Test-drove a Bolt twice today (LT and Premiere)

Schnort said:

Can you just leave it in low and do one pedal driving (even on the highway?) I'm completely used to this with my i3, and the normal coast/creep forward thing really irritates me now.

Click to expand...

Yes, one pedal driving is fully supported at highway speeds.

99.9% sure you are going to get regen with a go pedal lift in both D and L and Sport and Normal.

Only the magnitude of regen changes.

Also saying you get more regen, or more energy back in L or that L is "more efficient" is not true.

You can get maximum regen and maximum recoup of energy in any mode.

Just coasting in D will take you 300 yards to stop from high speed and coasting in L will take you 100 yards to stop as the regen is approximately 3 times stronger in L.

It is only personal preference.

gpsman said:

Just coasting in D will take you 300 yards to stop from high speed and coasting in L will take you 100 yards to stop as the regen is approximately 3 times stronger in L.

It is only personal preference.

Click to expand...

That is what I meant by being more efficient.......just a matter of terminology. If the BOLT is anything like the Volt, you don't have to take your foot completely off that 'go' pedal while in 'L'.....you can feather the pedal and still get 'regen'.......doesn't happen in 'D'. When they added the paddle, it added another dimension to 'regen' efficiency........preserving yur brake pads/rotors.

Ok, I just don't like when people say they get more regen in L. What is true is they get quicker regen in L.

You can capture the same number of kWh (energy) in either D or L.

If L makes it easier or more comfortable for you, that's fine.

Going through two generations of hybrids I have become an enegy efficient driver. With conversion losses it should be well known that "coasting" neither using power nor regenerating is "most efficient" from a science standpoint. I may be shifting to N more than most of you. Time will tell. My Bolt should be in my hands sometime in January.

gpsman said:

Ok, I just don't like when people say they get more regen in L. What is true is they get quicker regen in L.

You can capture the same number of kWh (energy) in either D or L.

If L makes it easier or more comfortable for you, that's fine.

Going through two generations of hybrids I have become an enegy efficient driver. With conversion losses it should be well known that "coasting" neither using power nor regenerating is "most efficient" from a science standpoint. I may be shifting to N more than most of you. Time will tell. My Bolt should be in my hands sometime in January.

Click to expand...

I would refer to it as more aggressive or responsive 'regen'..........and that is why I prefer it.........you can easily moderate it in 'L' as opposed to 'D'

I don't think it makes sense to be that 'energy efficient' if you are creating more wear and tear on the brakes, by throwing in neutral all the time around town.........if that is what you are doing.

SeanNelson said:

Good grief. Anyone who expects EPA ratings to exactly apply to their particular circumstances is a rube and has nobody to blame but himself. Prius owners don't expect to get the EPA rating at 80MPH, why should Bolt EV owners?

Click to expand...

Sean, we're not talking about a EPA highway rating miss by a few MPG's.

I merely stated that many first time EV buyers will look at the GM/EPA range estimate and accept 238 as "the" number. Why wouldn't they? It isn't that they are "idiots" as someone else called them (very classy by the way), they are EV newbies that are being told by GM corporate, it's advertising, and their dealers that their new Bolt will get 238 miles of range. Putting the E-P-A letters on the rating even makes it sound official, as if it's been an audited.

devbolt said:

The Car and Driver folks got 190 miles when driving at 75mph with the AC set to 72.

Click to expand...

190 is a damn sight short of 238, when it happens driving at speeds we take for granted - like at 75mph on a freeway. What if the car is driven at 10F, and that number slips to 150 miles. While all cars' efficiency are affected by speed and temperatures, EV's are drastically affected. Yes, I know that hypermilers among us will easily achieve 238 or more miles with the Bolt but Joe Public doesn't hypermile.

The car buying public is already skeptical about EV's, and there is a lot of misinformation like optimistic EPA range ratings that contributes to that. Perhaps one day the EPA will crack down on this BS and mandate that manufacturers submit range figures that are more in line with reality. GM would have been better off keeping the rating at 200, with the disclaimer "more or less". Instead, they went for a "WOW" number that will frustrate a lot of people when they only get 190. As an EV enthusiast community - we shouldn't be defending this, or calling people out as idiots when they realize they've been lied to.

