Chevy Bolt - 200 mile range for $30k base price (after incentive)

[scaesare]

If they are limiting the plug current capability to ~240-250A, then indeed, there are going to be few real-world cases where they'll be putting out 125KW. 500V is just a bit of an odd selection and hence the 125KW rating is probably not going to be ever really achieved.

Even with Tesla's 85KW packs, the charge current is below 250A before the charge session reaches 400V, so even there I'd bet that 100KW wouldn't be reached. Maybe with the 100KW packs.

In practice, it will be a ~80-90KW network for the most part.

 

[Zoomit]

Actually the 75kWh packs can charge at ~100kW now and the 100kWh packs charge at 116kW.

75kW pack charging: Some exciting observations about the new Model S60 (software limited 75 kWh)
100kW pack charging: P100D, 760HP and Performance Tests

But you're right that the future 125kW-rated CCS chargers will be more like 80-90kW in reality where the voltages are between ~325 and ~400V. That's basically double what the "50kW" chargers do now.

 

[gene]

Let's face it. Most every Bolt owner will learn to love driving an EV. And most every Bolt owner's next car will be a Tesla.

 

[Jeff N]

The same could be expected of CCS stations rated to 150kW (500V at 300A). I'd guess this is the upper limit for the current cable design. A "150kW" charger could charge a battery at 400V and 300A giving 120kW.

CHAdeMO and CCS are both imminently being officially specified for 350A, not 300A.

Yes, 500V at 350A is 175 kW but this is stupidly referred to as 150 kW in press articles and public discussion just like CHAdeMO's original 500V at 125A is dumbly referred to as 50 kW instead of 62.5 kW. Yet, oddly, CCS's 500V at 200A is correctly referred to as 100 kW and a later move to double the maximum voltage specification to 1000V at 350A is correctly but inconsistently referred to as 350 kW.

As you mention, the actual power is dependent on the voltage design considerations of a particular model's battery pack. So, I think the capability of the charger itself should just be reported as its maximum amperage -- 62.5 for some of the BMW-funded small chargers, 125A for most chargers today, 200A for today's CCS specification, 250A for ChargePoint's new charger, and 350A for tomorrow's specification. When voltage doubling comes along in a few years one can mention if the charger supports a peak of 500 vs 1000 voltage but at least we can reset the discussion of existing chargers to be numerically coherent.

Then the question is which cars can take 250A and 400V. That will depend on the size of the battery and the designed charging "C" rate. Tesla's charge at a peak of around 1.2C to 1.3C. If we assume the same for other cars, the battery capacity must be 77 to 83kWh to charge at 100kW (250A, 400V). Currently no CCS-compatible cars exist with such batteries. The closest is the Bolt EV that might have a 70kWh total battery capacity. It would need to charge at 1.4C to take full advantage of a "125kW" charger and charge at 100kW.

Why would we assume the Bolt would be inherently limited to 1.2C or 1.3C (or, gak, the 0.8C that GM talks about publicly today).

The Tesla uses NCA chemistry whereas the Bolt and several other BEVs use a variant of NMC. Several first generation BEVs charge at a peak of over 2.0C including the LEAF, Spark EV, i3 and the e-Golf is in the mix also. Although it's certainly possible that the Bolt cells are limited to 1.3C it could easily be higher.

 

[stopcrazypp]

As you mention, the actual power is dependent on the voltage design considerations of a particular model's battery pack. So, I think the capability of the charger itself should just be reported as its maximum amperage -- 62.5 for some of the BMW-funded small chargers, 125A for most chargers today, 200A for today's CCS specification, 250A for ChargePoint's new charger, and 350A for tomorrow's specification. When voltage doubling comes along in a few years one can mention if the charger supports a peak of 500 vs 1000 voltage but at least we can reset the discussion of existing chargers to be numerically coherent.

It's arguable which power rating to use, but the voltage rating for a given charger should already be specified. It would not be trivial to just voltage double the existing chargers from 500V to 1000V if they didn't support 1000V in the first place. It's better to advocate for both voltage and amps to be specified, or either one specified with the power (so you can calculate the third number).

 

[McRat]

The EV pack that LG produced for the Spark does it's CCS charging at 2.4C average up to 80% charge.

A 125kW peak charging rate on the Bolt would be less than the Spark's average rate.

We will still have to wait for both a Bolt to be available in the wild, and a CCS charger above 62.5kW to be hooked to it in the wild to know the truth.

Neither are available in the US to normal car owners.

 

[wdolson]

Who said that?

