Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs Revealed: 60 kWh, 0-60 In “Less Than” 7 Seconds – Video

7 months ago by Jay Cole 377

Chevrolet Bolt EV Presented By GM CEO Mary Barra And Mark Reuss (GMNA Boss) At NAIAS In Detroit On Monday

Chevrolet Bolt EV Presented By GM CEO Mary Barra And Mark Reuss (GMNA Boss) At NAIAS In Detroit On Monday (InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)

After doing a mini reveal at last week’s CES show in Las Vegas, GM CEO Mary Barra and Mark Reuss (President of GM NA operations), re-presented the Chevrolet Bolt EV at NAIAS in Detroit this morning.

Chevrolet Bolt EV - Featuring A 60 kWh Battery

Chevrolet Bolt EV – Featuring A 60 kWh Battery (InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)

And this time, they brought stats with them.

Powering the Bolt EV is a 60 kWh lithium battery which resides in the floor of the car from the front foot well to back of the rear seat.

Inside, the electric motor in the Bolt EV puts out 266 lb.-ft. (360 Nm) of torque and 200 hp (150 kW) of hp.

GM states that in conjunction with a 7.05:1 final drive ratio, the Bolt EV will zip past 60 mph (98 km/h) from a standstill in less than seven seconds“, while 0-30 mph is accomplished in 2.9 seconds.

GM puts top speed of the Bolt EV at 91 mph/145 km/h.

“Being the leader in range and affordability means nothing if the car isn’t going to excite you each time you get behind the wheel,” said Josh Tavel, Chevrolet Bolt EV chief engineer.

“That’s why the team was tasked with delivering a propulsion system that would also make the Bolt EV an electric vehicle that owners would love to drive.”

Note: Complete preliminary 2017 Bolt EV spec sheet below

Chevrolet Bolt EV Cutaway

Chevrolet Bolt EV Cutaway

Chevrolet Bolt EV Battery - 60 kWH

Chevrolet Bolt EV Battery – 60 kWH

On the 60 kWh battery itself:

  • 60 kWh lithium-ion battery pack.
  • 288 lithium ion cells
    • Five sections
    • 10 modules
    • 96 cell groups – three cells per group
  • 960 lbs. (435 kg) total weight

GM says that the pack uses active thermal conditioning which is “similar” to the 2016 Chevrolet Volt.  Still, a 8-year/100,000 mile warranty should take care of any issues owners might come across

“You usually have a battery cell that delivers either the desired levels of energy or power, but not traditionally both.  With this cell design and chemistry we were able to deliver a battery system with 160 kilowatts of peak power and 60 kilowatts hours of energy,” – Gregory Smith, Bolt EV battery pack engineering group manager. 

Chevrolet Bolt EV Breaks Technical Cover At NAIAS In Detroit

Chevrolet Bolt EV Breaks Technical Cover At NAIAS In Detroit

The cells itself are a unique chemistry from that of the new Volt, and are of a new design.

Chevrolet Bolt EV Motor - 266 lb-ft of torque/200 hp

Chevrolet Bolt EV Motor – 266 lb-ft of torque/200 hp

The nickel-rich lithium-ion chemistry provides improved thermal operating performance over other chemistries, which requires a smaller active cooling system for more efficient packaging.  The chemistry allows the Bolt EV to maintain peak performance in varying climates and driver demands.

The cells are arranged in a “landscape” format and each measures in at only 3.9 ins. (100 mms) high and 13.1 ins. (338 mms) wide providing improved packaging underfloor. The lower profile cell design enabled the vehicle structure team to maximize interior space.

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV - 0 -30 mph in 2.9 Seconds

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV – 0 -30 mph in 2.9 Seconds

Chevrolet Bolt EV Charging:

The L2 system has been given a massive upgrade over the new Chevy Volt’s 3.6 kW system, with GM saying that a 50 mile recharge can take less than two hours via a 7.2 kW on board charger (which is standard).  Full charge on L2 takes 9 hours.

As noted earlier, DC Fast Charging is in the SAE Combo connector configuration.  Here again GM says 90 miles of range can be recouped in 30 minutes.

GM also released some notes on the regen system that provides “one-pedal” driving:

Chevrolet Bolt EV Cutaway (click to enlarge)

Chevrolet Bolt EV Cutaway (click to enlarge)

“Interviews with EV enthusiasts indicated their desire for one pedal driving capability on the Bolt EV.  One pedal operation boosts the thrill and uniqueness of EV driving,” Tavel said.

Through a combination of increased regenerative deceleration and software controls, one pedal driving enables the vehicle to slow down and come to a complete stop without using the brake pedal in certain driving conditions.

When operating the Bolt EV in “Low” mode, or by holding the Regen on Demand paddle located on the back of the steering wheel, the driver can bring the vehicle to a complete stop under most circumstances by simply lifting their foot off the accelerator, although the system does not relieve the need to use the brake pedal altogether.

Operating the Bolt EV in “Drive” mode and not pulling the paddle while decelerating delivers a driving experience where usage of the brake pedal is required to stop.

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV On Stage In Detroit

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV On Stage In Detroit

Full 2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs:

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

377 responses to "Chevrolet Bolt EV Specs Revealed: 60 kWh, 0-60 In “Less Than” 7 Seconds – Video"

  1. Ash09 says:

    Pretty impressive stats. Hope it sells well.

