Will the Chevy Bolt EV be a 'game changer'?

Interesting article: 'Increased mileage on a charge for electric cars is all well and good, but the real “game changer” won’t come until a way is found to recharge the battery that renders the process equivalent in time to filling up a tank with gasoline.'

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-ol-le-bolt-20160916-snap-story.html

I think a public quick charging network will be great when it happens - but that does not diminish the huge effect a longer range EV will have. The Bolt EV is the first car to break this barrier of range and price.

JimmYK said:

Interesting article: 'Increased mileage on a charge for electric cars is all well and good, but the real “game changer” won’t come until a way is found to recharge the battery that renders the process equivalent in time to filling up a tank with gasoline.'

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-ol-le-bolt-20160916-snap-story.html

Click to expand...

We already spend far less time charging our EV than we spend at the gas station fueling our "gas guzzling" hybrid. Charging the EV takes about 15 seconds a day.

I think the true "game changer" was the Tesla Model S. It proved that you could make a no-compromises EV.

This car simply takes that paradigm and lowers the price by half. That's certainly noteworthy, but as with most technology, prices usually will drop as the technology matures.

You have to define 'game changer'. Does it mean *everything* will be different afterwards? There have been very few of those in the last 200 years - and I am including 'the automobile' as NOT being a game changer using THAT definition - since there was no ONE event that made a HUGE difference: it was a long series of changes that got us that change from horse to auto (those first autos were CRAP).

Will the Bolt have an effect? Yes. Manufacturers are no longer going to be able to pawn off sub-100 miles range cars as 'the electric car'. They will become 'the electric CITY car' (which is what they have always been, but now Chevy is showing that you don't have to spend $70K to have a longer-range electric vehicle). NOT counting any Tesla offering, I would bet that there will be *at least* 3 other models from 3 different manufacturers before the 2020 model year which will have a 180+ mile range. Is that 'game changing'? It seems to be changing the rules for what is 'acceptable'.

I think that because of the Bolt (and the slew of similarly-ranged electric vehicles to appear in the next 2 years) the electric vehicle will no longer be the 'crap, we have to make a compliance vehicle for California' model in each manufacturers' stable of cars. Which means that number of electric vehicles sold will increase, and quantity of batteries sold will increase, which should fuel competition and research (yes, pun intended), all of which should lower the price point of batteries, which means ... (you see the vicious cycle? ). Is that 'game changing'? I think so. 5 years from now, 2-3% of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. could be electric. With a 200+ mile highway range, they will meet almost everybody's commute requirements, and the vast majority of weekend travel requirements. Holdout areas : full-size pickups, SUVs, and cold-weather climes.

SparkE said:

You have to define 'game changer'. Does it mean *everything* will be different afterwards? There have been very few of those in the last 200 years - and I am including 'the automobile' as NOT being a game changer using THAT definition - since there was no ONE event that made a HUGE difference: it was a long series of changes that got us that change from horse to auto (those first autos were CRAP).

Click to expand...

The Model-T was a definite game changer. It completely redefined the way the country lived. Major technological shifts like that are rare, but they do happen.

roundpeg said:

SparkE said:

You have to define 'game changer'. Does it mean *everything* will be different afterwards? There have been very few of those in the last 200 years - and I am including 'the automobile' as NOT being a game changer using THAT definition - since there was no ONE event that made a HUGE difference: it was a long series of changes that got us that change from horse to auto (those first autos were CRAP).

Click to expand...

The Model-T was a definite game changer. It completely redefined the way the country lived. Major technological shifts like that are rare, but they do happen.

Click to expand...

The Model-T production model was a definite game changer. It changed the way industrial products were manufactured, lowering production costs and thus prices (for so much more than just Model-Ts, or even cars). Although Ford didn't *invent* the assembly line (not even the first to apply it to automobiles) he *vastly* improved it - the Ford Model T assembly introduced numerous advances in productivity during the production lifetime of the vehicle.

It was the production technique that was the real game changer - the vehicle was simply the visible instantiation of it. Now the Model T changed things greatly as well, but it never would have been possible (the price and the production numbers) without the game changer that was Ford's modern assembly line.

