derivative of G2SC platform) |
| Body style / driveline: | front-wheel-drive, five-passenger, five-door all-electric CUV |
| Construction: | Steel and Aluminum |
| EPA vehicle class: | Small Wagon (EPA does not have a cross-over category) |
| Key competitors: | Nissan Leaf, BMW i3, Ford Focus Electric, Kia Soul EV, VW eGolf, Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric |
| Manufacturing location: | GM Lake Orion Assembly |
| Battery manufacturing location: | Incheon, South Korea |
| Motor and drive unit manufacturing location: | Incheon, South Korea |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Battery System
| Type: | rechargeable energy storage system comprising multiple linked modules |
| Volume/case: | 285L |
| Mass (lb / kg): | 960 / 435 |
| Battery chemistry: | lithium-ion |
| Thermal system: | liquid active thermal control |
| Cells: | 288 |
| Energy: | 60 kWh |
| Warranty: | 8 years / 100,000 miles |
| Electric driving range: | EPA-estimated 238 miles (255 city / 217 highway) |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Electric Drive
| Type: | Single motor and gearset |
| Motor: | permanent magnetic drive motor |
| Power: | 200 hp/150 kW |
| Torque: (lb-ft / Nm): | 266 lb.ft./360 Nm |
| Final drive ratio (:1): | 7.05:1 |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Charging Times
| 120 V: | 4 miles / 6.4 km of range per hour (available with standard cord) |
| 240 V: | 50 miles of range in less than 2 hours, full charge in 9.3 hours |
| SAE Combo DC Fast Charge: | up to 90 miles in 30 minutes |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Performance
| Top speed (mph / kph): | 91 / 145 |
| 0-30 mph: | 2.9s (75% SoC) * |
| 0-60 mph: | Under 7 seconds |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Chassis & Suspension
| Front: | Independent MacPherson strut-type front suspension with side load compensating and finely tuned springs, direct-acting solid stabilizer bar system and ride & handling oriented LCA bushings. |
| Rear: | Compound crank (torsion beam) type rear suspension with the closed section V-shaped profile axle; specifically tuned coil springs, performance balanced shock absorber, angled A-bushing supporting understeer tendency on cornering maneuver and kinematically optimized torsion beam providing stable and best ride & handling performance. |
| Chassis control: | Four-channel ABS; Traction control system; StabiliTrak; Drag control |
| Steering type: | column-mounted electric power steering |
| Steering wheel turns, lock-to-lock: | 2.91 revolutions |
| Steering ratio: | 16.8 :1 |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Brakes
| Type: | power four-wheel disc with ABS; electro-hydraulic; partially regenerative; dynamic rear brake proportioning |
| Brake rotor diameter front (mm / in): | 276 / 11 |
| Brake rotor diameter rear (mm / in): | 264 / 10 |
| Total swept area (front) (cu cm): | 1398.9 |
| Total swept area (rear) (cu cm): | 1131.4 |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Wheels & Tires
| Wheel material: | cast aluminum |
| Tires: | Michelin Energy Saver A/S 215/50R17 all-season |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Exterior Dimensions
| Wheelbase (in / mm): | 102.4 / 2600 |
| Overall length (in / mm): | 164.0 / 4166 |
| Overall width (in / mm): | 69.5 / 1765 |
| Track width front (in / mm): | 59 / 1501 |
| Track width rear (in / mm): | 59.1 / 1501 |
| Height (in / mm): | 62.8 / 1594 |
| Front overhang (in / mm): | 32.9 / 836 |
| Rear overhang (in / mm): | 28.7 / 730 |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Interior Dimensions
| Seating capacity (front / rear): | 2 / 3 |
| Headroom (first row) (in. / mm): | 39.7 / 1009 |
| Headroom (second row) (in. / mm): | 37.9 / 962 |
| Shoulder room (first row) (in / mm): | 54.6 / 1387 |
| Shoulder room (second row) (in / mm): | 52.8 / 1340 |
| Hip room (first row) (in / mm): | 51.6 / 1310 |
| Hip room (second row) (in / mm): | 50.8 / 290 |
| Legroom (first row) (in / mm): | 41.6 / 1056 |
| Legroom (second row) (in / mm): | 36.5 / 927 |