  2. Pajda says:

    excelent article with a lot of interesting technical details. Great work IEV team!

    1. Miggy says:

      Agree, great information and good to see the metric measurements.
      Now GM need to get this car sold to the rest of the world and include both LHD and RHD markets.

  3. mhpr262 says:

    200 ponystrengths? I have a feeling this car will be pretty zippy. Hopefully they get the suspension and steering right, too, so it will be fun to drive even on twisty roads. The “skateboard pack” under the floor should help a lot with the center of gravity. Nothing shuts up EV naysaysers quicker than EVs that are actually fun to drive instead of making you suffer for the sake of the environment.

    1. R.S says:

      Could be close to a Golf GTI, if they get the suspension and steering right, which should be a lot easier on an EV.

      1. Brian says:

        I have my doubts that the suspension and steering will be anywhere near as tight as a GTI. Remember, this is a car built for ride sharing, so ride comfort takes precedence over sporty handing. Still, at least the suspension is something that one can tighten up with aftermarket products. Not sure about the steering response, though.

        1. bro1999 says:

          I wouldn’t be so skeptical.
          The Bolt’s chief engineer is an accomplished SCCA racer. I think the Bolt will be sportier than you think.

          Hell, Car and Driver, a muscle car mag, said they even liked the Bolt and how it drove.

          1. Brian says:

            I really hope you are right, but like I said I have my doubts. The worst part of driving a Leaf, to me, is not the acceleration but the mushy feeling in corners. I’m really hoping my next EV is something much more exciting to drive. I will know within a year, as I’m planning on getting behind the wheel of a Bolt as soon as I possibly can. Heck, I would be satisfied if it handled like a Volt. I don’t need it to be a raw sports car.

            1. Aaron says:

              Put stickier tires on the LEAF and it becomes a handling monster. (Range suffers, but you gotta have your priorities.) C&D got a LEAF up to 0.98g with just a tire/wheel swap.

            2. Josh says:

              I am with you Brian. The LEAFs handling makes using the torque not as much fun.

              I really wish LEAF and Bolt both offered a “Sport” package with tighter suspension for the minority of us that prefer it (similar to GTI vs. Golf).

              1. Alpha777 says:

                Or, an air-suspension, that could be tuned.

      2. Alpha777 says:

        Torsion beam rear suspension? I’m not hopeful.

    2. pjwood1 says:

      RE: “200 ponystrengths”. 2-3 decades ago, 5.0 Mustangs and Porsche Carerras were 200-220HP.

      Interesting torque/HP ratio, as in not-massive. The battery has the juice for more, but seems they tweaked to their desires.

    3. EVcarNut says:

      EV’s R Great !…A nice sporty Hatch Back Version With even more range Would be Ideal:

  4. Alan says:

    They really have thrown down the gauntlet with this, it can only be good news from now on one would think.

    Let’s hope it’s a stampede !

  5. The Swede says:

    I hope this car is available for us in scandinavia.

    1. Mister G says:

      I hope it’s available in Central Florida

      1. Big Solar says:

        +278!

  6. Martin says:

    Thanks for being so quick with delivering details. We were pretty spot on with our 60 kWh guesses.

    Seriously less than 210 EPA range would be surprising. The 2ton Model S had 208 miles of range. This one will be about 1600kg i guess. I know aerodynamics but still, let’s be realistic here.

    Crazy times guys, Crazy times.

    1. Jay Cole says:

      Thanks Martin,

      NAIAS is crazy (besides the winter storm that closed Detroit airport), once the press days doors open everyone has all the information – all over the place.

      /getting there

    2. Jim_NJ says:

      EPA estimates for the 4323 pound Model S 60 was 208 miles. I think the drag profiles of the Model S and Bolt are probably similar. The Bolt is taller (more drag), but narrower (less drag), than the Model S. I’m going to guess an EPA range of 215 combined.

      1. taser54 says:

        Another thought, the Model S is longer and therefore, it is simpler to smooth the airflow over it vs a shorter vehicle.

        1. Josh says:

          Model S probably has a lower Cd, but more frontal area than the Bolt.

          I agree the Cd * area (CdA) is roughly the same between the two.

          But remember the EPA test includes some extreme heating/cooling situations too so the HVAC might play into the final numbers. And I have no idea who is the winner there.

      2. Brian Swanson says:

        Another big thing about this is that it is a permanent magnet motor V/S induction motor as such it should be more efficient than a Tesla.

    3. evcarnut says:

      If they Consentrate on Developing More Energy Efficient Electric Motors Combined with More Energy Dense Batteries, Could be the answer to extending the range….

    4. Martin says:

      “Chevy gives the 2017 Bolt EV a target curb weight of 3580 pounds (1620 kg), “without two passengers” inside.” – Green Car Reports

      Jeez i’m good at estimating 🙂

    5. EVcarNut says:

      I Can See Some Great things Coming .. It gets better & better As We Move Forward….350 Plus Miles Would Be The answer that I’m seeking, The More range The Better!

  7. bro1999 says:

    0-30 time: 2.9 secnds
    0-60 time: likely 6.8 or 6.9 seconds
    Turning radius: 10.8 meters (almost the same as an i3)

    90 miles in 30 minutes, and 80% in 60 minutes….so we can assume 180 miles is the 80% range figure.

    That would mean the fully charged EV range would be 225 miles! Also meshes with the 9 hours @ 25 miles per hour (225).