Apple has instilled into society that their newest rectangle is always "revolutionary" - just by adding a newer processor, more pixels, or some other superfluous feature because they've run out of truly revolutionary ideas with potential to change the game . These days, "revolutionary" and "game changer" is simply marketing speak to hipster consumers that their rectangle isn't cool anymore and by extension, they may not be either. :roll:

The original iPhone was revolutionary, but was it really a game changer? Essentially, they took what Blackberry had and evolved it into something better. One could argue that the iPod / iTunes was a game changer, not because you could have 1000 songs in your pocket, but because it turned the entire music delivery model upside down. Nothing even close to that kind of paradigm shift can attributed to the Bolt, or for that matter, the Model 3. People already drive around in electric cars, plug them into public chargers, and at home. Nothing to see here.

The Bolt will be a low priced 60kWh electric car - but does that make it a game changer, or revolutionary? Nope...only affordable.

Ok, but the iPhone took the idea of a "smart" phone from something for business people to something for anybody. They made a phone cool in a way that blackberry never could. And the market exploded.

The Bolt has the potential to do the same for the EV market. Right now, our dinky little 80-100 mile affordable EVs are just for pragmatists. And Teslas, though desirable, are out of reach of most buyers. The Bolt could bring the desirability of EVs down to affordable levels, thus causing the market to explode.

As for "game changer" / "revolutionary" / etc, these are subjective terms. I don't care to argue the semantics of whether the Bolt fits their definition (or really, what that definition should be)

SparkE said:

The Model-T production model was a definite game changer. It changed the way industrial products were manufactured, lowering production costs and thus prices (for so much more than just Model-Ts, or even cars). Although Ford didn't *invent* the assembly line (not even the first to apply it to automobiles) he *vastly* improved it - the Ford Model T assembly introduced numerous advances in productivity during the production lifetime of the vehicle.

It was the production technique that was the real game changer - the vehicle was simply the visible instantiation of it. Now the Model T changed things greatly as well, but it never would have been possible (the price and the production numbers) without the game changer that was Ford's modern assembly line.

Click to expand...

No matter how you put it, the Model-T, as the first affordable and reasonably reliable car, massively altered the way the country lived and in ways that nobody could have possibly anticipated. We are living in the world it created even today. This is one of the most significant cultural events of the 20th century.

GetOffYourGas said:

Right now, our dinky little 80-100 mile affordable EVs are just for pragmatists. And Teslas, though desirable, are out of reach of most buyers. The Bolt could bring the desirability of EVs down to affordable levels, thus causing the market to explode.

Click to expand...

Is the Bolt all that affordable? In the game-changer scenario, the assumption is that the general public is ready to pay a lot more just to drive an electric car. Consider that a Chevy Sonic starts at $15,145, or about half the price of a Bolt after incentives.

http://www.chevrolet.com/sonic-small-car.html

For that reason, I don't think the Bolt will be the huge success we want it to be, much less cause the market to explode. The Bolt will be a great EV, but the masses are also pragmatic.

oilerlord said:

GetOffYourGas said:

Right now, our dinky little 80-100 mile affordable EVs are just for pragmatists. And Teslas, though desirable, are out of reach of most buyers. The Bolt could bring the desirability of EVs down to affordable levels, thus causing the market to explode.

Click to expand...

Is the Bolt all that affordable? In the game-changer scenario, the assumption is that the general public is ready to pay a lot more just to drive an electric car. Consider that a Chevy Sonic starts at $15,145, or about half the price of a Bolt after incentives.

http://www.chevrolet.com/sonic-small-car.html

For that reason, I don't think the Bolt will be the huge success we want it to be, much less cause the market to explode. The Bolt will be a great EV, but the masses are also pragmatic.

Click to expand...

The Bolt isn't affordable when compared to an entry-level Sonic. Of course not! But this car is not in the same class. Not even close. It will have much better driving characteristics and features than a base Sonic. And those are things that people will pay extra for.

However, the Bolt is within the financial reach of a much larger population than the current 200+ mile BEVs (i.e. Tesla). The market will naturally be larger. Right now, BEVs are for the 0.5%. Literally. The BEV market is about 0.5% of the total auto market. If that grows to only 2-3% because of cars like the Bolt, then I would say that is tremendous growth. Note that 3% still isn't "the masses".