2017/2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV Capacities
| Curb weight (lb / kg); | 3580 / 1624 |
| EPA passenger volume (cu ft / L): | 94.4 / 2673 |
| Passenger volume (first row) (cu ft / L): | 52.2 / 1478 |
| Passenger volume (second row) (cu ft / L): | 42.2 / 1195 |
| Max cargo volume (cu ft / L): | 56.6 / 1603 |
| Cargo volume behind rear seat: | 16.9 / 478 |
| Heating cooling (qt / L): | Heating loop 1.8L |
| Battery pack cooling (qt / L): | 6.9L (RESS cooling loop total coolant volume) |
| Power electronics cooling (qt / L): | 3.9L (PE & DU cooling loop total coolant volume) |
| Drive unit fluid (qt / L): | 2.9L |
More Information & Resources
- GM news
- Running GM sales results
- Running Chevrolet sales results
- Running Chevrolet Bolt sales results
- Running Chevrolet sales results
- GM incentives and offers
- Chevrolet Bolt information:
- GM Forum
Comments
I have a Volt and rarely use the gas engine as it is. I basically only need to use the gas engine on out of state road trips which I might do only a couple of times a year. So I could most defiantly live with a Bolt, I think rather than go through all the issues of finding public chargers on a road trips I would just also have a 2nd hand pickup or rent just something with an ICE for a week.
Bill, your comment about renting a vehicle for extended trips or having a second vehicle with an ICE is what I tell people when the subject of EV’s comes up and range is their issue. Most people fly and rent anyway, so, nothing of substance will change.
I expect that in the future of EV’s, fast charging systems and Solid state batteries. will mostly ameliorate range issues.
Why wouldn’t the OEM be opportunistic and offer a non-electric, say a Cruze hatch TD, for buyers of Bolt when they plan a road trip? Offer pick-up and delivery while you’re at it.
For little cost couldn’t this be an amenity, part of a complete ownership coverage model, all while establish long term rapport with local dealers?
The traditional ownership model will need to change on the road to electric propulsion, IMO.
Journalist Katakis: perhaps the lack of charging stations in your area is because of voters and stakeholders who saw the appearance of a charger in their town as an offensive assault on their “My America”. The tone of your article makes it clear you believe the chargers’ lack of presence is their own fault. “Tesla never made a profit and assumed they were right about their unique chargers anyway” and then you go on to describe a lack of ANY chargers in your area. Maybe it isn’t a matter of Right/Wrong. Maybe when somebody builds something where there was nothing before is at least less wrong than all the naysayers ever?
Tesla is the only automaker to step up to the plate and offer a full circle of support for its products. By that measure, they’re setting a good example. But it serves as zero benefit for other EV drivers because of the lack of compatibility. That’s not really following the mantra of the “greater good” at all. On the flip, you have all of these automakers adhering to a standard, and yet the infrastructure is moving at a snail’s pace, because nobody wants to pay for it. That’s not really following the mantra of the “greater good” either, despite all of the virtue signaling.
At the heart of this, conventional EV owners are left dealing with not being able to use Tesla chargers, and the rest of OEMs deferring liability. It’s kind of hard to promote an alternative propulsion vehicle when there’s no infrastructure to support it.
Charging stations also don’t need to necessarily be in the hands of municipalities and legislation. Besides, they’re rarely free. If they are free, they have a sponsor. My home town’s Chargepoint units are provided by Cargill.
1. Do you have access to a Level 2 or Level 3 charger on a daily basis? – we’ll thats why we are so lucky the University of West Virginia did their work and forced VW to admit cheating and force them to pay for these exact level 2/3 chargers to be built across America. Answered.