    1. Matt says:

      Hell yeah, bro.

    2. scott franco says:

      It means a 50kW charger, same as now.

  8. I just posted the same thing on GR. This thing is a Leaf killer for sure. Twice the battery capacity of the 2016 30 kWh Leaf with TMS to provide for longevity. More powerful motor, much better acceleration to 60 mph. Arguably better looking than Leaf IMO, and I currently drive one. And much more refined interior with lots of high tech goodies. ALL FOR BASICALLY THE SAME PRICE AS THE CURRENT LEAF. Nissan had better up their game considerably in the next 12 months if they want to remain in the EV segment. Also they better start offering major discounts on the 2016 Leaf if they want to sell any, otherwise everyone will just wait 11 months and get a Bolt.

    1. Alan says:

      Is the 7.2kw onboard charger as standard ?

      If so, that’s another blow to Nissan’s Leaf.

      1. bro1999 says:

        Doesn’t say “available”, so that probably means standard.

      2. Phatcat73 says:

        for that size of a battery 7.2 will be standard if not a bit on the low side. RAV4 EV and Benz EV have a 10kw charger for a smaller battery footprint. In any case, the car will be like a cell phone. Plug in at night and 100% in the morning.

        1. NN99 says:

          They said it’s the same as in the 2016 Volt.
          Which if its anything like the G1 Volt, or better,
          then it’s great thermal management.

    2. Walt says:

      The Bolt is not really the same price as the Leaf. It is about $10,000 more. Also in Washington state you would have to pay $3,000 in additional sales tax for the Bolt. The Leaf would be exempt.

      1. David says:

        How do you figure? Bolt is supposed to be <$30,000 after tax rebate meaning <$37,500. The LEAF SV is around $34,000. Only $3500 difference. Bolt should have all the same credits and rebates as the LEAF if not more.

        1. Kakkerlak says:

          Washington State has a special love/hate relationship with battery-electric vehicles and their drivers.

          Washington failed to adopt the ZEV part of the CARB standards, for example, so we don’t get vehicles like the Spark or e-Golf. EV drivers pay a special surcharge on our vehicle registrations too, which was just upped from $100 to $150 this year.

          In the past, Washington made BEV’s exempt from our (almost 10%) Sales Tax, but it was amended in July 2015 to apply only to vehicles with an MSRP under $35,000.

          There was a proposed exemption for the BMW i3 because its carbon-fiber frame is made here, but that was removed from the transportation bill at the last minute.

          So the Bolt EV won’t get any State-level incentives in Washington.

          1. Matt says:

            Are you sure it’s based on MSRP and not sale price? The Leaf dealer swore up and down last week that he just sold a loaded 30kwh model that has an MSRP above 35k and the buyer paid no sales tax due to his trade in.

            If it’s MSRP, then lease it is.

            1. Brian says:

              Beware leasing a GM EV. The offer I was given on leasing a Volt (back in 2011, granted) had them apply the $7500 credit to the residual. So my payments were nice and low, but if I tried to buy out the lease, I’d have to pay GM back the $7500! What a scam!

              I’m not saying they’ll do this with the Bolt. Heck, I don’t know if they still do it with the Volt. But before you sign anything, look at all of the numbers, including the buyout price.

              1. Matt says:

                Appreciate the word of caution, Brian. Strange they would do that, given that Nissan passes that savings in the residual onto the buyer (from what I’ve seen, anyway). I’ll definitely check this before making a deal. Though at the end of the 3 years there might be something else out and better EV incentives.

              2. ModernMarvelFan says:

                “I’d have to pay GM back the $7500! What a scam!”

                What?

                No way that is real!

                That would be the biggest scam in the world.

                1. Brian says:

                  Absolutely it was real. I don’t have the paper any more, but I had it in writing in 2011. With any luck, it was just a rogue dealer trying to rip me off, and not a corporate-wide policy. That said, I stand by my warning: read the fine print. And that goes for any car from any manufacturer.

                  1. SparkEV says:

                    Didn’t the lease paperwork have residual value that you pay to “buy” the car after lease? If they ask for more than the residual, that would seem to be fraudulent contract.

                    1. Brian says:

                      Yes. Here’s what it looked like, in approximate numbers.

                      MSRP = $40k
                      Residual = 45% + tax credit = $18k + $7.5k = $25.5k
                      Lease cap cost = $14.5k

                      The contract said that at lease end, I could buy the car for $25.5k.

                      The lease payments were based off the ~$14.5k cap cost. But the buyout was inflated by $7.5k. I don’t remember the verbiage they used to justify this atrocious rip off. It’s fine if you know you are going to turn in the lease. But they really didn’t want you to buy out the lease. On the flip side, I thought this is part of what kept the Volt’s depreciation in check. but it sounds like I may have been dealing with a shady dealer?

                      Needless to say, I walked. I went to Nissan who happily applied the $7.5k to the lease as a down payment.

                    2. SparkEV says:

                      I just checked my SparkEV lease paperwork, and residual/price to buy reflects capitalized cost ($13.5K). I guess one should pay close attention to paperwork. I actually made sure to ask them how much it’ll cost to buy at the end of the lease.

                2. JeffP says:

                  It’s real. I had the same deal on my lease for a 2012 Volt. Needless to say, I turned mine back in at the end of the lease since I could have bought a used 2012 for about $10k less than the buy-out for the lease.

