Chevy Bolt begins production “in just a few short months”

[Blue20]

No OC in Canada, traditional balloon payment loans only.

Owner's Choice is a balloon payment product. It is available in Canada, except for Quebec.

http://thebmwstore.bmw.ca/ca/thebmwstore/en/general/financial_services/financing.html

 

[i3atl]

Owner's Choice is a balloon payment product. It is available in Canada, except for Quebec.

http://thebmwstore.bmw.ca/ca/thebmwstore/en/general/financial_services/financing.html

Thanks - this is different from Owner's Choice in the US, which offers a return and "walk away" option at the end of the term, as is the case with a lease.

 

[i3an]

Art, I think you are confusing process with product. The mark of any human-made object is whether or not it achieves what its maker sets out to do, and what is under the skin is mostly irrelevant. Chevy is not attempting to make the Ultimate Electric Driving Machine, it is attempting to hit the mass-market sweet spot of value and performance: a 200-mile range pure BEV family sedan for $30k. Tesla is flailing at volume production of the Model X, their 200-mile $60k-plus car, and it sure looks like mass production of their 200-mile $30k Model 3 will be at least a year behind the Bolt. What you call cutting corners others call value engineering. Sure, the Bolt is not going to be as nimble or handle as well as the i3, but it is going to be $10k cheaper! However it does appear to be more aerodynamic compared to the goofy i3, so at highway speeds it just might be as efficient—in spite of its porkiness. Only time will tell, but don't dismiss the Bolt just because its engineering isn't as elegant as the i3, or that GM has a long and inglorious history of unrelenting mediocrity.

 

[michaelbmw]

People use the term "efficient", but the best measure I can think of is MPGe, for which standardized values are available.

I3 is rated at 124 combined, and the I3 Rex is rated 117. By comparison, the much admired Tesla 85 is rated at 89 combined (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymake/Tesla2014.shtml). But even the Volt, which EV purists treat with disdain, manages 106 combined despite the fact that it has an ICE and everything that goes with it.

I think it's fair to expect that the Bolt will come in somewhere between Volt's 106 and I3's 124, and that will put it right in line with most of the current models (for example Leaf at 114 https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2014_Nissan_Leaf.shtml).

Frankly, I won't be surprised if the Bolt turns out to be more efficient than the I3 Rex.

 

[I33t]

People use the term "efficient", but the best measure I can think of is MPGe, for which standardized values are available.

I3 is rated at 124 combined, and the I3 Rex is rated 117. By comparison, the much admired Tesla 85 is rated at 89 combined (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymake/Tesla2014.shtml). But even the Volt, which EV purists treat with disdain, manages 106 combined despite the fact that it has an ICE and everything that goes with it.

I think it's fair to expect that the Bolt will come in somewhere between Volt's 106 and I3's 124, and that will put it right in line with most of the current models (for example Leaf at 114 https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2014_Nissan_Leaf.shtml).

Frankly, I won't be surprised if the Bolt turns out to be more efficient than the I3 Rex.

Efficiency is a prime requirement IMHO.

Otherwise we could build a large, heavy car, fill it with a mass of battery to give it good range (and even more weight) and then have the users consume large amounts of electricity to fuel it for routine suburban use with one driver on board. Yep, like most Tesla S's.

An i3 has the efficiency lead that makes it perfectly possible that someone with solar panels can be a nett exporter of electricity to the grid. It's designed as an urban car, not a highway cruiser. Hopefully, the Bolt will get into that range for owners that don't need the 200 mile range.

I'll be amazed if the Bolt turns out to be anywhere close to the i3 REX.

 

[Sparky]

Totally agree. That's why the insane mode in a tesla is ridiculous.

 

[I33t]

I bet it's got better freeway speed efficiency than the i3. It's definitely more aerodynamic

From the Bolt forum:

http://www.mychevybolt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=113

Have a look at the frontal area and the Coefficient of drag. If that table is correct, looks like you'll be wrong on all counts!

 

[alohart]

This chart lists the i3's weight as 2853 lb. whereas BMW's Website lists it at only 2634 lb. I thought that maybe the i3's weight on the chart was that of a REx, but BMW lists its weight as 2799 lb. So I'm pretty certain that the i3 BEV's weight is more than 200 lb. lighter than listed. That would make the Bolt nearly 1000 lb. heavier than the i3 BEV. About half of that is due to the Bolt's much larger battery pack with much of the rest probably due to Chevy's lower priority on lightweight construction.

 

[I33t]

Google says that 2853lb comes from the Car and Driver test of the i3 vs Mercedes B Class Electric:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2014-bmw-i3-vs-2014-mercedes-benz-b-class-electric-drive-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-4

Maybe they weighed it with a driver on board? No way the Bolt was weighed by C&D with a driver on board... The do quote the weight "at an estimated 3580 pounds" http://www.caranddriver.com/chevrolet/bolt-ev

 

[michaelbmw]

[

Efficiency is a prime requirement IMHO.

Otherwise we could build a large, heavy car, fill it with a mass of battery to give it good range (and even more weight) and then have the users consume large amounts of electricity to fuel it for routine suburban use with one driver on board. Yep, like most Tesla S's.

An i3 has the efficiency lead that makes it perfectly possible that someone with solar panels can be a nett exporter of electricity to the grid. It's designed as an urban car, not a highway cruiser. Hopefully, the Bolt will get into that range for owners that don't need the 200 mile range.

I'll be amazed if the Bolt turns out to be anywhere close to the i3 REX.

