Chevrolet Bolt & Bolt EUV

[TomT]

It will definitely be on my short list. I look forward to seeing, and the others, at CES...

I agree, though, that the actual car does look pretty good, and better than the concept.

 

[mwalsh]

Close to production or production Bolt?

http://jalopnik.com/the-electric-chevrolet-bolt-this-is-pretty-much-it-1751258676

 

[ampitupco]

http://insideevs.com/2017-chevrolet-bolt-details-leak-ahead-todays-reveal/

9 hours to fully recharge on Level 2 (likely 6.6 kW or higher)
EPA-estimated range of 200 miles or more
Available in late 2016
Expected output of ~150 HP
~ 300 pound-feet of torque
0 to 60 MPH in ~ 7 seconds
Top speed of more than 90 MPH
DC fast charger will recharge car from 0 to 80% in 45 minutes (more than 50 kW?)
Price still claimed to be less than $30,000 after the $7,500 tax credit
10.2-inch touchscreen
Exterior structure is made of aluminium, carbon fiber and mineral magnesium
Battery tucked under floor
Seating for 5
4 USB ports, as well as the 4G LTE

Wow. Nissan is screwed. Unless they half the price of the LEAF, or double its range.

I am doubting the 2016 delivery tho. Maybe to a select few dealers in CA in 2016.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

It is an impressive offering, for sure. I bet they will meet the 2016 delivery in the same way that the Volt / Leaf were delivered in 2010. I.e. in token amounts, sometime in december, just so they can check a box. The Bolt will then ramp up during 2017.

Meanwhile, Nissan repeatedly hints that the next gen Leaf will arrive in March 2017. That's not a whole lot of head start for the Bolt. And with its limited availability, I'm sure Nissan can sell their stock of 30kWh Leafs with a heavy enough discount.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

http://insideevs.com/2017-chevrolet-bolt-details-leak-ahead-todays-reveal/
Wow. Nissan is screwed.

Depending on how serious GM is with this thing I'm not sure it bodes well for Tesla either. GM knows how to manufacture things in volume at low(er) margins. When you see how Tesla has struggled delivering on schedule and ramping production you have to wonder if honing that skill is a much bigger challenge than GM basically coming out with a 50-60 kwh battery.

 

[edatoakrun]

... Nissan is screwed. Unless they half the price of the LEAF, or double its range..

Well, hasn't the actual price after Nissan's discounts and the $7,500 FTC for a base LEAF S been reported on other threads to be ~$16k to ~$18k, today?

So, A stripper Bolt (when it is available) will probably cost ~twice as much as the cheapest LEAF, and have two to 2.5 times the range.

I have to say that however, that while many people say they want more range in a mass-market segment BEV, I'm not so sure how many will be willing to actually pay for it.

Especially if gas remains near $2 a gallon, and when you can buy a comparable ICEV at the same GM dealership, with more than twice the Bolt's range, at close to half the Bolt's price.

The Kia Soul has ~25% more kWh than a LEAF, and a similar increased range in city or low speed driving, and costs only a few $k more.

But Kia sold fewer Soul EVs in the US market in the entire last year, than Nissan moved LEAFs in it's worst month of sales.

http://insideevs.com/ev-sales-record-set-december-us-powered-bmw-i8-wait/

 

[KeiJidosha]

Looks quite similar to the Fit, actually. Which is about perfect in my book.

Or maybe a Focus hatch shortened by lopping a foot-long section from the area between the rear doors and the tail of the car. I agree, though, that the actual car does look pretty good, and better than the concept.

Fit EV listed Interior volume as 89.3CuFt. Reports are the Bolt is 94.4, against 92.4 for the LEAF and 94 for the Tesla S; "That volume is "two segments larger" than the car's exterior size would suggest, said Pam Fletcher, GM's executive chief engineer for electrified vehicles." First Drive: Chevy Bolt EV 200-Mile Electric Car Development Vehicle

 

[dgpcolorado]

Depending on how serious GM is with this thing I'm not sure it bodes well for Tesla either. GM knows how to manufacture things in volume at low(er) margins. When you see how Tesla has struggled delivering on schedule and ramping production you have to wonder if honing that skill is a much bigger challenge than GM basically coming out with a 50-60 kwh battery.