              3. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° ) says:

                Beware leasing a GM EV ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )

                Sorry, I was just thinking about the EV-1 there for a second.

                ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )

        2. Phatcat73 says:

          Nissan also plays the rebate game. They’ll throw in significant manufacturer rebates to drop their price. In the end it may be a 6k-8k price difference.

    3. Bolt is limited quantity, limited market compliance car.

      1. David Murray says:

        Where do you get that? GM has repeatedly said it would be available in all 50 states.

        1. …Murica is not the world.

          1. Stimpy says:

            Would you expect them to start selling it in Germany first?

          2. Spider-Dan says:

            Given that there is no such thing as a world law that GM is trying to comply with, it’s silly to call the Bolt a world compliance car.

            In America, where the Bolt will be available, it’s not a compliance car. In other locations where it won’t be available, it’s also not a compliance car, because it doesn’t exist.

        2. RexxSee says:

          30,000 / 50 = 600 each state.
          No ICE car maker is committed to really sell good BEVs in sufficient numbers, yet.
          Tesla beats them all with 1000 less times the facilities.

          1. ModernMarvelFan says:

            Still hating it?

            LOL.

            Close to running out of excuses not buying one?

          2. ClarksonCote says:

            When has Tesla sold 30,000 Model S sedans in a year in the US?

            Oh wait, sorry… I forgot you’re not using data to arrive at your conclusions.

      2. MTN Ranger says:

        Not bad for what’s likely to be the top selling BEV of 2017.

        1. david_cary says:

          Hope not – only 30,000 copies made a year. Leaf 2.0 should have more availability. Model S can beat that.

          Even Leaf 1.5 can beat that if incentives are good.

          1. Brian says:

            Agreed. Heck, Model S beat that in 2015. I hope that the market keeps growing, not shrinking!

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              “Agreed. Heck, Model S beat that in 2015. I hope that the market keeps growing, not shrinking!”

              I didn’t know 25,700 beat 30,000…

              LOL. I need to find a calculator.

              1. Brian says:

                Hey now. He only later clarified that was talking about US sales. Tesla sold over 50,000 Model Ses worldwide in 2015.

          2. ClarksonCote says:

            I suspect they’re being conservative so they can exceed planned numbers instead of miss them, so as not to repeat what happened with the Gen 1 Volt after it was a political football with the bankruptcy.

            Could be wrong though.

            1. Sting777 says:

              Exactly. If you buy 30,000, they’ll make more.

              1. Anon says:

                Not right away. Ever hear of Dealer ‘Market Adustment’ Fees? The stealership jacks up the price based on (usually false) high demand and limited product supply to justify the added cost.

              2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                Sting777 said:

                “If you buy 30,000, they’ll make more.”

                Maybe, altho I wonder how many GM wants to make of a car which almost certainly will yield a lower profit margin than their gasmobiles.

                But even if GM wants to ramp up production, will they be able to? They’re dependent on LG Chem for batteries, and with LG’s ever-expanding list of customers, would LG be able to supply GM with more batteries than they contracted for? These contracts are written years in advance.

        2. MTN Ranger says:

          I meant for the US – Model S sales only 25,700 and Leaf sales only 17,269 for 2015.

      3. Stimpy says:

        Chevy already said Bolt is going to be sold in all 50 states.

      4. The Fixer says:

        The Bolt will be unobtainium for at least 1-2 years (Maybe longer). Tesla’s are pretty much unobtainium and they cost a mint (I sure as heck can’t afford one). If I can afford a Bolt, most people will be able to. Which means demand for them will outstrip supply for a Looooong time. I’ll be VERY impressed if they ship more than 200-500 before the end of the year.

    4. Tim E says:

      Really? Just wait 11 months and get a Bolt? I would bet after the ultra delayed 2016 Volt delayed rollout to the country we will end up seeing something similar with the Bolt – I would bet most of the country will not be able to get their hands on one till mid to late 2017 at best.

      I certainly hope Nissan does quickly up their game too, and I certainly do also hope that GM can nail production and make it available everywhere right away. It’s in EVERYONES best interest!

      I’m enjoying the extra range from the 2016 Leaf right now – no waiting. 🙂

      1. Mathias says:

        “I’m enjoying the extra range from the 2016 Leaf right now”

        Do you feel the extra 46 lbs in battery weight when you drive it?

  9. Ambulator says:

    Wasn’t the under seven seconds 0-60 revealed at CES? I certainly heard about it enough.

    The 60 kWh battery is on the high end of what I was expecting. Very, very nice, GM.

    And Pushmi-Pullyu: Do we get to say nyaa, nyaa, nyaa yet?

    1. bro1999 says:

      Nope, he’ll stick to his 160 mile official EPA rating story ’cause he’s as stubborn as a mule.

      1. taser54 says:

        I’m waiting for his 20 posts in a thread. 🙂

    2. Alan says:

      Just need Apple to announce they are producing a car and he will need to change his username !

      He makes me laugh though, pure entertainment !

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Ambulator asked:

      “And Pushmi-Pullyu: Do we get to say nyaa, nyaa, nyaa yet?”

      Absolutely, you deserve it. 🙂

      Congratulations to all who calculated at or near 60 kWh for the Bolt.

      1. MTN Ranger says:

        You’re welcome!