I think GM is expecting to sell something like 50k Bolts in the next 12 months. Most will be in CA, so there will probably by 30k or so Bolts in CA in 12 months, which is not "the distant future". I see no reason for it to cause any chaos. Most will be used as daily driver commuter cars very, very effectively. Many will use them for distance travel too. I suspect those folks will wish there were more and better long-distance charging infrastructure, and will not be nearly as well served as those of us who can use the supercharger network during the next 12 months. That's not chaos, and it won't even prevent the Bolt owners from successfully traveling long distances, it will just take longer because the charging will be slower, but also because there will be competition to use the limited fast charging resource available along the routes outside the city. I'm well aware that the map you posted is about 200 miles across which is why I said that the Bolt could drive completely across it without charging since it has a 238 mile range.

I think you are being obtuse on purpose. Why?

Just FYI GM's announced Bolt production for the first year and possibly the first few years is only 30K a year. Speculation of LG Chem's battery production capacity has estimated they might be able to expand production to about 50K a year if GM really needs it, but that's about the top level for now.

GM's 30K Bolts will be sold worldwide including under a different brand name in Europe. With the other CARB states and GM's announcement that the Bolt will be available nationwide in the US, about the largest number I would expect in California a year from now will be about 15K. In any case, California will most likely have the largest number in the world, though California is a large place with a larger population than Canada.

With a CCS network build out, Bolts may be able to travel around the state, but they will still be limited for some time compared to supercharger travel with Teslas. Superchargers now cover around 90% of the continental US. It's going to be a while until someone can drive from California to New York on the CCS network. Looking on Plugshare there are a fair number of CCS stations around the US, but they are clustered mostly in cities, which is not where they need to be for long distance travel, and there are huge gaps between some cities. Without somebody giving incentives to build chargers in the middle of nowhere, nobody is going to build them.

 

[JRP3]

I think you are being obtuse on purpose. Why?

Because he's a GM fan boy who uses misdirection over and over even though we catch him every time.

 

[Breezy]

Just FYI GM's announced Bolt production for the first year and possibly the first few years is only 30K a year. Speculation of LG Chem's battery production capacity has estimated they might be able to expand production to about 50K a year if GM really needs it, but that's about the top level for now.

To clarify, GM has never announced any sort of production target or limit for the Bolt. What we have is leaks from suppliers and speculation. LG expects them to sell more than 30,000.

I think 30,000 is a reasonable target for the first year of production, but GM is likely capable of considerably more. The line is currently running at 9/hr on one shift (~18,000 per year) with a target of 30/hr (~60,000 per year)

Chevrolet Bolt Production Now Underway

 

[Jeff N]

It would not be trivial to just voltage double the existing chargers from 500V to 1000V if they didn't support 1000V in the first place. It's better to advocate for both voltage and amps to be specified, or either one specified with the power (so you can calculate the third number).

Sure, I agree that 1,000V chargers will likely be new charger designs rather than simple upgrades of existing units in place.

I agree that ideally both maximum voltage and amperage should be quoted but people are lazy and want a single number.

 

[stopcrazypp]

To clarify, GM has never announced any sort of production target or limit for the Bolt. What we have is leaks from suppliers and speculation. LG expects them to sell more than 30,000.

I think 30,000 is a reasonable target for the first year of production, but GM is likely capable of considerably more. The line is currently running at 9/hr on one shift (~18,000 per year) with a target of 30/hr (~60,000 per year)

Chevrolet Bolt Production Now Underway

He's talking about cell and pack production by LG Chem. Earlier this year it was calculated at ~50k units per year if LG Chem maxed out their existing capacity. The final assembly I don't think there is a real limit because GM has plenty of factory capacity for that.

 

[Zoomit]

If you're Bolt-curious, here are today's three articles from Motor Trend:

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV vs. 2016 Tesla Model S 60 Comparison

The Chevrolet Bolt and Tesla Model S 60: Range, Charging - and Travel - Motor Trend

What Tesla Owners Think About the Chevrolet Bolt - Motor Trend

 

[Zoomit]

...and here's an odd juxtaposition for you. This would be Tesla’s chief designer, Franz von Holzhausen, sitting in a Bolt EV.

 

[BluestarE3]

...and here's an odd juxtaposition for you. This would be Tesla’s chief designer, Franz von Holzhausen, sitting in a Bolt EV.

I wonder if Franz bumped his head while getting out of the Bolt like Harald Kruger (BMW CEO) did while exiting a Model X at a car show?
Watch BMW’s CEO bonk his head rushing to get out of Tesla’s Model X after calling it “only a prototype” [Video]

 

[stopcrazypp]

I wonder if Franz bumped his head while getting out of the Bolt like Harald Kruger (BMW CEO) did while exiting a Model X at a car show?
Watch BMW’s CEO bonk his head rushing to get out of Tesla’s Model X after calling it “only a prototype” [Video]

That's what I'm remembering too. Tesla's attitude is a lot friendlier than other makes.