But the Bolt isn't a long range car and the Tesla is. For some having a 200 mile car that can't make long trips will be sufficient, but Tesla will still own the market for pure EVs that can make long trips unless auto companies install their own supercharging network (very unlikely IMO) or they buy into Tesla's network (possible, eventually).

Add in GM's limited production targets and a dealer network that will do anything possible to steer customers to ICEVs, including badmouthing BEVs, and I don't think the Bolt threatens Tesla in any meaningful way.

My 2¢.

 

[MTNRanger]

Bolt passenger space is 94.4cf compared to Volt 90cf, Leaf 92cf, and i3 84cf.
56.6cf max cargo space with rear seats down.

Lots of photos/screencaps:

 

[pkulak]

Wow, looks like an amazing vehicle. I'd seriously consider it if I didn't need a new car right now. What a fantastic use of interior space. A totally flat rear passenger floor goes a long way. And the trunk looks small, but it's so deep I bet you could still fit a hell of a lot in there.

Sadly, I doubt I'd every make it my only car. You still have to charge on road trips, and finding places to fast charge the Bolt is going to be even more onerous than the Leaf, which is already getting nearly impossible to charge away from home. But as a second car? If you can plug in at home, this can be your second car.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

That all-important question remains unanswered though, can you tow your boat with it?

 

[pkulak]

That all-important question remains unanswered though, can you tow your boat with it?

Oh yeah. Front-wheel-drive towing is always a good idea.

 

[Deleted member 9549]

That all-important question remains unanswered though, can you tow your boat with it?

Oh yeah. Front-wheel-drive towing is always a good idea.

We tow a 26' boat with our front wheel drive minivan. Works great.

 

[lorenfb]

http://insideevs.com/2017-chevrolet-bolt-details-leak-ahead-todays-reveal/

9 hours to fully recharge on Level 2 (likely 6.6 kW or higher)
EPA-estimated range of 200 miles or more
Available in late 2016
Expected output of ~150 HP
~ 300 pound-feet of torque
0 to 60 MPH in ~ 7 seconds
Top speed of more than 90 MPH
DC fast charger will recharge car from 0 to 80% in 45 minutes (more than 50 kW?)
Price still claimed to be less than $30,000 after the $7,500 tax credit
10.2-inch touchscreen
Exterior structure is made of aluminium, carbon fiber and mineral magnesium
Battery tucked under floor
Seating for 5
4 USB ports, as well as the 4G LTE

Wow. Nissan is screwed. Unless they half the price of the LEAF, or double its range.

I am doubting the 2016 delivery tho. Maybe to a select few dealers in CA in 2016.

So the motor is very similar to the Spark's motor as discussed here;
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=6198&start=900

Reviewed the basic specs of the 2016 Spark verses the 2016 Leaf:

Torque (lb-Ft) HP (kW) Battery (kWh)
Spark: 327, 97 (130 HP), 19
Leaf: 190, 80, 30

 

[Evoforce]

I want to know when all of the combo quick chargers are going to roll out? And where?

 

[Valdemar]

I want to know when all of the combo quick chargers are going to roll out? And where?

There has been a steady increase of their numbers here in SoCal. Most new chargers that pop-up on PlugShare are either dual-standard or CCS specific. I predict CCS will eventually dominate despite the fact that Chademo is more widespread currently as it boils down to Nissan vs. everyone else.

 

[RegGuheert]

So the motor is very similar to the Spark's motor as discussed here;
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=6198&start=900

Reviewed the basic specs of the 2016 Spark verses the 2016 Leaf:

Torque (lb-Ft) HP (kW) Battery (kWh)
Spark: 327, 97 (130 HP), 19
Leaf: 190, 80, 30

The LEAF has more torque than the Spark at zero speed, but less at highway speeds, as discussed here:

It seems clear from looking at these curves that the Spark EV has LESS torque at the axle than the 2011 LEAF. The LEAF has 280 Nm at the motor which equates to 2222 Nm at the axle after the 7.9377 reduction gear. That's 1622 ft*lbf of torque at the axle! This compares with 1700 Nm (at the axle) for the Spark EV. Clearly the 400 ft*lbf spec for the Spark EV is the motor torque.

