michaellax said:
michael said:
You're right. I don't know anything about the subject. I've misunderstood everything on the subject that I've read.
Let's wait for GM to give an official ruling and then we will know. The fact that GM will only guarantee 60% battery capacity over 8 years/100K miles has nothing to do with the subject.
I apologize for all the misdirection I've caused.
Michael: Tone down the snark for one minute and give me a serious answer for one minute to this serious question:
Background:
Every single leased Chevy Bolt EV leasee is charging the vehicle EVERY night; and why not? That is the habit to get into and why would they want to go to the bother to change that habit?
Their manual does not indicate that Hilltop Reserve has any function for battery maintenance, so unless they live on top of a hill, leasees are not using that function!
So, what is GM going to do with ALL of those leased Chevy Bolt EVs that come back after 3 years, with severely damaged batteries, according to your prognosis?
Sell them at a severe discount, after disclosing the defect?
Sell them at used market price but not disclose the defect?
Completely replace the battery and sell them at used market price and take a huge financial beating?
Some other option that I have not considered?
GM wants the use of an EV to seem easy. They don't want to point out complications. Ditto for other manufacturers. Ford advised Focus Electric owners to leave them plugged in all the time. The batteries faded as electrochemistry would predict.
If GM described hilltop reserve as an alternative charge setting, then the EPA would require them to claim range based on the average of the two settings. A 5% hit in range. Nissan faced this same problem with the Leaf. Originally they provided the option of 80% or 100% charge. By eliminating the battery-saving 80% option, they suddenly could claim an additional 10% (approximately) range. They did that despite the fact that Leaf batteries are well known for severe fade.
Yes, every manufacturer sells the used EVs at whatever price they can. If the battery still meets the original standard (better than 60% capacity within 8 years/100K miles, it is good enough. They are not going to compromise current sales to make the thing have a higher residual value.
All lithium batteries fade with time and use. Some chemistries more, some less, but all have compromises. The batteries in the Honda Fit EV have shown good life but poor low temperature range, for example. I can tell you that low temperature performance loss is a big deal...the battery doesn't put out and the heater is sucking up kiloWatts. Range drops a lot.
GM could have provided a 20% larger battery, for example, with large reserves. This would have provided better life but higher cost. If they were going to provide a, for example, 70kWh battery, claiming 300 mile range would do much better for sales than would changing the battery warranty to, for example, 80% at 100K miles.
I think they were very clever to provide "hilltop reserve" as the rationale for a much needed battery conserving mode of operation. They were also clever to provide the 40% immediate charge option...that is the ultimate battery saver on days you only need say 40 miles of range.
They could have used the TMS to keep the battery cooler. That would have helped preserve battery life but at the cost of reduced performance and lower MPGe. If they did that, reviews would criticize the Bolt for poor efficiency, not taking note of the fact that wall power was consumed to save the battery.
So yes, they made business and engineering decisions to maximize range and minimize price at the expense of battery life. It is in the owner's hands to treat the car gently to get the most life out of the battery. Or to decide he doesn't care.
If in three years Bolts are hard to resell, it will be more because other people are then selling 300 mile EVs, and less because typical Bolts have faded to X% of their initial range.