  10. jerryd says:

    Well 60 kwhrs means I was wrong and GM didn’t try to make the Bolt lighter, more aero instead of more battery.
    It’ll also increase fast charging times needing more power/mile than needed.
    And means it won’t be as competitive as the T-3 with less room to drop the price to compete with it.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Of course the Bolt will be out AT LEAST 1 year earlier than the Model 3.

      Vaporware can’t compete with an actual car, no matter how good the specs might be.

      1. Brian says:

        “Vaporware can’t compete with an actual car”

        Sure it can. In fact, that’s the whole point of talking about it so far ahead of the launch – to convince people to wait rather than buying a competitor’s product.

        1. bro1999 says:

          When someone actually takes that vaporware Model 3 for a spin, let me know.

          With Tesla’s track record, MAYBE founder edition 3’s will be in customer hands by Dec. 2017

          1. Brian says:

            My point is that many people will choose not to purchase a Bolt simply because of the Model III. Therefore it is competition.

            1. Doug B says:

              That may depend on lease rates and terms. On an optimistic level you’ll probably have to wait 2 years after the Bolt release for a TM3, so why not lease first and get started with an EV.

              1. Brian says:

                Some will do that. Others will wait. The fact that Tesla is opening reservations for the Model III means that it will compete for the same customer base as the Bolt.

                Competition in car sales rarely means everyone goes one way or the other. Take the F150 / Ram competition. They certainly go after the same market, but both coexists.

        2. TomArt says:

          Agreed. But, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that the Model III will have superior performance and upgrades to longer ranges.

          That’s one of the many things I really appreciate about Tesla – the base model is impressive, and there are powertrain upgrades, like ICE cars usually have larger engines you can opt for.

      2. Julien says:

        The Bolt may be out at least a year before the Model 3 but the Model 3 will start “making money” before the Bolt if the reservations are up just after the announcement in March 😀

      3. Josh says:

        I will be placing a reservation on Model 3 on the night of the reveal. But I will definitely we waiting to drive a Bolt and will reconsider my decision to wait for Model 3 until then.

        Since I live in Texas, I am looking at Summer ’17 as the earliest time I will see a Bolt. I expect to be able to test drive a LEAF 2.0 in Fall ’17 also. So it might only be a 6 month difference from driving all three cars.

        If I have waiting that long (2+ years from the end of my LEAF lease), I might as well wait a few more months.

        1. Klaus says:

          My plan is similar, place reservation for model 3 first day, check out the Bolt and consider dropping reservation.

          I want to keep the cost low, so my need for FWD or AWD means even more for the Tesla (assuming the base is RWD), not to mention possible add’l cost for supercharger access. I’m guessing I’ll prefer the model 3, but end up in a Bolt.

  11. Brandon says:

    I thought it would be a 60 kW battery! Neat layout.

  12. Bob says:

    The stat I’m interested in is what it costs GM to produce each copy of the Bolt.

    That number is likely well north of $37.5K.

    1. bro1999 says:

      After factoring in CARB credits/CAFE impact, I’m sure the Bolt is a money maker in the end for GM.

      Plus for every Bolt sold, it allows them to sell that many more cash-cow SUVs/pickups.

      1. Mart says:

        GM makes money off of financing. Higher prices make for longer notes with more interest payments.

    2. Someone out there says:

      They already said they pay $145/kWh for the battery cells. $145*60=$8700, add some for the cost of the packaging and you have around $10k for the battery, which is usually a third of the cost of the car.

      1. Josh says:

        You need to add battery management software/controller and active cooling mechanism also.

        I would put my guess at ~$12k.

    3. R.S says:

      I guess the production costs will be way less than 37,500. But if you consider the development costs, marketing cots and the 30k cars a year sales target, it might be very close. With such a low sales target, they might have to keep at around 10 grand to pay for things like that, probably more. (Just divide 1-3 billion $ by 5-6years times 30k cars)

      1. Jim_NJ says:

        I agree. Let’s start with a nicely-optioned $20,000 Chevy Sonic.

        $20,000 – MSRP of Nicely optioned Sonic
        -$2,000 – Remove engine/transmission/fuel system (Probably contributes more to MSRP than $2,000)
        +$8,700 – 60 Kwh of cells at $145/kwh
        +$2,300 – Packaging/thermal/battery management
        +$500 – 7.2 kwh charger
        +$1,000 – Electric motor
        =======
        $30,500

        Of course this doesn’t amortize the development cost over a smaller Bolt production run than the Sonic, but it seems that GM should make a decent amount of money on the Bolt.

        1. Tech01x says:

          Your battery packaging, thermal management, and BMS costs are likely low.

          Infotainment and vehicle computer costs are also likely higher than the Sonic. The wheelbase is longer with a far lower volume so the costs are amortized over a far smaller run rate.

          I’m guessing this vehicle makes very little money at invoice, but with CARB ZEV credits, it doesn’t really need to anyways.

          1. ModernMarvelFan says:

            Yup!

            Motor controller can easily cost $4K to $5K for a 200HP system.

        2. Open-Mind says:

          Did you leave out the cost of a motor controller?

          If available as an option, I would happily pay $10K extra for two-motor AWD, especially if that bumped HP to 300 or more! 🙂

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            Open-Mind asked:

            “Did you leave out the cost of a motor controller?”

