DC FAST CHARGING

oilerlord said:

why wouldn't GM put DCFC in every car? Considering the importance of DCFC, even with respect to resale value, I think GM deciding to make DCFC an option is somewhat irresponsible - especially when the buyer doesn't even know what it is.

Click to expand...

Crazy that it's a $700 option, too, when it's simply some thick gauge wire attached to the battery.

Perhaps manufacturers are reluctant to install DC fast charging ports when there is no universal standard?

Manufacturers should have settled on a charging standard before offering DC fast charging. Now we have something similar to the beginning of the cell phone era where different models require different connectors.

... and expecting the stealership to know something about the vehicles they sell is like expecting a politician to tell the truth. It's a tough lesson to learn, but most people understand that they are Salesmen, not Engineers.

redpoint5 said:

oilerlord said:

why wouldn't GM put DCFC in every car? Considering the importance of DCFC, even with respect to resale value, I think GM deciding to make DCFC an option is somewhat irresponsible - especially when the buyer doesn't even know what it is.

Click to expand...

Crazy that it's a $700 option, too, when it's simply some thick gauge wire attached to the battery.

Perhaps manufacturers are reluctant to install DC fast charging ports when there is no universal standard?

Manufacturers should have settled on a charging standard before offering DC fast charging. Now we have something similar to the beginning of the cell phone era where different models require different connectors.

... and expecting the stealership to know something about the vehicles they sell is like expecting a politician to tell the truth. It's a tough lesson to learn, but most people understand that they are Salesmen, not Engineers.

Click to expand...

I think it's a little more complicated than just heavy duty cables attached to the battery. And given how much current those cables have to carry, I imagine they're not cheap, either. Plus heavy duty relays, a much beefier inlet port, additional support electronics, etc.

Yes it sucks that they charge $750 for what is probably less than $200 in parts. Welcome to the world of automobile manufacturing where the price of an option is decoupled from what it actually costs to make and install in a vehicle.

redpoint5 said:

oilerlord said:

why wouldn't GM put DCFC in every car? Considering the importance of DCFC, even with respect to resale value, I think GM deciding to make DCFC an option is somewhat irresponsible - especially when the buyer doesn't even know what it is.

Click to expand...

Crazy that it's a $700 option, too, when it's simply some thick gauge wire attached to the battery.

Perhaps manufacturers are reluctant to install DC fast charging ports when there is no universal standard?

Manufacturers should have settled on a charging standard before offering DC fast charging. Now we have something similar to the beginning of the cell phone era where different models require different connectors.

... and expecting the stealership to know something about the vehicles they sell is like expecting a politician to tell the truth. It's a tough lesson to learn, but most people understand that they are Salesmen, not Engineers.

Click to expand...

The DCFC option involves more than connecting wires to the battery, if that's what they did you would have live 400V in your charging port.

Longer term I think DCFC will be standard on EVs, the parts cost difference is small, perhaps $200, and it causes confusion with consumers who see ads for DCFC and think their car comes with it.

There is a DCFC charging standard and the Bolt uses it. I'm not sure what cell phone connectors you are referring to but there are still many different connector types used for charging cell phones. Cell phone charging standards and connectors continue to change as well. Newer phones are capable of charging at much higher power levels, with appropriate chargers.

It is likely that EVs in the future will also be capable of charging at much higher rates than the Bolt does today.

redpoint5 said:

... and expecting the stealership to know something about the vehicles they sell is like expecting a politician to tell the truth. It's a tough lesson to learn, but most people understand that they are Salesmen, not Engineers.

Click to expand...

There is a difference between a professional salesperson, and a lot lizard. The lot lizard is looking to close the deal, as quickly as possible, using as much BS required to get it done. A good salesperson will take the time to ask questions, and understand the customer's needs. They will know the basics about the car so they can explain features and benefits. Being an engineer isn't a requirement.

Salesperson: "The Bolt can be equipped with DC fast charging"
Customer: "What's that?"
Salesperson: It's a special charging port that greatly reduces charging times, and extends range. I think it's absolute must if you plan to take the car on road trips where public fast charging stations are available. Do you think you may want to take your Bolt on the occasional road trip?
Customer: Sure!
Salesperson: Then, for only $750, would you agree the fast charging option may come in handy?
Customer: Yes. Thanks for explaining that to me.

See how easy that was? Feature, benefit, close. Everybody wins. Takes 30 seconds or less.

OK. Bummer that the OP apparently didn't do the slightest amount of research
before plonking down 40 grand for a new-paradigm car. Total and complete bummer.
That being said...
It seems after reading his post that he thinks that he can't use his 40 amp
Juice Box. OP...? You CAN use your Juice Box, and you CAN use EVgo, Chargepoint,
etc. chargers away from home. You just can't use the DC high speed chargers.
Am I missing something?

Maybe I said it already in this thread, but GM clearly left the DCFC option out of the BOLT EV so that they could retail it for $36,995, with a Federal Tax Credit of $7,500 and market it as a $29,995 car!! Pure and simple!!!

Leaving out L3 on the Bolt EV and not making that crystal clear to EVERY customer is a crime!

I use a 240v 20 amp Clipper Creek charger in my garage left over from my leased Volt days (just recently upgraded from the 120v GM charger) and my 47 miles remaining Bolt EV here in LA home from my drive from Santa Cruz, charged in San Luis Obispo should recharge before 9:30am tomorrow morning.

Well within the paramaters needed for L2 charging for my needs!

