The upcoming 2022 Chevy Bolt EUV all-electric crossover will offer GM’s Super Cruise semi-autonomous driver assistance system. However, it will not be exactly the same as the system fitted to other GM vehicles.
2021 Cadillac CT4 (China)
The difference is that the system in the Bolt EUV will not include the Automated Lane Change feature recently introduced in three Cadillac models: the 2021 Cadillac CT4 and 2021 Cadillac CT5 luxury sedans and the all-new 2021 Cadillac Escalade full-size luxury SUV.
Automated Lane Change allows the vehicle to automatically complete a lane change, and represents an evolution of the standard Super Cruise system. In vehicle that offer it, using the lane change feature is quite simple: the driver starts the process by either tapping or fully latching the turn signal lever. This prompts the system to look for an acceptable opening in the indicated lane, and to move into that lane if it is safe to do so. As with all Super Cruise features, this works only on compatible highways, of which there are around 200,000 miles in the United States and Canada and approximately 180,000 miles in China.
At the media reveal of the vehicle, Super Cruise Assistant Program Engineering Manager, Jeff Dinakar, explained why Automated Lane Change would not be available on the Bolt EUV: “This requires VIP.”
In this case, VIP stands for Vehicle Intelligent Platform, also known as the GM Global B electronic architecture. Essentially a vehicle’s electronic nervous system, Global B has gradually been replacing the earlier Global A in GM models, which dates back to the 1990s, and in some cases, even before.
Although the Bolt EUV will go on sale this summer as a brand new model, it is technologically and mechanically similar to Chevrolet‘s other all-electric crossover, the Bolt EV, which is undergoing a refresh for the 2022 model year (but will not offer Super Cruise, even as an option). The electronic architecture for both is basically Global A, but with a partial update which evolves it in the direction of Global B without actually turning it into a “proper” Global B vehicle. As such, the electrical system is not sufficient to allow the Bolt EUV to be fitted with Automated Lane Change.
Super Cruise system engaged in Cadillac CT6
The Bolt EUV’s Super Cruise system will therefore be similar to the one that first appeared in the 2018 Cadillac CT6, indicating to the driver that it is safe to take their hands off the wheel in certain circumstances. According to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Automated Vehicles for Safety document, Super Cruise is a driver assistance feature, and not a fully autonomous system.
Super Cruise in the Chevy Bolt EUV
The NHTSA defines it as a Level 2 system (in a hierarchy which extends to Level 5), which is described as follows: “Vehicle has combined automated functions, like acceleration and steering, but the driver must remain engaged with the driving task and monitor the environment at all times.”
Be sure to subscribe to GM Authority during the electric revolution for more Chevy Bolt EUV news, Chevrolet news and ongoing GM news coverage.
Comments
I don’t understand, global A since the 1990s?
Electrical systems in vehicles have changed drastically since then with Canbus communication etc.
This is an excuse. Any computer module they need to add in order to have automatic Lane changing runs on 12 volts and the DC to DC converter in the vehicle should power it fine….
Unless, global b electrical spec has super duper magic wiring…. Or, you know just decrease the wire gauge a bit..
More than likely it can’t handle the data rate necessary for the more advanced system. Yes you’re right they could have updated the wiring, but at what cost? More that likely this is going to be a cheaper upgrade with a monthly subscription fee. Given the price differences between the models I image is going to be less than a $1000 option.
SuperCruise is $2,200 and includes 3 years of OnStar. You can order the EUV on the web now.
That asking price is nearly the same as a Model Y.
Seems like a tough sell.
True. The Tesla has cool features like instant convertible mode (roof eject), and you get to pick a new paint color if you want after a few years because the still have the worst paint in the industry. I’m not sure if they still offer driver decapitate mode, and that nifty fart sound.
Let’s not pretend either is a perfect car. Both of these driver assist modes are unsafe unless you are prepared to take control at a moments notice. (Please note the period at the end of the sentence.)
The fact that you can put a beanbag on a Tesla steering wheel and take a nap tells you a lot about Teslas real commitment to safety, versus their desire to look good and leverage data at the cost of people’s lives. Not just the drivers, their passengers, and the others on the road. If you want to argue that point you should go take a course in ethics at your local Community College.
I have taught two of my own children to drive. There is a point where the capability new driver matches that of an unsupervised level 2 autonomous car. Does anyone here look forward to the relaxing experience of driving on the freeway with their learners permitted child? NO! You love them but it’s harrowing. Let’s not pretend that just because a computer is in control that technology is really as reliable as good people. It will fail you.
Apollo 13. The Apollo 11 manual landing, Sully on the Hudson. Even the best, most redundant technologies of their times fail and need people to back them up.
The Tesla system is non redundant – it is a vision only system to cut development time and save cost, and it is obviously designed to easily allow any moron to bypass the safeguards with whatever they have in arms reach.
The GM system uses vision and Lidar redundantly to feed data to the computer, and it uses a safety interlock specifically designed to be hard and expensive to bypass. Sure, they don’t want to get sued, but GM has outgrown leveraging lives versus profit at such a basic level.