2. Are you familiar with the availability/accessibility of charging stations in your area? – within 5 minutes your elementary school age child can download an app on your phone to take care of that. Answered.
3. Do you have a back-up vehicle? – Book by Cadillac is coming to Chevy. Answered. Also, most US families have at least 2 cars. This question is so loaded it’s not a question anymore.
4. Are you comfortable staying within the confines of the vehicle’s driving radius? – 90% of US worker commutes are less than 10 Miles each way. The extra time US commuters spend commuting isn’t in the distance, it’s in the traffic, and even that is created to benefit the toll road corporations. A Bolt owner could possibly only charge once per week. Answered.
5. Do you love waiting for extended periods of time for your EV to charge? Same as Q1, just restated for extra bloviation. High capacity 350KW chargers are only a few years away. Same for Carbon-Ion and solid-state batteries which can recharge in seconds.
Journalist Katakis – there is a publication called “Electric Bike Action” which could contribute much to your unsatisfactory research load.
I don’t think you understand the questions.
A loaded question is one where the asker wants a message sent, so I’m choosing to deliberately “not understand” that one. Literally everyone has access to back up vehicles in the US, at the very least from Hertz, most dealers have rentals, if they live so remotely they can’t rent, then they have farm vehicles and trucks, and if they’re too young to rent they have family and friends, and trains.
On the other questions, you probably have more than an anonymous commenter such as me, but the future chargers aren’t too far away.
So Tromby… Are you your suggesting that by buying a new vehicle (the Bolt), one must also have a backup vehicle handy?
If so, do you honestly think that is satisfactory or otherwise “good”?
Maybe the Bolt’s sticker should read… “by buying this car, you also agree to have a backup vehicle handy.” I bet that will do wonders for sales and owner satisfaction.
Take those tongue-in-cheek comments and apply them to some critical thinking. The Bolt is a vehicle that comes with many asterisks… ones that are not necessarily its fault. But asterisks nonetheless.
There is no need for inflammatory or ridiculously overarching statements about the research that goes into a 2,000 word-long write-up based on over 500 miles of experience with the vehicle just because you don’t agree with something subjectively.
The bottom line is that the problems outlined in the story are real. You can deny it and be part of the problem, or you can accept that the current state of EV charging infrastructure leaves a lot to be desired and presents an opportunity (perhaps for GM)… and then you can be part of the solution. Eh?
I’m thinking a Ferrari 488 buyer doesn’t need the asterisk either, but folks don’t go around writing “Ferrari buyers just have to understand that their car won’t carry the shopping or park on grandma’s humped street, so:
1. Do they have a back up shopping car?
2. Are they familiar with every humped street, potholed street, and ice-cracked street on their chosen route?
3. Are they comfortable staying within the confines of the 55mph limit?
4. Do they have the right oil specs ready for every 1000 miles?
5. Can they wait for extended winters while the ice and salt lurk to make their cars useless?”
Because if you wrote that, the reader might think you thought Ferrari buyers were just, plain, dumb. Even though 10,000 miles of research would prove you absolutely correct.
Only difference is that the Bolt is meant to be a mainstream product. The Ferrari is not. Is this not obvious?
The Bolt’s purpose is entirely different… and, as a mainstream product, it should have as few “asterisks” as possible.
What are you arguing for here, exactly? I’ve lost track.
The article opened with a salvo of shame for BEV’s. That belonged much further down the article, in a way abviously meant to be analysis rather than conclusion. People don’t open articles about Ferrari 488’s with “Unless you have a shopping vehicle, you aren’t ready for the Ferrari lifestyle”.