            Yes, he did. As Tech01x pointed out, he seems to have low-balled GM’s cost on several items. I wonder if the $1000 for the electric motor might be a bit low, too. You’d have to pay about $2000 on a do-it-yourself website for a motor of this type. Of course GM gets a large quantity wholesale discount, but I’m not sure the discount is as much as 50%.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              On the other hand, he’s mixing up cost and price. He listed “$20,000 – MSRP of Nicely optioned Sonic”, which would be the price, not the cost. Yet he calculated the actual cost of the battery cells.

              I dunno what it costs GM to produce a “nicely optioned Sonic”, but we can be pretty sure it’s at least a few thousand dollars less than $20k.

              1. protomech says:

                I think the idea was to start with the price of the Sonic vehicle, then subtract and add incremental costs to illustrate that there could be some padding left in the Bolt price.

                As far as the charger cost…

                This is probably one of the lowest-price EV-specific charging systems available today. Priced at $1150 for 6 kW ($191/kW). Two separate modules and a separate charge controller, would be lower cost if built as a single module.

                http://www.thunderstruck-ev.com/tsm2500-x2-and-charge-controller.html

                To go lower cost, some in the DIY space have built high-power chargers using rackmount server power supplies. These are typically available for $100-180/kW, or much less if purchased used.

                $500 for 7.2 kW ($70/kW) does seem like a low price, but might not be that far off if talking about cost instead.

        3. kubel says:

          Where can I sign up to get a $500 7.2kW charger? 🙂

          1. Jim_NJ says:

            Do you mean a $500 $7.2 kw EVSE? 😉

              1. tom911 says:

                and 30% Fed tax credit on the unit and the install = win!

                http://www.metroplugin.com/evse-rebates/

              2. kubel says:

                That’s not a charger.

            1. Ambulator says:

              I think he was referring to this, posted by you:
              “+$500 – 7.2 kwh [sic] charger”

              So, no, he is not talking about an EVSE.

      2. pjwood1 says:

        Next thing you know, they may be selling “Boltec” to Honda. Let’s look at all revenue and costs over its life cycle.

    4. Tech01x says:

      Buick Encore is retail priced at around $24k, so cost to GM is around $20k. Add in $12k for the battery pack, another $2k for the BMS, another $2-4k for custom electronics/infotainment etc, drop the ICE for the motor, and this car likely is around break even at dealer invoice.

      However, factor the CARB ZEV credits that won’t have to be purchased and the Bolt ends up making money. But they can’t make too many of these.

      1. Alan says:

        I assume that $24k includes the cost of the engine ?

        1. Tech01x says:

          Of course, but I’m trading the engine cost for the motor/gearbox/inverter cost in the calcs.

    5. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Bob said:

      “The stat I’m interested in is what it costs GM to produce each copy of the Bolt.

      “That number is likely well north of $37.5K.”

      Well, I think the rule of thumb for down-market cars is that they don’t make money in the first model year. Things improve as the startup costs are amortized away.

      But I doubt GM is gonna lose that much money on each unit, even during the first MY. If they were, then they would make them in only California Compliance car numbers. According to rumor, this car will be made in much greater quantity: 30,000 per year.

      This is one reason GM waited so long to introduce a BEV. They knew that it couldn’t be profitable so long as battery prices were so high. The $145/kWh price which GM will be paying LG Chem certainly points to a much better opportunity for GM to sell this EV without losing much money on it.

      I think they still won’t make as big a profit as they do on their average gasmobile, though.

    6. pvwowk says:

      I got some numbers here…

      The battery at $145/kwh, which means the 60kWh battery is $8700.

      Lets assume the motor costs $10/kw, that makes it $2000.

      Lets assume the inverter is about $20/kw. That makes it $4000.

      Everything else (door, shocks, wheels, wiring harness, etc) on the car, lets assume is $10000.

      We’ll take assembly as ~10% of the total cost of components, we’ll say $2500.

      Lets put it together

      Misc…….10000
      Inverter…4000
      Motor……2000
      Battery….8700
      Assembly…2500
      Total……27200

      That means they would make ~10k per car without factoring in R&D.

      Really, I don’t think they are going to make much money on this car if they sell 20k/year. They just don’t want to put the investment into a 100k/year factory until they know it is a hit. Also, they are investing in the technology. So when competitors decide they want to release an electric, they’ll be years behind GM, and GM will reap the benefits.

      1. wavelet says:

        That $145/kWh cost number is for the cells, not finished battery pack.
        You forgot to add in casing, cooling system, BMS, assembly and testing (the last is not a trivial item… Anything significant goes wrong in a hi-voltage pack, people can die). I expect the total pack cost to GM is 1.4x-1.6x the cell costs.
        Of course, that’s not including the R&D costs, which hopefully will get amortized over many vehicles.

  13. Philip d says:

    I don’t think DC Fast Charging comes standard.

    From GM Bolt press release: “Bolt EV also features an optional DC Fast Charging system using the industry standard SAE Combo connector. Using DC Fast Charging, the Bolt EV battery can be charged up to 90 miles of range in 30 minutes.”

    1. kosee says:

      One of the major advantages of a larger battery pack is faster charging. Hope they didn’t screw that up by making it optional and limited to 50kw.

  14. Someone out there says:

    This car really sets the new standard! All new EVs need to achieve 200 miles or they don’t exist. This will be stiff competition for both Tesla and Nissan’s upcoming models. Hopefully they will both release something great!

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      It indeed looks like GM has really raised the bar. And it’s nice to see someone finally giving Tesla what looks like real competition!