While efficiency is desirable (who could argue it is not?) I think it is far from the top of reasons to select a particular EV. Even the least efficient EVs (Toyota RAV-4 EV 76 MPGe) is far more efficient than the best ICE or even hybrid.

I believe the most important factor is range, followed by charging availability and time, and then cost. Lack of range and concerns about ability to recharge seem to be the key factors that keep people from considering EVs. I am a committed EVer, having covered 48,000 miles in slightly over two years in an 80-mile class car, and even I am not going to go through that again.

I really don't care if my next car gets 130 or 110 MPGe, I just want to be able to charge at home at night and get through my 100 mile daily drive without worries about cold weather, battery fade, errands, or access to workplace charging. The Bolt seems to offer this, and no 80 or even 100 mile class car does.

Even if the Bolt turns out to not quite equal the MPGe of the I3 Rex while in EV mode, there is no doubt it will be vastly better after the 72-mile mark when the Rex turns into a 39 MPG hybrid.

Incidentally, the primary reason Tesla powered cars (Tesla, Toyota, Mercedes) have lower MPGe than most others is not weight, but rather the fact that Tesla uses AC induction motors rather than permanent magnet motors. Again, nobody can argue weight is good, but it is less harmful to an EV than to an ICE car because at least some of the kinetic energy is recovered when slowing.

 

[I33t]

I really don't care if my next car gets 130 or 110 MPGe, I just want to be able to charge at home at night and get through my 100 mile daily drive without worries about cold weather, battery fade, errands, or access to workplace charging. The Bolt seems to offer this, and no 80 or even 100 mile class car does.

Even if the Bolt turns out to not quite equal the MPGe of the I3 Rex while in EV mode, there is no doubt it will be vastly better after the 72-mile mark when the Rex turns into a 39 MPG hybrid.

To be fair to the REX, if your trip is 100 miles and the rex cuts in at 72, you use it for 28 miles = 0.72 Gallons. Fossil Fuel consumption for your trip is way better than 39MPG, try about 140MPG.

I agree it is a better idea to have an EV that covers your daily commute distance without running out of range. If you look at the distribution of daily commute distances, the i3 covers the majority. Increasing range requires more cost, manufacturing, resources and weight.

Regen does put some of the energy back into the battery, but as efficient as the i3's regen is, you do not get it all back. It takes less energy to accelerate a lighter car to speed than a heavy one. The only time it makes no difference for a heavier car is when it is coasting or in regen. Other factors like aerodynamic resistance come into play when running at speed and it certainly looks like the Bolt isn't the leader there.

 

[alohart]

Only time will tell, but don't dismiss the Bolt just because its engineering isn't as elegant as the i3, or that GM has a long and inglorious history of unrelenting mediocrity.

I'm dismissing the Bolt only for myself because elegant engineering and what's "underneath" are particularly important to me. I understand that most people don't care so much about these things, so the Bolt could be a fine choice for them. I wish it well.

 

[michaelbmw]

To be fair to the REX, if your trip is 100 miles and the rex cuts in at 72, you use it for 28 miles = 0.72 Gallons. Fossil Fuel consumption for your trip is way better than 39MPG, try about 140MPG.

That is the same reasoning that Chevy uses to try to claim that Volts are getting 250+ MPG. It ignores the electrical energy that is consumed and gives a number that imagines the entire distance was covered using only the gasoline energy.

Using your example of a Rex going 100 miles on a battery full of 18 kWh plus 0.72 gallons of gas, the total equivalent gasoline used is approximately...

18/0.85 = 21 kWh (assumes 85% charging efficiency...MPGe is calculated wall-to-wheels)

21 kWh/33.7 kWh per gallon = .62 gallons equivalent (EPA uses 1 gallon = 33.7 kWh)

0.62 + 0.72 = 1.34 gallons equivalent

Try about 100/1.34 = 75 MPGe....same as a Tesla model S or RAV4 EV. Any greater distance and the portly Model S would be more efficient than the Rex.

 

[I33t]

Those figures are just totally arbitrary michaelbmw. I understand the EPA's reasoning, but it does not apply to all cases, probably to very few.

That is the reason I applied the term "Fossil Fuel" I grant you that it all just depends on where your electricity comes from. If you charge from solar PV, then there is little to no FF in your electrical consumption. If you charge via a coal fired power plant then there is a lot more consumption.

In our case, the local power supply is one of the best in Australia, but it is still ~75% fossil fuel, mostly natural gas and a bit of coal for top up from interstate. We were not happy to increase our FF consumption so we installed more solar PV than we need so our i3 BEV runs on 100% renewables. If we had a rex with your driving distance, our MPG would be as previously said, 140MPG, same for anyone using 100% renewables.

 

[archieb]

This discussion is one of the best I have seen lately, even if it has strayed off topic a bit. Information and references are excellent, and I have both learned and enjoyed it.

To add one more piece of information, Green Car Reports just added an updated story January 27th:

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1080871_electric-car-price-guide-every-2015-2016-plug-in-car-with-specs-updated

The i3 does have the highest MPGe rating at 124 and the Porsche Cayenne S E-hybrid the lowest at 47. With a one year average of 5.3 miles per kwh (5.7 until winter temps arrived) and a TOD cost of $0.055 per kwh, the i3 costs me about a penny a mile to operate. My one year anniversary is tomorrow so I drove 7,500 miles for $75.

I look forward to what will be available in 2018 when my i3 lease is completed. Unless some new technology is introduced I will continue to drive an BEV.