Remember also that GM isn't alone the EV market. The Bolt will force Nissan to respond. Ford and VW will likely respond as well. Taken together, this next crop of BEVs will take a much larger market share than the current offerings. And it was all led by the Bolt. In many ways, it was forced by the specter of the Model III, but the Bolt comes to market first. In fact, there is reason to doubt that the Model III will be everything Musk promises it to be.

Anyway, the bottom line is that we are basically in agreement. The Bolt will not bring BEVs to "the masses". Where we disagree is on the overall significance of the Bolt's presence. I think it will have a large direct and indirect (i.e. forcing competition) effect on the BEV market.

We do agree that the Bolt will have a significant effect in the overall advancement of BEV's, but we disagree that the public will pay twice as much for the Bolt than a Sonic (or other inexpensive small crossover) - just because it's an electric car. I believe it's way too early to expect people to embrace an EV's eccentricities and perceived compromises en masse, especially with the availability of cheap gas. The fun-to-drive factor in a small crossover won't be enough to overcome the apparent "need" for a car that can go 300 miles on a tank (and can fill up anywhere, in a couple of minutes). The Bolt also doesn't answer those "what if" questions regarding range and the ability to get to city X, the lack of DCFC infrastructure in rural areas, and justifying how long it otherwise takes to charge the battery. DCFC doesn't answer all those questions, at least not yet. $5 per gallon could be a catalyst for EV's but that's probably years away too.

And so, it comes down to affordability, and this is no different than early hybrids that used to cost an extra $6,000 over their gasoline counterparts. People ran the math, and determined that $6K buys a lot of gasoline. Now, some manufacturers are offering the hybrid option for no extra charge, and we're seeing hybrids everywhere. Perhaps a decade from now, EV's may be offered for about the same price as a similar gasoline car. That's when the game may change.

Games have a way of changing incrementally. Dramatic single events happen in history, but they are relatively rare. We don't need to take the binary view that if an event did not change everything right away that it wasn't significant. It may well have contributed something important to a larger trend. My sense is the Bolt could be another potentially notable step up the long ladder away from fossil fuel dependency. A lot of other things could and almost certainly will happen between now and then, most of them unpredictable, and possibly game-changing, but the importance of even the smaller steps along the way are worth considering. Keeping in mind, only the look back from the future will tell for sure.

oilerlord said:

We do agree that the Bolt will have a significant effect in the overall advancement of BEV's, but we disagree that the public will pay twice as much for the Bolt than a Sonic (or other inexpensive small crossover) - just because it's an electric car. I believe it's way too early to expect people to embrace an EV's eccentricities and perceived compromises en masse, especially with the availability of cheap gas. The fun-to-drive factor in a small crossover won't be enough to overcome the apparent "need" for a car that can go 300 miles on a tank (and can fill up anywhere, in a couple of minutes). The Bolt also doesn't answer those "what if" questions regarding range and the ability to get to city X, the lack of DCFC infrastructure in rural areas, and justifying how long it otherwise takes to charge the battery. DCFC doesn't answer all those questions, at least not yet. $5 per gallon could be a catalyst for EV's but that's probably years away too.

And so, it comes down to affordability, and this is no different than early hybrids that used to cost an extra $6,000 over their gasoline counterparts. People ran the math, and determined that $6K buys a lot of gasoline. Now, some manufacturers are offering the hybrid option for no extra charge, and we're seeing hybrids everywhere. Perhaps a decade from now, EV's may be offered for about the same price as a similar gasoline car. That's when the game may change.

Click to expand...

A few things, while the comparison to the Sonic has some merit, it is partly due to the misconception that the Bolt is based on the Sonic. While true they used that as a starting point and it is still a G2XX chassis, engineering and design decisions and considerations led to a chassis unique to the Bolt. It has a longer wheelbase, is taller and wider, has a flat floor with the batteries underneath, more interior room with the cabin "pushed" into what was the engine compartment. Battery weight and location also dictated major structural changes.
The performance of the Bolt also puts it in a completely different class than the Sonic Hatchback (which is much closer to $20K than $15K with an automatic and a few goodies that make it a better comparison the the Bolt in LT trim).