I do respect Elon Musk, and the philosophy of going fast and breaking things, just not breaking people (and misleading them about it) (for profit).
Let’s not pretend that Tesla is the answer. They are great for awareness and innovation, but especially when discussing driver assist, don’t add to the cardboard pedestal they are on.
I wasn’t pretending anything. But it’s pretty obvious the Tesla is a more desirable car, is AWD, longer range, better acceleration, etc.
Well written, Tom. Well said.
No manufacturer is perfect, but all good manufacturers try to be. Your statement, based on evidence of GM’s actions, soundly place them in a subset of companies to watch through this decade. They’ve set a high but realistic milestone for 2025.
There is no price breakdown on the Chevy site for the new Bolts – just general preorder pricing. Where did you see the $2,200 price? It’s not going to be the same price as Cadillacs, because it has fewer features.
Go to the EUV order form and select the Premier option. Then select your color and interior. The next screen has the price.
Global A vs Global B isn’t so much the wiring or even the electricity; it’s how all the modules talk to each other. In the old days each system (steering, ABS, stability, radio, HVAC, etc.) all had their own brain and all did their own thing. Global A started letting these talk to each other, but only partially. There is also a difference in “read” ability vs “read/write”. Global B is relatively new and has all/most of those systems able to talk to each other. It’s not as simple as swapping wiring or sensors, to move to Global B you have to replace the entire nervous system of the car.
All that said, I’m not sure why they didn’t move both Bolts to Global B. I think they were pressed to get this to market, and 100% plan the Gen2 versions to use Global B (and their Ultimum batteries too).
You have to figure the Bolts will move to the BEV3 platform in the future. No reason for the BEV2 platform to survive since BEV3 supports the Bolt’s size and it has already been engineered to support global platform B.
GM directly said that the Bolt will not move to BEV3. It will most likely be retired in a few years.
The Bolt EV name might retire, but the BEV3 platform support subcompact 55kW battery vehicles. I can’t imagine GM releasing the Bolt EUV and getting rid of it in 4 years and abandoning the compact CUV EV space.
I don’t think you’re qualified to make the assessment of what’s required on a vehicle for higher levels of autonomous driving. Seeing as nearly no other manufacture currently offers this, I’d say it’s a little more advanced than 1990 tech.
Or according to Dan, maybe some thicker wire, another stick of ram and a software update should do the trick…
This shouldn’t surprise anyone. They are going to keep some market segmentation or less people will want to shell out thousands more for a Cadillac that isn’t any more capable than the Chevrolet.
This is not as simple as reprograming a computer. The wiring for data transmissions between components needs to be upgraded. The sensors to this probably dont’twork on the old wiring very well or at all. This is similiar to data networks. For years networks used hubs for communications on networks, which were good for the speed computers could do at the time to talk to each other. However with faster computers you need a way to get the data faster to other computers hence the reason network switches are used now and they range from 1000mbs to 10gbs. Fiber will even get you there faster. However a cars computer has to a lot to dofor the size of it and the enviroment it is in. Reason this has to do with the electrical side is because they are running not only power over the wiring in a car but also the data to simply the building of automobiles. Automobiles are not using the same hardware as what you have at work or home for your computers to communicate.
Bolt EUV = Rebadged Buick Velite 7 EV, nothing more. Yes it will have Super Cruise, but as shown here it’s more limited in scope due to platform limitations.
Literally the only thing that it MIGHT share from the Velite 7 is the frame, and that’s an assumption.
The body is similar, but different. The insides are entirely different, not even close.
Similar? It looks nearly identical.
But they don’t sell the Buick here, so it doesn’t really matter.
Agreed that they look very similar, but since they are not identical, we can’t call them identical 😛
I’m seeing some differences, mostly in the badges…
GM is doing the right thing!!! If GM determines it is not 100% ready and safe, do not install it!!
I’m sorry, but I don’t buy the answers given here.
Let me get this straight – the A platform has everything needed to do emergency braking, lane keep assist, and dynamically adjust the speed – but somehow the ability to change lanes would stress the poor car systems out so far that it would be impossible?
Nonsense.
Assuming that this reason is true (it could just be an excuse), I believe that GM simply decided not to offer it on the A platform. I see no technical reason why it couldn’t work. Why? For the same reason that they didn’t offer ACC or the regular SuperCruise on the Bolt platform for the previous 4 years, and the exact reason why SC is only available on the EUV and not the EV: You want the fancy features? You have to buy a more expensive car.
Sean,
The reason you have platforms is so you don’t have to start over again on the development, programming, testing and certification of your software and systems with each new car.
Even if it could be done, the cost would be huge, resources would get pulled away from a dozen more worthy projects, and in the end your new lane change feature on a single car would come years later, if at all, after you wasted all of the above.
Some are forgetting this was suppose to be out a year ago. If released ontime we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Excellent article!