I mentally cut the EPA range in half, and treat that as the absolutely no questions, no worry range, at freeway speed, in the winter, after three years of battery fade. So I think of the Bolt as 120 miles absolutely, positively, I'd send my daughter out for that with no concerns.

Huge improvement over my Focus, 40 miles same calculation. And it was about right. My morning commute 35 miles. In the winter, after 50,000+ miles, at 75 MPH it was down to a few kWh left upon arrival.

Similarly, I depend on the Bolt to do my entire day's roundtrip drive plus errands (80-100 miles, depending) on a single charge, under all conditions and after fade. My Focus wouldn't do that even when brand new without very careful driving. That's big.

In order for the EPA to have manufacturers submit what you think are more realistic range or mileage figures requires that the EPA redesign the tests that all the of manufacturers are required to use. The current tests are designed to mimic typical driving situations, including cold weather and hot weather, crowded city streets, and highway travel.

One of the ideas behind the EPA tests is to have a uniform methodology for determining mileage or range so that you can easily compare two similar vehicles and pick the one with the potential for higher MPG or range over that of the other one. Sadly, American consumers aren't willing to dive into the numbers deep enough to get a realistic idea of what their range or mileage will be. When I buy a car, I know to lop 10 to 15 percent off of the combined number that the EPA has published and that will be the MPG that I typically get because of my driving style and typical commute. I fully expect to have to do the same with the Bolt. I hope I will get close to the EPA number and probably could if I started driving in a more relaxed manner, but that's not likely to happen.

GM cannot use any number other than the 238 number that EPA came up with (or rather the number that GM came up with using the tests defined by the EPA). Advertising a lower more realistic number is not an option. They can only say "up to 238" and nothing else.

Guys, numerous journalists have already reported achieving or exceeding the 238-mile stated range, but it is a mixed-mode range, not a highway-only range. Also even the EPA's highway test is not literally 65+ mph nonstop. But it's the same exact test used for all electric cars so the range is directly comparable to any other. For example the latest Leaf has an EPA range of 107 miles, which means the Bolt has more than twice its range.

I don't understand why some people have forgotten how EPA ratings work. It's no different for electric cars than it is for gas, in that your mileage may vary, and the manufacturer is literally prohibited by law from advertising any other figure. So GM's only option is either to advertise a 238-mile range or not to advertise any range claims whatsoever, which is stupid since the main point of the car is that is legitimately has more than twice the range of any other competitor in the same price range.

michael said:

I mentally cut the EPA range in half, and treat that as the absolutely no questions, no worry range, at freeway speed, in the winter, after three years of battery fade. So I think of the Bolt as 120 miles absolutely, positively, I'd send my daughter out for that with no concerns.

Click to expand...

Finally, the voice of reason. I was starting to think I was all alone on this.

This goes to my point that the EPA number (or test conditions) should be more realistic so that it takes into account an average of temperatures, speeds, and driving styles. This isn't at all being critical of the Bolt, it's about the EPA, and how an EV range number is determined. It would be a lot more helpful to have a city/highway/combined range rating than simply one "up to" number that will end up frustrating first time EV buyers.

michael said:

I mentally cut the EPA range in half, and treat that as the absolutely no questions, no worry range, at freeway speed, in the winter, after three years of battery fade.

Click to expand...

I noticed that you had two '14 Chevy Volts.................how much battery 'fade' did you experience? If you state any figure, and assuming we have the same definition of battery 'fade', I would question that. I would define battery 'fade' as the obvious, natural reduction in battery cell energy experienced over a duration of battery life.

As an example, in my first year of owning my 2012 Volt, I was pulling 10.2+- kwh on a full charge; in my fifth year, 59,000miles later, I can still pull 10.2+-kwh from a full charge on my battery. This is a testament to the engineering of the Chevy Volt system and my understanding is that much of that engineering knowledge has been built into the Chevy Bolt EV. In five years of ownership, I have only heard of one case where a battery pack was replaced because one or more cells were proven defective/stopped working.

oilerlord said:

This goes to my point that the EPA number (or test conditions) should be more realistic so that it takes into account an average of temperatures, speeds, and driving styles. This isn't at all being critical of the Bolt, it's about the EPA, and how an EV range number is determined. It would be a lot more helpful to have a city/highway/combined range rating than simply one "up to" number that will end up frustrating first time EV buyers.

