Nissan: We Can Match Bolt

[GetOffYourGas]

As for trust, I would trust Nissan over GM.

I would vote for GM as well, but for a different reason. A good friend of mine drives a Volt, and it is clearly over-engineered. The durability of the car and battery far exceeds that of my Leaf. Now Nissan could come back and fix past engineering mistakes with the Leaf 2.0. But it's more likely that GM will get it right, since they got it right the first time and don't really have as major mistakes to correct.

I guess it depends on what you call GM's first time. I thought the Bolt was a pure BEV, not a PHEV like the Volt. But I could be wrong. That would mean their first time, discounting the EV1, would be the Spark. That was the only EV I test drove and actively disliked. And that came later than the Leaf. So I'm not inclined to believe GM is ahead of Nissan.

No, the Bolt is a BEV and not a PHEV. I refer to the Volt as their first serious *EV to market. It speaks of their engineering in terms of battery management as well as overall drive train.

I live in NY, so I never got a chance to drive the Spark EV, and have not seen any data regarding durability of the battery. Moreover, I was referring to the more objective measures such as how GM babies the Volt's battery, rather than subjective measure of how much one "likes" the car. To my knowledge, no Gen 1 Volts have exhibited any loss of electric range to date. That doesn't mean that the batteries have not degraded, of course. GM may just have kept a large enough reserve to hide any capacity loss. And in turn, I admit, that is harder to do with a BEV than a PHEV. Time will tell, of course, but at this point I trust GM to have done their homework more than Nissan.

 

[pkulak]

Nissan and Tesla are vaporware and will likely be a year late to Chevy's party.

haha. Perfect thread summary!

 

[pkulak]

Don't forget, eventually battery capacities will be so large (think beyond Tesla), that any degradation will become less critical; when you start out with < 100 miles range, losing some is more obvious.

I dunno. You lose percent of capacity, not absolute miles. Battery warranties are usually, what, 70%? So with a Bolt you can lose almost an entire Leaf range before the battery is considered "bad". You'd think it doesn't matter with a long-range car like a Tesla, but it bothers me. Sure, still having 150 miles after degradation is great for around town, but what if two supercharges you use are 160 miles apart?

 

[palmermd]

Nissan and Tesla are vaporware and will likely be a year late to Chevy's party.

haha. Perfect thread summary!

But they both have an opportunity to show their plans before the launch of the Bolt, and that could be enough for many to delay a purchase of a Bolt until they can see both (or all three) cars in person. I think Bolt will sell well out of the block, but then stagnate until the competitors products are available to compare. Of course this depends on what they say will be offered and at what price from Nissan and Tesla. Details inside these announcements could have a big effect.

 

[evnow]

Nissan and Tesla are vaporware and will likely be a year late to Chevy's party.

I don't think vaporware means what you think it means.

Nissan has working Leaf 2.0 on the road they have been testing. Yet, they have not announced anything about it.

Tesla has a huge battery factory coming up.

Leaf 2 & Model 3 are so far from the meaning of a vaporware - it is not even funny.

In the computer industry, vaporware (also spelt vapourware) is a product, typically computer hardware or software, that is announced to the general public but is never actually manufactured nor officially cancelled. Use of the word has broadened to include products such as automobiles.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

I'm sure he only meant they're not for sale yet either.

So, Bolt beginning in December? Then maybe LEAF 2 soon after, if not also December? Model 3 not until December 2017 probably?

 

[Moof]

I don't think vaporware means what you think it means.

Vaporware is something that has been announced, but I cannot buy yet. It is real once it arrives at a dealer, or at least once production worthy units are test drivable by the press. Vaporware is a software term, so not the best fit when describing cars.

The Bolt is arguably still vaporware, but quickly becoming real. We still don't have a final price and you can't buy one, but we have real hardware being demoed.

The Leaf 2.0 is full on vaporware without even a spy shot leaked, or anything resembling hard specs available. We don't even have a claim as to when it will be announced or what model year it will be available in.