      But if GM keeps yearly production at 30,000 units or less, as rumored, then they don’t plan to even remotely compete with Tesla on quantity production.

      1. Someone out there says:

        I don’t see why GM would refuse to sell more than 30k cars per year if the demand called for it. If anything they might not be able to scale up production, or more likely LG wouldn’t be able to but I’m sure GM want to sell as many as they can.

        1. Josh says:

          How GM sells the car will tell us that answer.

          If the Bolt is as profitable as their SUV and Trucks, we will see ads everywhere and them stocked on every dealer lot in every state.

          If the supply is concentrated in ZEV markets, and there is little marketing effort, we can assume there isn’t much profit in the Bolt.

          Time will tell.

    2. Nom de Plume says:

      This is perhaps the most important point of all. You know this is going to light a fire under Elon Musk and Tesla. They are going to take this as a challenge to make the Model 3 even better, and possibly even a LOT better. Yes, I know, they’re probably going to miss their deadline, but if a Model 3 comes out in 2018 that exceeds the Bolt’s specs in every way, it will be worth the wait.

      1. JeremyK says:

        I think GM is in a good position here. Even if the TM3 comes to market with better specs, the Bolt will be about due for a mid-cycle refresh or a price reduction (by 2018). This is like Chess. Everyone is thinking multiple moves ahead. Going to be fun to watch.

      2. ClarksonCote says:

        Any additional flare that Tesla chooses to add to the Model 3 will only delay production more. So that’s a fine line that Tesla will have to negotiate when they’re making decisions for Model 3 capabilities.

    3. Josh says:

      I agree. GM has confirmed the BEV standard will be 200 mile AER.

      Nissan hinted towards it with their 60 kW concept recently. It may be more than ironic that both GM and Nissan are using LG and offering 60 kW packs.

      Tesla still originally and publicly defined that anything less than 200 miles was not sufficient. Stating that it would take more time to get battery costs down at a mass market price point.

      But GM beat Tesla to that goal.

  15. ggpa says:

    I saw the car at CES, but it was on a stand so nobody could get close to look inside. I hope we get more pictures soon. It is great that it is a 5 seater, not 4 as the prototype.

    It is great that the battery specs are out. At 137 Wh/kg the density is lower than I expected.

    1. PureElectricPower says:

      Because you expect Tesla/Panasonic battery with 10% higher energy density.

      1. ggpa says:

        Actually I was expecting them to match Tesla. I find it interesting that the new roadster battery is made by LG, has 70kWh and weighs about the same as Bolt 60kWh.

        And I wonder how it will compare to model 3. I think Bolt and Model 3 are the most exciting BEVs at the moment.

        1. Brandon says:

          I don’t see this brought up much, but I for one am inclined to think that the Next gen Nissan LEAF will actually be quite awesome. Seems like it will match the Bolt in range, and frankly Nissan has been the leader for a mass produced affordable EV, and I expect they will continue to do so with the next gen LEAF, at least until the Model 3, but we will see;)

        2. PureElectricPower says:

          Tesla Roadster battery can have higher energy density because the pack doesn’t have thick heavy protection plate under the whole floor.

  16. bro1999 says:

    I think that *THUD* you just heard was the resale values of the Leaf and i3 crashing into the floor.

    It was also the sound of the “100 mile” Ford Focus Electric dying before it’s even released.

    1. Brian says:

      Don’t forget the 100-mile eGolf, which will likely launch right around the same time as the Bolt 😉

      1. Doug B says:

        RIP all EVs with ~100 mile range.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Well, all BEVs.

          Sadly, there does not seem to be a similar rush to more than double the range of PHEVs. 🙁

        2. SparkEV says:

          It depends how other EV are priced. For example, if Chevy decide to continue / expand SparkEV, it’d be $17.5K ($15K in CA), far more reachable as entry level EV. But all mid level EV like Leaf, i3, eGolf, etc. would be dead. Unfortunately, I think Chevy will kill SparkEV (quickest car under $20K, third quickest EV), only leaving iMiev, one of the slowest cars on the road. Hmmm. So yeah, you might be right. RIP…

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            I know you refuse to believe that GM makes no profit on the Spark, but no compliance car makes a profit for its manufacturer, unless it’s by selling carbon credits, and even then I think it’s questionable, given R&D and tooling costs.

            I suspect GM will discontinue the Spark soon, because the Bolt almost certainly will come closer to making a profit, or at least lose them less money per unit.

            But we’ll have to wait and see.

    2. EVcarNut says:

      bro, U R SOOOOooooo Rite!

    3. Still no details on price, beyond entry level base model.

      No mention if Bolt will be available nationally in 2016/17. If volume of Bolt is constrained, or if optional packages are expensive add-ons, then pressure on other EVs will be eased.

      My expectation is the 2017 Bolt rollout will follow a similar strategy to the 2016 Volt.
      ie: Only available in ZEV compliance states for first 9 months followed by top 10, growing to top 25 PEV markets after 12-18 months. Hint: there will be other 150-200 mile BEVs rolling out before Bolt is available in all 48 states!

      Where the Bolt puts pressure on other BEVs is on price points. I see the Chevy Bolt and the BMW i3 REx being direct competitors … both similar in size and have a 150-180 mile range.

      1. Ambulator says:

        I can’t see the i3 REX and Bolt as competitors. With the Volt, yes.

        Putting gas into a motorcycle engine every 60 or so miles would not be fun.