Click to expand...

No Worries Range has been discussed before.

http://www.mychevybolt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16&start=10#p918

And as I noted, depends a lot of what sort of uses you have for the car. I'm a pessimist in some ways. But not all the time.

EPA numbers are attainable, but are in no way guaranteed. I look at this issue as an opportunity for Chevy salespeople to shine. There does not have to be a downside with telling the truth about the numbers with a sales prospect. Even if it would serve to turn a prospect away from going EV, the sales person can steer them over to a Cruze, Malibu, Impala, or any other Chevy that the prospect might consider. This is not saying a salesperson should not try to sell a Bolt; a good salesperson would absolutely put the effort out. But they should realize the Bolt as being the unique Chevy that it is and sell the virtues it has over any ICE product, as well as any other EV out there, including the far more expensive, less nimble in traffic Tesla Model S and Model X.

mbepic said:

As an example, in my first year of owning my 2012 Volt, I was pulling 10.2+- kwh on a full charge; in my fifth year, 59,000miles later, I can still pull 10.2+-kwh from a full charge on my battery. This is a testament to the engineering of the Chevy Volt system and my understanding is that much of that engineering knowledge has been built into the Chevy Bolt EV. In five years of ownership, I have only heard of one case where a battery pack was replaced because one or more cells were proven defective/stopped working.

Click to expand...

Comparing a Volt's battery with the Bolt's is apples & oranges. Your 2012 Volt has a 16 kWh battery but only 10.4 of that is usable. The large buffer between total and usable capacity is the reason why your Volt's battery still tests at 10.2 kWh after five years and 59,000 miles.

For the Bolt to have that kind of battery longevity (i.e. showing no degradation) it's buffer would need to roughly mirror the Volt's percentage. That would make the Bolt's total battery capacity to be more than 90 kWh. It isn't.

oilerlord said:

mbepic said:

As an example, in my first year of owning my 2012 Volt, I was pulling 10.2+- kwh on a full charge; in my fifth year, 59,000miles later, I can still pull 10.2+-kwh from a full charge on my battery. This is a testament to the engineering of the Chevy Volt system and my understanding is that much of that engineering knowledge has been built into the Chevy Bolt EV. In five years of ownership, I have only heard of one case where a battery pack was replaced because one or more cells were proven defective/stopped working.

Click to expand...

Comparing a Volt's battery with the Bolt's is apples & oranges. Your 2012 Volt has a 16 kWh battery but only 10.4 of that is usable. The large buffer between total and usable capacity is the reason why your Volt's battery still tests at 10.2 kWh after five years and 59,000 miles.

For the Bolt to have that kind of battery longevity (i.e. showing no degradation) it's buffer would need to roughly mirror the Volt's percentage. That would make the Bolt's total battery capacity to be more than 90 kWh. It isn't.

Click to expand...

I was in no way comparing the Volt vs Bolt battery size but you are correct in explaining the 'buffer' that the engineers built into the system; however, with the Volt, the engineers realized that they were very conservative allowing the amount of buffer that they did and in subsequent years, they modified that in the newer Volts.

I guess I was really referring to the 'thermo' cooling/heating system that conditions the battery cells at an acceptable temperature. That is something that the Nissan Leaf does not have and battery degradation was quite pronounced in the hot climates. The BOLT EV has a 'thermo' system like the Volt. Battery fade should not be noticeable during the most useful life of the vehicle.

To maximize battery life, it's important not to recharge until the batteries are relatively low, and ideally to only recharge it to around 80%. The worst thing you can do is to constantly top off the battery charge.

mbepic said:

michael said:

I mentally cut the EPA range in half, and treat that as the absolutely no questions, no worry range, at freeway speed, in the winter, after three years of battery fade.

Click to expand...

I noticed that you had two '14 Chevy Volts.................how much battery 'fade' did you experience? If you state any figure, and assuming we have the same definition of battery 'fade', I would question that. I would define battery 'fade' as the obvious, natural reduction in battery cell energy experienced over a duration of battery life.