But the difference is in power. The LEAF can only maintain its maximum torque up to about 25 MPH, while the Spark EV can (nearly) maintain it up to about 40 MPH. At 40 MPH, the LEAF is down to somewhere around 1350 Nm of torque.

Basically, a high-torque, low-speed motor can reduce drivetrain losses at all speeds by reducing the switching frequency of the inverter and hence the switching losses (which I have estimated to approach a 1-kW constant draw in the LEAF) while also reducing the eddy-current losses in the motor at higher speeds.

Switching losses will likely be greatly reduced in future BEVs by moving from IGBT switches to MOSFETs (likely SiC, but possibly Si), but the eddy-current losses in the motor are improved greatly by GM's approach.

 

[lorenfb]

So the motor is very similar to the Spark's motor as discussed here;
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=6198&start=900

Reviewed the basic specs of the 2016 Spark verses the 2016 Leaf:

Torque (lb-Ft) HP (kW) Battery (kWh)
Spark: 327, 97 (130 HP), 19
Leaf: 190, 80, 30

The LEAF has more torque than the Spark at zero speed, but less at highway speeds, as discussed here:

It seems clear from looking at these curves that the Spark EV has LESS torque at the axle than the 2011 LEAF. The LEAF has 280 Nm at the motor which equates to 2222 Nm at the axle after the 7.9377 reduction gear. That's 1622 ft*lbf of torque at the axle! This compares with 1700 Nm (at the axle) for the Spark EV. Clearly the 400 ft*lbf spec for the Spark EV is the motor torque.

But the difference is in power. The LEAF can only maintain its maximum torque up to about 25 MPH, while the Spark EV can (nearly) maintain it up to about 40 MPH. At 40 MPH, the LEAF is down to somewhere around 1350 Nm of torque.

Basically, a high-torque, low-speed motor can reduce drivetrain losses at all speeds by reducing the switching frequency of the inverter and hence the switching losses (which I have estimated to approach a 1-kW constant draw in the LEAF) while also reducing the eddy-current losses in the motor at higher speeds.

Switching losses will likely be greatly reduced in future BEVs by moving from IGBT switches to MOSFETs (likely SiC, but possibly Si), but the eddy-current losses in the motor are improved greatly by GM's approach.

Again, the key point being that the Bolt's motor is most likely very similar to the Spark's,
I.e. not similar to the Volt's multi-motor/gearing system and thus avoiding a basic transmission
as with the Leaf and Tesla's MS/X .

 

[RegGuheert]

Again, the key point being that the Bolt's motor is most likely very similar to the Spark's,
I.e. not similar to the Volt's multi-motor/gearing system and thus avoiding a basic transmission
as with the Leaf and Tesla's MS/X .

Agreed. And the Spark drivetrain is likely more efficient than the LEAF or Tesla drivetrains at highway speeds. The Volt's drivetrain may be slightly more efficient, but at a much higher cost.

DOE indicates Delphi is "going to production" with a new inverter. I wonder if this is the inverter used in the Bolt:

 

[TonyWilliams]

Sadly, I doubt I'd every make it my only car. You still have to charge on road trips, and finding places to fast charge the Bolt is going to be even more onerous than the Leaf, which is already getting nearly impossible to charge away from home. But as a second car? If you can plug in at home, this can be your second car.

Holy crap, if you're in Portland, you have one of the best designed and implemented DC quick charge systems for the LEAF (all CHAdeMO) in the world. It is just the opposite for the Bolt, as there are few CCS charge stations in comparison.

Any car needs a robust refueling infrastructure for long distance travel, whether it is gasoline, electric, natural gas, diesel, or steam. I personally just don't get the "second car" thinking process... if you're buying a new car to sit around in second place, I'll bet the real economics don't pencil out so well.

http://www.westcoastgreenhighway.com/pdfs/WCEH_map.pdf