 

[Darren Donovan]

Let's face it. Most every Bolt owner will learn to love driving an EV. And most every Bolt owner's next car will be a Tesla.

Doubt it. Unless Tesla vastly improves QC and reliability, and build more, much more, service centers. I was pretty sure I was gonna get an S, then started reading about the QC issues here. Tesla vehicles are peerless, when they run. But when your expensive cars sit the shop for multiple times, regarding the same issues, and coupled with long wait times, all that greatly sour the experience, and paying nearing $100K, oftentimes more, just adds salt to the wound. The time to give Tesla excuses will be over soon when the Model 3 arrives.

 

[RiverBrick]

To clarify, GM has never announced any sort of production target or limit for the Bolt. What we have is leaks from suppliers and speculation. LG expects them to sell more than 30,000.

I think 30,000 is a reasonable target for the first year of production, but GM is likely capable of considerably more. The line is currently running at 9/hr on one shift (~18,000 per year)

We also are starting to get reports from dealers about their allocations and it looks like current production will not meet demand, at least not outside of ZEV states.

For example, Bourgeois Chevrolet in Rawdon, QC may be the highest volume Volt dealer in the world*, but they are only expecting 200 Bolts in the 1st year, which is almost certainly less than the number of people on their waiting list. Their 1st allotment for February+March is for 40 cars, Compare that to California dealers that are receiving 75 for December+January. Two other dealers in Québec have spoken of volumes of 10 and three vehicles per quarter.

* 41% of their sales are Volts or Spark EVs, but only because they massively import used ones from the USA, since GM Canada generally doesn't supply them with enough new ones.

 

[RobStark]

Doubt it. Unless Tesla vastly improves QC and reliability, and build more, much more, service centers. I was pretty sure I was gonna get an S, then started reading about the QC issues here. Tesla vehicles are peerless, when they run. But when your expensive cars sit the shop for multiple times, regarding the same issues, and coupled with long wait times, all that greatly sour the experience, and paying nearing $100K, oftentimes more, just adds salt to the wound. The time to give Tesla excuses will be over soon when the Model 3 arrives.

LOL.

1) Chevy is not Lexus. Neither is Cadillac for the matter.

2) Tesla QC issues revolve around fit,finish and noise not leave you stranded on the road then weeks in the shop issues.

3) Proof is in the pudding with Tesla's 98% satisfaction rates and would buy again numbers.

 

[JRP3]

The Chevrolet Bolt and Tesla Model S 60: Range, Charging - and Travel - Motor Trend

The next morning, the Bolt had absorbed 68 kW-hrs of energy, the Tesla, 64.7. Is the Bolt’s charging that much less efficient? (For those of you without electrical engineering degrees, absorbing more energy is a bad thing, an indicator of inefficiency, similar to spilling gasoline at the pump, but instead it’s wasted electrons.) However, this was not the case. The Bolt’s battery is evidently larger than claimed, its usable size likely larger than its stated, 60 kW-hrs capacity (which I had run extraordinarily low; GM says a typical charge is 66.6).

This is as I suspected after seeing the range numbers they are getting. I think it's a smart move to slightly over deliver on usable battery capacity, something I hope Tesla will do in the future.

 

[wdolson]

Doubt it. Unless Tesla vastly improves QC and reliability, and build more, much more, service centers. I was pretty sure I was gonna get an S, then started reading about the QC issues here. Tesla vehicles are peerless, when they run. But when your expensive cars sit the shop for multiple times, regarding the same issues, and coupled with long wait times, all that greatly sour the experience, and paying nearing $100K, oftentimes more, just adds salt to the wound. The time to give Tesla excuses will be over soon when the Model 3 arrives.

Look at Consumer Reports reliability figures for the Model S. The 2013s are Fair, the 2014s are rated Poor, the 2015s Good, and the 2016s Excellent. For some inexplicable reason they predict 2017s will be Average. Tesla has gone a long ways towards improving quality in just the last couple of years. Few people have reported problems with their 2016s, mine has been excellent. People who had an earlier Model S who got a 2016 have commented that the quality of 2016s are vastly better than what they had before.

Now the Model X still has serious teething problems (the ones being produced now are better than 6 months ago, but there are still some complaints) and Tesla does need more service centers, but more service centers are part of the Model 3 roll out plan.