This must be a common point of confusion. I just took a demonstration drive yesterday from an agency funded by the Dept. of Energy, and the lady said DCFC was a standard feature on all Bolts. Granted, she had 3 different cars to know about (Bolt, Leaf, Cmax), she still was giving misinformation. If a person whose only job is to know 3 cars doesn't know this, then the public doesn't stand a chance.

She even warned me to be careful about using L mode, as it does not activate the brake light. I had to correct her on that point, too.

Given that the leadership comes from Rick Perry I am not surprised!

What group is it?

redpoint5 said:

This must be a common point of confusion. I just took a demonstration drive yesterday from an agency funded by the Dept. of Energy, and the lady said DCFC was a standard feature on all Bolts. Granted, she had 3 different cars to know about (Bolt, Leaf, Cmax), she still was giving misinformation. If a person whose only job is to know 3 cars doesn't know this, then the public doesn't stand a chance.

She even warned me to be careful about using L mode, as it does not activate the brake light. I had to correct her on that point, too.

Click to expand...

Did you really expect anyone from this administration to understand what they are talking about, let alone tell the truth about it?

I can feel the pain of the OP. I was starting to do some research on the Bolt when I went into the dealer in Gilroy for a test drive. I had no intention of buying the car but it was pretty much sold from the moment I sat down in the driver seat. Anyway I had absolutely no idea about charging other then I could use the thing in the trunk to charge it on 110V. I knew that like most stuff I would sort the charging options out after I got the car home. The sales guy gave me a lot of information on the car which was a bit overwhelming and he did show me that the charge port had two connectors though I did not understand why at the time. I assumed that any Bolt would come with fast charging capability, it never occurred to me that the fast DC charge was added option. Luckily for me the car came with it and now if I go on a longer trip and can find a fast charge station I will be able to use it.

I have had the Bolt for two weeks now and I love it! I drive 100 miles per day and with a level 2 system installed at home I have plenty of range every morning and I am so happy to not have to buy gas every week. LOL the car pool lane access is sweet also!

ghn said:

I have had the Bolt for two weeks now and I love it! I drive 100 miles per day and with a level 2 system installed at home I have plenty of range every morning and I am so happy to not have to buy gas every week. LOL the car pool lane access is sweet also!

Click to expand...

Hey! Welcome to the forum. I'm glad you're enjoying your Bolt.

Thanks! I would have been here sooner but I had no idea the Bolt even existed until a short time ago. A friend of mine who is a big fan of Tesla heard about the Bolt on a Tesla podcast of some sort and told me about it. Once I knew about the car is was only a matter of time and living in the SF bay area there seem to be plenty available. As a matter of fact I signed up for some web car search thing and I had dealers calling me within a minute or so of hitting the enter button. The dealers here really seem eager to find buyers.

dandrewk said:

Did you really expect anyone from this administration to understand what they are talking about, let alone tell the truth about it?

Click to expand...

The Dept of Energy was created by the Nixon administration in 1970. Don't know what this administration has to do with Oregon's nonprofit Fourth, funded by the DoE.

https://forthmobility.org/electric-showcase

redpoint5 said:

dandrewk said:

Did you really expect anyone from this administration to understand what they are talking about, let alone tell the truth about it?

Click to expand...

The Dept of Energy was created by the Nixon administration in 1970. Don't know what this administration has to do with Oregon's nonprofit Fourth, funded by the DoE.

https://forthmobility.org/electric-showcase

Click to expand...

Nice attempt at deflection.

Read the context in which the comment was made. It has nothing to do with who created the DOE. It has EVERYTHING to do with the oil industry flacks that are currently running the DOE, along with Congress and the White House.

dandrewk said:

Read the context in which the comment was made. It has nothing to do with who created the DOE. It has EVERYTHING to do with the oil industry flacks that are currently running the DOE, along with Congress and the White House.

Click to expand...

Agreed, the DoE is a waste of taxpayer money and should go away. It has failed to accomplish the stated purpose of reducing foreign energy dependence every single year since being founded in 1970.

Disagree that the kale-eating liberal who works at Fourth (who owns a Spark EV) is influenced in any significant way by the current administration. Irrationality, ignorance, and tribalism is not a flaw of any particular political party, but rather a genetically programed attribute of humanity.

redpoint5 said:

Agreed, the DoE is a waste of taxpayer money and should go away.

Click to expand...

DOE's budget is mostly spent on handling the USA's stock of nuclear weapons. Maybe they should change the name to avoid confusing people.

WetEV said:

redpoint5 said:

Agreed, the DoE is a waste of taxpayer money and should go away.

Click to expand...

DOE's budget is mostly spent on handling the USA's stock of nuclear weapons. Maybe they should change the name to avoid confusing people.

Click to expand...

Agreed, and I can't think of a more important responsibility. This whole absurd notion of eliminating DOE comes from the petrochemical industry, which feels it should do anything it wants, anywhere it wants.

The problems with DOE emanate from the political hacks that are appointed (how in the HELL is some vapid nimrod like Perry in charge of ANY department?). Anyone remember why W's DOE sat on its thumbs and allowed Enron and other Texas petrochemical companies to fraudulently steal $billions from California ratepayers? You think that would have happened if California companies tried to do that to a red state?

Where's a Moderator when you need one???

Oooooops!!!!

WetEV said:

DOE's budget is mostly spent on handling the USA's stock of nuclear weapons. Maybe they should change the name to avoid confusing people.

Click to expand...

...especially the President.

All 20 Bolts on the lot at the local Chevy dealer have DCFC. Both the sales manager and the salesman said they learned the hard way that nobody wants one without it.