Mainstream use means, according to Daniel Schleith of the University of Cincinnati, LESS THAN a normal BEV range. That means all these warnings that the article opened with are not as important as an article-opening warrants:
“Ultimately, the UC study found that out of the 25 cities studied, the top 5 cities with the worst or longer-than-average commutes in 2011 were:
Atlanta, with 17 miles and 1.8 million commuters
Phoenix, with 15 miles and 1.4 million commuters
St. Louis, with 14.8 miles and 1 million commuters
Miami, with 14.376 miles and 1.8 million commuters
Seattle, with 13 miles and 1.3 million commuters
Cities with the lowest commutes in 2011 were:
Omaha, with 9 miles and 350,000 commuters
Wichita, with 10.12 miles and 220,000 commuters
Las Vegas, with 10.33 miles and 700,000 commuters
Portland, with 10.69 miles and 820,000 commuters
Thus, BEV owners don’t need a back up car and don’t need a out-of-order charger when they won’t need a charger outside their home. BEV life will be significantly easier than needing to stop at gas stations every week, yet that didn’t get a mention at all, let alone at the top, did it?
“… nobody is going to test the true potential of electric cars by driving in a bubble.“ Actually, that’s exactly what current BEV’s are for, so that’s the test they need to pass, and have passed. Those commutes are where 90% of vehicle pollution occurs.
“The shorter wheelbase and taller stance of GM’s latest electric darling felt more in line for urban driving than anything.“ That looks like Journalist Katakis agreeing with me and disagreeing with his own idea of a cross-country test, see what I mean?
“For what it’s worth, we clearly took the Bolt EV well outside of its natural element in terms of both distance and driving styles, …” yet you put a conclusion based on the long-range issues loud-n-proud right at the top of the article. Wrong way around! The “we clearly took it out of it’s zone” should have been first and “it didn’t cope so well outside of its zone” after that.
“… a 440-mile journey that tested the mettle of a regional EV infrastructure as much as it did the Bolt EV itself, enabling us to write this 2017 Chevrolet Bolt review. Of course, none of the inconveniences were inherently the fault of the Chevy Bolt EV.“ THAT should have gone at the top, at the exact place where the 5-point list was.
What if, after your years of excellent reportage and dedicated avoidance of AGW vs RWNJ controversy (which you have done very carefully and professionally), someone at Library of Congress wrote the entry on GMA like this:
“If you are concerned for the environment and pollution, then the commenters below-the-line on GMA make their reporters and management look like idiots”??? That wouldn’t be true, and you would take offense, right?
The mental confines of this comment are shorter than any driving radius of any electric car on the market.
It takes one power outage, one natural disaster, one emergency for some of us to realize that complete reliance on the electrical grid is a higher risk than people care to admit. Having something to supplement an EV is more than just an insurance policy, it’s a ticket to freedom.
Lastly, comparing electric vehicles that are marketing themselves as the one car anybody will need, to a vehicle where the owner is swimming in disposable income, and likely has five cars or more, is grabbing for straws.
http://anythingmotor.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/1973-oil-crisis-1170×400.jpg
https://media1.britannica.com/eb-media/69/19369-004-A29C7625.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/9e/11/02/9e1102c4019ca6b18429d13485e6073d.jpg
I wish your comments area could show pictures, because these ones are of hundreds of cars backed up around the corner from gas stations in 1973.
A solar panel, even an inefficient one, would eventually give enough energy to move. Glycerine generators, even chicken fat powered diesel generators can provide electrical power much more quickly than waiting for days in a line on the street several blocks away from a gas station.
By this reasoning, in a natural disaster, all the gas stations stay open? And trucks supply them?
From Business Insider 9-2-2017: “Reports of price-gouging — including $20 for a gallon of gas and $99 for a case of water — are spiking in areas of Texas most affected by Hurricane Harvey.
The Consumer Protection Division of the Texas attorney general’s office said Thursday that it has received more than 500 complaints of price-gouging.
Most complaints have cited prices ranging from $6 to $8 a gallon for gas.” So therefore when the natural disaster comes, has-powered freedom is only for the very rich, Journalist Katakis.