The Model 3 is the same, only we know when it will be announced, so still vaporware.

 

[user 10599]

No, the Bolt is a BEV and not a PHEV. I refer to the Volt as their first serious *EV to market. It speaks of their engineering in terms of battery management as well as overall drive train.

I live in NY, so I never got a chance to drive the Spark EV, and have not seen any data regarding durability of the battery. Moreover, I was referring to the more objective measures such as how GM babies the Volt's battery, rather than subjective measure of how much one "likes" the car. To my knowledge, no Gen 1 Volts have exhibited any loss of electric range to date. That doesn't mean that the batteries have not degraded, of course. GM may just have kept a large enough reserve to hide any capacity loss. And in turn, I admit, that is harder to do with a BEV than a PHEV. Time will tell, of course, but at this point I trust GM to have done their homework more than Nissan.

When I bought my Leaf, I had test driven the Volt and Spark. I was impressed with the Volt and actively disliked the Spark.

So yes, if the Bolt takes after the Volt, then they may well have an excellent car. If however, it is more like a Spark with longer range, I would be very concerned. And I would worry that the Bolt would more likely take after the Spark given that both are full BEV concepts while the Volt is a PHEV. I hope I'm wrong on that.

 

[dm33]

When I bought my Leaf, I had test driven the Volt and Spark. I was impressed with the Volt and actively disliked the Spark.

Hard to tell since you don't mention what you liked about the Volt and didn't like about the Spark.

 

[evnow]

Vaporware is something that has been announced, but I cannot buy yet. It is real once it arrives at a dealer, or at least once production worthy units are test drivable by the press. Vaporware is a software term, so not the best fit when describing cars.

You are using a bad definition. By your definition every car that has been announced but can't be bought now is vaporware - including Bolt. Obviously it takes some time between an announcement and production. See the definition I've posted from Wikipedia.

Various Audi/VW announcements over the years are good examples of vaporware EVs. For that matter, may be even US Outlander PHEV, that has been postponed time & again. Or Infiniti LE.

Calling Model 3 or Leaf 2 vaporware is just a slur. This is frequently used to beat up products someone doesn't like - was also extensively used in Tesla forum to describe Bolt !

 

[smkettner]

Match the Bolt? So much for being market leader in this segment.

 

[EVDRIVER]

I don't think vaporware means what you think it means.

Vaporware is something that has been announced, but I cannot buy yet. It is real once it arrives at a dealer, or at least once production worthy units are test drivable by the press. Vaporware is a software term, so not the best fit when describing cars.

The Bolt is arguably still vaporware, but quickly becoming real. We still don't have a final price and you can't buy one, but we have real hardware being demoed.

The Leaf 2.0 is full on vaporware without even a spy shot leaked, or anything resembling hard specs available. We don't even have a claim as to when it will be announced or what model year it will be available in.

The Model 3 is the same, only we know when it will be announced, so still vaporware.

Your description of vaporware is not accurate in this quote.

 

[EVDRIVER]

Match the Bolt? So much for being market leader in this segment.

At least they did not say they are "almost" matching the Bolt.

 

[cwerdna]

If you look at CR reliability ratings for GMs brands across all model years vs. Toyota and its brands, you will STILL find a lot of GM vehicles w/below average reliability, some well below, some average and a few above average. For Toyota, there are few below average and most are above average, often well above.

In looking at my Dec '15 CR issue which lists the 20 least reliable vehicles, 6 of them were GM. 0 were from Toyota or its brands.

If you look at http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2013/04/best-worst-used-cars/index.htm, notice a bunch of Toyotas and Lexuses being amongst the recommended vehicles (and no GM except for the Corolla-based Toyota Matrix twin built at NUMMI Pontiac Vibe) while none were in the "Worst of the worst used cars". A bunch of GM vehicles made it in that latter bucket.

I'm not sure I'd agree that Toyota is "in decline", from a reliability POV.

To add to this, in looking at the same issue, CR ranked 28 auto brands by predicted reliability and grouped them into 3 categories: most reliable, reliable and least reliable.