When compared to the Sonic Hatchback (or other "small wagons"), the Bolt offers:
Better performance
More fun to drive
Much more fuel efficient
Much, much "greener"
More high tech and modern
Way "cooler"
Virtually no maintenance
Reduced cost of ownership
More convenient to fuel

Not all of these will be imprtant to every buyer, and the value they place on them will vary. Enough to justify $10K? Not for everyone.

Is a Model S worth 3x+ a Hyundai Sonata? To 17K people in the US this year, yes. (I know people like to compare Tesla to Mercedes, BMW and other luxury makers, but their interior fit and finish is not in that class) They also like to compare them to performance or sports cars and the Tesla is a one trick pony - the dragstrip. Not that different than the muscle cars of the 60's and 70's.

The proper comparison of the Bolt is to the i3, 250e, Soul EV, e-golf, etc. Although I haven't driven the Bolt yet, it's a safe bet that the Mercedes and BMW will have a better interior and be much quieter at freeway speed. Are they worth an extra $5-10K and less than half the range?

What's a 107 mile LEAF worth compared to the Bolt?

Is the Bolt a game changer? - yes. Will it redefine the industry? - not to anywhere near the Model T did. But it is a vehicle that will force other automakers to rethink, redesign, and lower prices (part of the reason for the LEAF 2.0 delay). I consider that to be a game changer.

DucRider said:

Is the Bolt a game changer? - yes. Will it redefine the industry? - not to anywhere near the Model T did. But it is a vehicle that will force other automakers to rethink, redesign, and lower prices (part of the reason for the LEAF 2.0 delay). I consider that to be a game changer.

Click to expand...

Well put.

Look at Nissan. If they want to continue "play" in the EV space, they will need to do something dramatic with the Leaf. They could drop the price by $5k-$10k. Or bump the battery to meet/exceed the bar set by the Bolt. They could do both, and offer the Leaf in a wide array of choices. A $20k 30kWh Leaf S could sell next to a $30k 60kWh Leaf SL. But they cannot sell the lineup they have, and expect to remain a player. If that isn't changing the game, what is?

DucRider said:

When compared to the Sonic Hatchback (or other "small wagons"), the Bolt offers:
Better performance
More fun to drive
Much more fuel efficient
Much, much "greener"
More high tech and modern
Way "cooler"
Virtually no maintenance
Reduced cost of ownership
More convenient to fuel

Click to expand...

You're preaching to the choir. As EV enthusiasts, we're excited for what the Bolt is, and are willing to pay (a lot more) for electric vs ICE. We also accept an EV's shortcomings and the trip planning that goes with driving electric - but as history has shown, it's a tough sell for others. As for "more convenient to fuel", I charge at home too, but there are exactly zero CCS DCFC stations between Phoenix & Las Vegas, and countless other city X to city Y destinations. The Bolt eases some of these concerns but doesn't eliminate them. The stigma of range / charging / charging infrastructure will put off a lot of buyers living outside of EV friendly states like California. Even with DCFC, how is waiting around for 30 minutes for your car to charge "convenient"? We tend to answer that with "Just rent a car or use your second ICE car" for road trips, but that's more of a compromise than a solution isn't it?

A lot of new ICE cars come with free scheduled maintenance, and oil changes are being pushed to 10K miles. My neighbor takes her Lexus to the dealer, and she gets a spa manicure at the dealership while she waits. EV's do have "virtually no maintenance" though this isn't the huge benefit it once was.

Reduced TCO is a slippery slope. The person buying a well equipped Sonic LT hatchback at $19K has (at least) an $11,000 head start on the the person buying the Bolt. Gasoline is cheap, and depending on where you live, kWh's may not be. Depending on TOU rates, my friend in Carlsbad pays up to $36 to "fill up" his Model X. That isn't exactly free fuel. Also, consider that non-Tesla EV's depreciate like no other car. I bought my nearly new B250e for 60% off MSRP. The first owner only had 6,000 miles on the car...I think reduced TCO can be a misnomer.

There is only so much "cool" you can extract from a somewhat plebian Chevy hatchback - regardless of it's power train. The Tesla Model 3 is cool because it's a beautiful electric car that happens to be a Tesla. No doubt the Bolt will be an advanced EV, but it still looks like a Sonic.