When the driver is limited to one source of power, and a very politically controlled one, then it’s your range that’s limited. Whenever they want to limit it.
Your assumption that all electricity is supplied by “the grid” (sounds religious) is wrong. In fact, lots of millennial and iGen kids are devoting their lives to finding non-grid sources of electrical power, and they are making huge strides. Electricity can be supplied in a grassroots kind of way. Refined petroleum has literally only one way to get to consumers, and that is through the refinery/shipping/trucking supply lines which are a “grid”.
Could you point us to GM marketing saying the Bolt is an only-car, and if so, why didn’t you put that at the top of your article? Because then I would have seen that you were arguing against GM marketers instead of arguing against anybody who was thinking of buying an electric car for any reason at all, which is how your article is pitched.
Again: you took it out of its comfort zone (what it was designed to do) and then said it was uncomfortable to buy. That is not a valid syllogism. Like negatively reviewing a submarine because it can’t fly. If GM said it’s sub can fly, point me to where they said that before you say “it’s a lie”.
I think we can both agree on the principles of energy independence. Off-grid homes are a huge part of that, and I commend anybody attempting to do so. Even if laws in certain states are prohibiting this. Yet it’s still one part of the equation.
Gasoline/diesel is highly available, easily storable, and easily transportable. I was hoping this would be assumed knowledge. I agree that natural disasters affect fueling stations just the same, and the price gouging scenarios are well documented, but it nevertheless is easier to have a couple of gallons of fuel stored in a shed or a garage, just in case. If we want to talk about energy independence and off-grid living, easily storable and transportable fuel sources are a part of it. Right now, that’s a flammable liquid that we can put in sealed red containers with a handle.
Plus, the amount of energy one would need to charge an EV with a 240 volt charger, on top of powering of other electric appliances like refrigerators, washers/dryers, hot water tanks, etc… one would need a very robust and expensive system. That’s a luxury few people can’t afford.
Which, if you’re implying that the Bolt EV was designed and built as simply a roundabout for the wealthy (seems like you are w/ the Ferrari comparison) – that it’s essentially a modern Fiat 850 Michelotti Spiaggetta – why would GM bother to bring the price as low as possible? A: Mass market appeal. They wanted the price so low that GM is willing to lose money on it. I know you’re a regular here, but just in case you missed it: http://gmauthority.com/blog/2017/06/ubs-gm-probably-loses-about-7400-per-chevrolet-bolt-ev/
Does that loss-leading strategy sound like its pandering to the luxury market to you?
Most mass market buyers tend to have just one vehicle, with the average home holding 2.3 vehicles, and they hold onto them for an average of 6.5 years. Can one vehicle be a long-range carryall, and the other be something like a Bolt? Sure, but that’s an extreme stretch. Spouses don’t treat one vehicle as a primary and one as a back-up. They tend to both see regular use.
The article opens up with questions asking if you’re ready for an ELECTRIC CAR. Not questions pondering as to whether or not GM marketing mixed words up. It lists five questions that also outline the current issues in the EV segment, and potential customers need to consider them.
The way you answered them above implies you don’t understand them, or that you simply choose to circumvent an actual answer altogether. VW getting busted for Dieselgate isn’t an answer (2,800 charging stations mostly funneled to California is a drop in the bucket nationwide, and presently has done nothing for most regions). Commuting statistics are not an answer (people use the car for more than just commuting). Downloading an app isn’t an answer (that’s how we all find the charging stations as is – it doesn’t address the shortage).
You can champion the Bolt EV all you want for what it is. But it’s not going to get GM to build an infrastructure for EVs it wants to sell. And at the end of the day, it’s less practical than the Volt on just about every metric. Except headroom.
“A picture says a thousand words”…
But Katakis took only 4 words to destroy all three of my pictures:
“Gasoline is highly available…”
oh, so these pictures I provided must be photoshopped, or just flat-out pencil drawings, right?