As an example, in my first year of owning my 2012 Volt, I was pulling 10.2+- kwh on a full charge; in my fifth year, 59,000miles later, I can still pull 10.2+-kwh from a full charge on my battery. This is a testament to the engineering of the Chevy Volt system and my understanding is that much of that engineering knowledge has been built into the Chevy Bolt EV. In five years of ownership, I have only heard of one case where a battery pack was replaced because one or more cells were proven defective/stopped working.

Click to expand...

The Volts have not exhibited any battery fade. It is well understood why they do not...good thermal management, very narrow depth of discharge window, and possibly (or not) masking of any fade that might occur by widening the DOD window.

The Focus, on the other hand, declined from approximately 20 kWh usable when new to approximately 15.2 kWh usable over three years and 54,000 miles. This despite decent thermal management (liquid cooled but not held to a narrow range) and reasonable DOD window (90% to 8%)

I don't know how Bolt will fit into that spectrum. It depends a lot on how one manages the battery. If usually kept within a small range of SOC, and if the thermal management is aggressive like in the Volt, then quite well if not, then...????

michael said:

The Volts have not exhibited any battery fade. It is well understood why they do not...good thermal management, very narrow depth of discharge window, and possibly (or not) masking of any fade that might occur by widening the DOD window.

The Focus, on the other hand, declined from approximately 20 kWh usable when new to approximately 15.2 kWh usable over three years and 54,000 miles. This despite decent thermal management (liquid cooled but not held to a narrow range) and reasonable DOD window (90% to 8%)

I don't know how Bolt will fit into that spectrum. It depends a lot on how one manages the battery. If usually kept within a small range of SOC, and if the thermal management is aggressive like in the Volt, then quite well if not, then...????

Click to expand...

Let's not forget the chemistry in the battery cells................every battery company is different and LG Chem may have found the right chemistry.

mbepic said:

michael said:

The Volts have not exhibited any battery fade. It is well understood why they do not...good thermal management, very narrow depth of discharge window, and possibly (or not) masking of any fade that might occur by widening the DOD window.

The Focus, on the other hand, declined from approximately 20 kWh usable when new to approximately 15.2 kWh usable over three years and 54,000 miles. This despite decent thermal management (liquid cooled but not held to a narrow range) and reasonable DOD window (90% to 8%)

I don't know how Bolt will fit into that spectrum. It depends a lot on how one manages the battery. If usually kept within a small range of SOC, and if the thermal management is aggressive like in the Volt, then quite well if not, then...????

Click to expand...

Let's not forget the chemistry in the battery cells................every battery company is different and LG Chem may have found the right chemistry.

Click to expand...

Ford uses LG Chem too

oilerlord said:

mbepic said:

As an example, in my first year of owning my 2012 Volt, I was pulling 10.2+- kwh on a full charge; in my fifth year, 59,000miles later, I can still pull 10.2+-kwh from a full charge on my battery. This is a testament to the engineering of the Chevy Volt system and my understanding is that much of that engineering knowledge has been built into the Chevy Bolt EV. In five years of ownership, I have only heard of one case where a battery pack was replaced because one or more cells were proven defective/stopped working.

Click to expand...

Comparing a Volt's battery with the Bolt's is apples & oranges. Your 2012 Volt has a 16 kWh battery but only 10.4 of that is usable. The large buffer between total and usable capacity is the reason why your Volt's battery still tests at 10.2 kWh after five years and 59,000 miles.

For the Bolt to have that kind of battery longevity (i.e. showing no degradation) it's buffer would need to roughly mirror the Volt's percentage. That would make the Bolt's total battery capacity to be more than 90 kWh. It isn't.

Click to expand...

That's true, but the Bolt's large battery make's it possible to control this based on usage.

For example, my daily commute is 40 miles each way, with charging available on both ends. So I can keep the SOC between approximately 40% and 60% most days, very easy on the battery and actually much more conservative than the Volt.

On the other hand, I could choose to charge it from approximately empty to full every third day. This would be very tough on the battery.

The shame is the Chevy did not provide an easy means to limit the charge to some small value (such as 60%). Tesla, to the credit, does so. Chevy at least provided optional 90% and 40% limits, but nothing in between. This will require intervention. A shame when the car is one big computer to make the owner hack this with charge timers and such. Why not provide a slider like Tesla does?