DucRider said:

Is a Model S worth 3x+ a Hyundai Sonata? To 17K people in the US this year, yes. (I know people like to compare Tesla to Mercedes, BMW and other luxury makers, but their interior fit and finish is not in that class) They also like to compare them to performance or sports cars and the Tesla is a one trick pony - the dragstrip. Not that different than the muscle cars of the 60's and 70's

Click to expand...

No. You had some merit in your post, but B.S. FUD like this washes down your credibility.

Everyone who has driven in our Tesla raves about the interior, how cool it is, there has been ZERO negativity on that front. As for handling, the Model S (and X) have both seen rave reviews regarding the cars open road capability. The Tesla is not a luxury car, it is a premium performance sedan. The fit/finish on our early 2013 Model S is superior to the "buttons everywhere" Mercedes with AMG package we traded in for it! The performance is so far above the similar priced Mercedes sedans in the normal world of city and highway driving, it is laughable to compare to an old muscle car.

Whatever you're smokin', pass it down.

SmartElectric said:

No. You had some merit in your post, but B.S. FUD like this washes down your credibility.

Everyone who has driven in our Tesla raves about the interior, how cool it is, there has been ZERO negativity on that front. As for handling, the Model S (and X) have both seen rave reviews regarding the cars open road capability. The Tesla is not a luxury car, it is a premium performance sedan. The fit/finish on our early 2013 Model S is superior to the "buttons everywhere" Mercedes with AMG package we traded in for it! The performance is so far above the similar priced Mercedes sedans in the normal world of city and highway driving, it is laughable to compare to an old muscle car.

Whatever you're smokin', pass it down.

Click to expand...

I'll stand by my statement that the interior fit and finish is not in the same class as most luxury cars. Very few Tesls owners argue that it is.
I'll also stand by my statement that the Tesla is not a performance car (other than in a straight line).
Is it a fine road car? Absolutely. Is it sports or luxury car? Not really. Nothing against Tesla, but no need to pretend it's something it is not.

The comparison to the Sonata was to point out the continued misinformation being spread that the Bolt is an electric Sonic. Are they similar in size? Yes. Are they based on the same platform? No.
The Sonata and Modle S are of similar size, but worlds apart in performance. The interior of the Sonata can actually be quite nice, and is no that different than the Model S/X when optioned appropriately.
Does the Sonata have the 14" display and all the high tech goodies? No, but neither does the Sonic have the 10" screen found in the Bolt.

Comparing the Model S to the Sonata is similar to comparing the Bolt to the Sonic - neither is really justifiable.

DucRider said:

I'll stand by my statement that the interior fit and finish is not in the same class as most luxury cars. Very few Tesls owners argue that it is.
I'll also stand by my statement that the Tesla is not a performance car (other than in a straight line).
Is it a fine road car? Absolutely. Is it sports or luxury car? Not really. Nothing against Tesla, but no need to pretend it's something it is not.

Click to expand...

So on one hand, you call the Model S "a fine road car", but also call it a one-trick drag strip pony.

Clearly, you haven't taken a Model S for a test drive. Trust me, this is no Dodge Hellcat. No doubt you've done some research based on specs and Internet forums, but those only take you so far...don't believe everything you read. The Model S P90D we drove in Carlsbad was like a BMW 7-series - larger than it looks in pictures, and the fit & finish looked every bit as good as a BMW 7. Considering the car's mass, it handled surprisingly well; better than any current 5 or 7 series I've driven. I've owned several performance, sports, and luxury cars, and the Model S strikes a nice balance of all three categories. My wife and I both left the test drive wishing we could justify buying that $100,000 car.

As good as the car was, the overall experience on the test drive was unlike none other. We had a Tesla "ownership advisor" riding shotgun. He took the time to explain the car's features before and as we drove the car, and instilled his sense of excitement about the car without being over the top. No cheesy lines to close the sale, no high pressure, no "make me an offer I can't refuse" games, or getting the manager involved, just a very professional person who seemingly had all the time in the world to devote to us, and our test drive. That was nearly as impressive as the car, and that kind of customer service is probably why Tesla owners are so fiercely loyal to the brand. I doubt the Bolt will have that kind of professionalism behind it, or that more than 10% of the salespeople selling them will know anything more about the Bolt other than it has four wheels and it's electric. At least, that's the experience I received when shopping for a Volt.

If the Chevrolet wants to be a game changer, they need to learn a thing or two from Tesla that already changed it.