2 gallons gonna get you how far? To other gallons at your friend’s house? Is your friend gonna give his gallons to you? Sun and animal fat and plant sugars are there, tomorrow and the next day. Your refined petroleum is for sale by the Corporations for $$$$, yesterday.
And, you safe-spaced yourself by using your internal GMA power to remove the reply button to your last post – natch, classy.
If you used the comment section long enough you’d know that after a while the reply button goes away, as it has for me also. You can still hit the reply button on a previous answer and continue your deferments.
Maybe you don’t understand how storing gasoline works, but it’s pretty easy, and, like insurance policies, are meant to be acquired well before disasters happen. I’m not sure where the arbitrary number of 2 gallons came from, but that’s not from me.
Apartment blocks with more than 500 apartments are common in large cities. Let’s say each apartment dweller has 10 gallons (or more) of gas stored, some where they aren’t too good about keeping the seal tight.
Then, one of the apartments is being renovated, and a 1st year apprentice cuts through a kitchen gas line. I had that happen to me, just two doors down from mine. The entire building had to evacuate, and the Fire Brigade had to go around asking who lived next to the burning apartment, and did they have any petrol stored, and by the way, please don’t store petrol in apartments, they said, again and again and again.
I apologize for the reply button implication. I was wrong, I’m sorry.
Apartment lifestyle is very vulnerable. And not friendly to EV ownership. For example, referring to question 1: “Do you have access to a Level 2 or Level 3 charger on a daily basis?” The answer for most apartment dwellers is a resounding no. One would have to rely on a charging infrastructure at their work, or other frequent destination, for powering up their EV. Which of course most people don’t have that kind of access. I think you’ll find that a vast majority of EV drivers live in homes, where they can plug their car in a garage, where it’s the most convenient setup.
.
Too bad they can’t be charged slowly overnight at home on 110 volts, or 220 like the stove and clothes dryer, and be ready for the next day.
4 miles an hour at 110v and 10 miles an hour at 220v…It’s possible one could make it work, just need to determine their mileage and if they access to another vehicle…
For running around town, or commuting to work, about 10-20 miles total a day, then recharge overnight plugged in at home, I would definitely consider one for a 2nd vehicle.
I really like the concept of the Chevy Volt more so than a full-on EV, because of its built-in range extending gasoline generator, which could easily be replaced by perhaps a hydrogen generator. Charging stations are okay and just okay, because of the time it takes to utilize them, whereas a built-in generator is far superior, eliminating the wait time, other than the time it takes to fill your tank at the gas station. And since hydrogen fuel cells are just around the corner technology-wise, as well as more than likely a means of using water to extract enough hydrogen from for fuel, you would have a self contained energy system thats far easier and cheaper than anything currently available from any manufacturer.
Here are my answers:
1. Yes because I built and installed a Level 2 and plan to build and install a Level 3 charger if I buy a Chevy Bolt EV.
2. Yes, because few EVs are using them. None are Superchargers.
3. Yes, but I plan to trade it in. I don’t need two EVs.
4. Yes, because I travel less than 150 miles a day and less than 5,000 miles a year.
5. Yes, because I will let it charge overnight as I do with all my portable electronic devices while I am asleep. Who waits for a cellphone to charge?
So I am ready for an EV since I began playing with battery powered cars over 50 years ago!
1)Do you have access to a Level 2 or Level 3 charger on a daily basis?
No, but I’m fully confident in wiring a 110 or 220 breaker in a panel and fishing the wires to an exterior plug. To me, access is simply a means of wiring it it, but the answer at present is no.
2) Are you familiar with the availability/accessibility of charging stations in your area?
For public chargers, yes, but only in those that I’ve physically seen. There may be more elsewhere, but I’ve not bothered to look them thoroughly. I’ve seen them on private property, but they were part of a dedicated parking spot at a nearby university.
3) Do you have a back-up vehicle?