In the most reliable camp (makes up spots 1 thru 7):
#1 Lexus w/average score of 66% above average
#2 Toyota w/average score of 56% above average
The only GM brand in there is Buick at #7 w/27% above average.

In the least reliable bucket (makes up spots 16 thru 28):
#19 GMC: 46% below average
#20 Chevy: 48% below average
#25 Cadillac: 91% below average

 

[user 10599]

Good points Cwerdna. I'm not real confident in Chevy.

It sounds like the Volt is an exception. Perhaps the Bolt will be too.

 

[LeftieBiker]

Speaking of "vaporware"and the "Volt": the latter actually was vaporware, in the beginning. It was a Camaro showcar prototype with the drivetrain of (literally, not figuratively) a golf cart. GM had no intention of producing this vehicle, but the public demand for it became so hard to ignore that they went ahead and built it, from less than scratch - from vapor. Despite this, it turned out to be a good car, and a very good PHEV. I doubt that GM will ever match that achievement.

 

[Zythryn]

Speaking of "vaporware"and the "Volt": the latter actually was vaporware, in the beginning. It was a Camaro showcar prototype with the drivetrain of (literally, not figuratively) a golf cart. GM had no intention of producing this vehicle, but the public demand for it became so hard to ignore that they went ahead and built it, from less than scratch - from vapor. Despite this, it turned out to be a good car, and a very good PHEV. I doubt that GM will ever match that achievement.

I'm not sure where you got that impression.
Public "demand" was much less than Lutz originally thought it would be. I don't think GM had any clue what the public demand would be.
The Volt program was shelved by the GM Board.
After Tesla came out with the Roadster, Lutz went to the Board and shamed them into approving the Volt.

Another factor MAY have been an attempt to repair their image from the EV-1 PR disaster.

 

[LKK]

If you have a bit of time, here's an Autoblog article that has a link to a 29 page report on the history of the Volt. It appears a lot of the information was provided by GM so it tends to show only the more positive aspects. Never the less it gives a glimpse at what went on to develop the Volt and I'm sure many of the same players and processes were used in the development of the Bolt.

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/09/23/a-brief-but-detailed-history-of-the-chevy-volt/

 

[edatoakrun]

Match the Bolt? So much for being market leader in this segment.

You might have greater understanding, if you read beyond the headline.

...“We will have offerings that will be comparable and at one point exceed the competitors again,” Michael Bunce, Nissan North America’s newly installed product planning chief, tells WardsAuto here during an interview at the 2016 North American International Auto Show....

http://wardsauto.com/industry/nissan-we-can-match-bolt

 

[LeftieBiker]

Speaking of "vaporware"and the "Volt": the latter actually was vaporware, in the beginning. It was a Camaro showcar prototype with the drivetrain of (literally, not figuratively) a golf cart. GM had no intention of producing this vehicle, but the public demand for it became so hard to ignore that they went ahead and built it, from less than scratch - from vapor. Despite this, it turned out to be a good car, and a very good PHEV. I doubt that GM will ever match that achievement.

I'm not sure where you got that impression.
Public "demand" was much less than Lutz originally thought it would be. I don't think GM had any clue what the public demand would be.
The Volt program was shelved by the GM Board.
After Tesla came out with the Roadster, Lutz went to the Board and shamed them into approving the Volt.

Another factor MAY have been an attempt to repair their image from the EV-1 PR disaster.

I was following the story as it happened. PBS (I think through "Frontline") did a piece on the Volt. The golfcart-powered Camaro that GM provided them would only go about 10MPH, and then broke down completely. GM suggested to the film crew that they "Speed up the footage" to make the car appear to go faster. Lutz was indeed the internal driving force behind the Volt's metamorphosis from vaporware to hardware, but even he would have had no luck if there wasn't a public demand that GM produce the car. The EV-1 debacle was also part of the mix, and is probably why GM produced the concept car in the first pace, with no intention of actually building the Volt. It was a case of PR having unintended consequences.