Yes, but given how short the distances I’ve to travel in the course of an average week, I wouldn’t need a back up vehicle except for the unusual long trip that may occur once a year.
4) Are you comfortable staying within the confines of the vehicle’s driving radius?
Absolutely. It’s no more difficult than staying within the estimated range of an ICE vehicle.
5) Do you love waiting for extended periods of time for your EV to charge?
If the charging time was scheduled for overnight periods, I wouldn’t have to worry about it as I would be asleep. I can see how it could become a problem if upon plugging the car in to charge an emergency arose that needed me to travel 200kms (out and back) to collect someone or something, but I could easily be just as annoyed at that situation as I could with a nearly empty ICE car.
While the ICE car could be refueled in minutes, it’s instances like that in which a swappable battery would be indispensable.
With regard to Q4, the ICE vehicle at least benefits from an already abundant and quick refueling network. This gives ICE cars an angle of freedom that is not present with EVs. This means an ICE vehicle isn’t exactly confined to a radius. I can drive my Chevrolet Volt virtually anywhere on two continents in the Western Hemisphere because all I need is unleaded gasoline. And I can do it completely at my own discretion. Q5 eludes to the current state of recharging an EV, even with DC fast chargers.
Here is the reality between everyone’s personal views.
There is not on vehicle fits all here.
The reality is some people can live with a Bolt as it fits their needs. Many it would not. It is closer to doing so but the charge time remains an issue.
The Volt is a compromise where it expands on the ability to meet more needs less life style compromise but is is not a car for people who want the pure EV experience and benefits.
Then there is the traditional buyers who will not pay more for either technology and do not want smaller or more expensive cars. They have no eco agenda and they have no care for leading technology. They just want what they like be it a Truck, Car or SUV that can be refueled in mins and can do all they want, take them where they want and not have to compromise their life or time. They are annoyed with stop start and would never pay more for charging stations.
While the last group remain the majority the others are growing and will continue to grow as technology improves.
Infrastructure issues need to be addressed. Charging is going to be required till we get batteries that can charge as fast as a fill of gasoline. It is not upon the cities or government but upon private enterprise. It should not be free. The real key is to standardize the charging for all applications. The SAE needs to set the standard. They are the same group that standardized the nuts and bolts in the early days when everyone was doing their own thing.
Even if they could help stanardsize batteries more would go a long way.
The reality is the pipe dreams of battery swapping will not work. One it is not that easy. Two if you have a new battery would you be willing to swap it out for a not so new battery. Like the Propane tank swaps do you want someone else’s crap?
Then you have city dwellers who are the prime people for EV. Most are not able to charge where they live. This would need to be corrected too.
Moving forward it will take all of our technolgies as no single one fits all. ICE will survive and EV will improve but it and other technolgies will be employed.
An excellent waste of my time. The high level of considered commentary by the staff and readers is rare on an automotive blog.
My only issues with article, was structure and the obvious bias against Tesla. Without Tesla, would the Bolt even exist.
Go tell the Teslarati that it’s hard to label the bias when it’s factual that Tesla has yet to deliver on any production targets, or make money. The only thing that company has managed to monetize is hype, in the form of stock.
Seriously, Billy Durant suffered from these exact take-downs -“yet to deliver on any production targets, or make money. The only thing that company has managed to monetize is hype, in the form of stock.” And yet Buick has survived even 2008/2009…
I beg you to read Lawrence R Gustin’s “Billy Durant: Creator Of General Motors”
Gustin was a writer and editor for The Flint Journal, and this book of his “won the Thomas McKean Memorial Cup, awarded by the Automobile Club of America for the best use of historical research in one year, as well as awards of merit from the Historical Society of Michigan and the American Association for State and Local History.” I got that quote from the GM Heritage Center’s website, not my trombone.
Was my begging better than when I said “unsatisfactory research”? Ferdinand De Saussure could help there too.
This would be an utterly useless vehicle for me and I never ever could justify spending 35-40K on something this small