      2. JeremyK says:

        GM has never launched a vehicle with that much lag in the nationwide rollout. The Volt is the only vehicle they’ve done this with that I can think of and Gen I was available in all 50 states just a few months after launch (more than 3 month, but less than 6 if I remember correctly). Not 12-18 months!

        1. MTN Ranger says:

          As 2012 Volt owner, 2011 models were only available in CARB states, just like the 2016 Volt. I bought one of the first available in NC and that was in October 2011, 11 months after it originally started selling.

    4. ClarksonCote says:

      On the other hand, there’s a bunch of people that still buy a Plug-in Prius over a Volt, despite them roughly costing the same after tax credits, and the Volt delivering quadruple the all-electric range. It’s surprising, but it happens.

  17. Tech01x says:

    The 2012 Tesla Model S 85 kWh pack was 544 kg, which means it has gravimetric energy density of 156 Wh/kg. This Bolt’s energy density is 138 Wh/kg, so much less dense.

    I wonder about the rest of the weight, I’d like to see the crash test results (not just ratings, but the actual g-forces/expected injury).

    I do wonder about CCS… is this a battery pack limitation or a CCS plug standard limitation? Will GM put thick enough wiring inside the gen 1 Bolt to allow for higher charge rates through an upgrade later in life?

    Model 3’s gravimetric density is expected to be even higher, with the current Model S’s 90 kWh battery already pushing mid 160’s, so an equivalent Model 3 pack should weigh in at around 350 kg, or 770 pounds.

  18. Brian says:

    These are some great stats! Now I’m more excited than ever to see this car in person, and get behind the wheel for a test drive. T-11 months and counting (assuming it’s available in NYS this December).

  19. ClarksonCote says:

    Is the 60kWh number usable energy or total capacity including the unused buffers? That’s not clear to me, but I could be missing a detail.

    1. bro1999 says:

      That’s total. I’m thinking usable is between 52-54.

      1. Brian says:

        I really wish that we started seeing cars spec’d in kWh usable, since that is the number that actually matters to consumers. But that will never happen unless it is legislated to , since the total capacity is a larger number and larger numbers are better for marketing (even though they are misleading).

        Same thing goes for rating chargers by their OUTPUT power instead of their INPUT power. Nissan went the wrong way, but competition kind of forced their hand.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Seems to me the important things are the full kWh and the range. The same “usable kWh” may not lead to the same range in a different car.

          For example, the BMW i3 is very efficient at using its battery capacity, partly because the car body is made of lightweight carbon fiber composite, instead of steel or aluminum. Conversely, a large heavy SUV BEV would get much less range than the Bolt on the same “usable kWh”.

          Merely comparing “usable kWh” may not be that meaningful.

          1. Brian says:

            Agreed that range is far more important than either total or usable kWh stats. Range and efficiency. Kind of like a gas car – they don’t usually focus on the size of the gas tank so much as range on a full tank and efficiency. EVs will get there. But right now we’re all obsessing over the size of the “gas tank”. Mostly because it is so small in comparison to their ICE cousins.

            1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              Few people really care about gas tank size and range, as gas stations are every few miles and it takes 5 minutes to refill.

              1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                Maybe most gasmobile drivers don’t car, but gasmobile manufacturers do. The industry standard for gasmobiles is a gas tank that will take the car 300 miles.

                Those EV advocates who keep insisting that BEVs will sell just fine with small battery packs… should stop and think about why that is the case.

                The GM Bolt will be an excellent test case to see how much a significant improvement in electric range increases the ability of a compelling BEV to compete with gasmobiles. If it makes as much difference as I think, then the Bolt is going to be in great demand, will sell considerably faster than the Volt ever did, and will significantly outsell the Leaf in the North American market.

        2. Open-Mind says:

          IMO, both total-capacity and useful-capacity are relevant, since the closer they are, the faster the battery will wear out.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            Total capacity also has a great influence on how gently battery packs age. According to available data, Tesla packs lose capacity very slowly, both because their larger packs get cycled fewer times, and because Tesla has gone to great efforts to “baby” their packs with a superior thermal management system.

            I also expect the Bolt’s battery pack to do well over time, both because the 60 kWh battery pack is as big as that in a Tesla Model S60, and because clearly GM did a great job with engineering the Volt to keep it from losing electric range over time.

        3. Bill Howland says:

          Brian- ,batteries, until the marketing EV types recently got involved, were rated the way you’d think they’d be rated.

          Most of my life, car batteries were rated in “20 hour ampere-hour” , meaning that if you discharged the battery over a 20 hour time period, you’d get such and such ampere -hours out of it. The energy level would be high also since the discharge voltage would be kept high due to the low voltage drop across the batteries “ESR” (equivalent series resistance).

          So, based mainly on the operation of my Tesla Roadster, where I had a decently sized battery to play with, its 53 kwh rating I believe was the capacity at some unspecified discharge rate, but at least the ’53’ was a real number since it took 65-70 kwh to get the 53 kwh battery fully charged, at the cars most efficient charging rate. Charging it at 120 volts, like all Teslas was inefficient, it needing then around 140 kwh to recharge.

          So, to be consistent, I’ve always assumed the ’53 kwh rating’ IGNORED the ESR when charging, and therefore INCLUDED the ESR when discharging, as I say at some definite, but unspecified rate.

          I’d expect the BOLT similarly to need around 63-64 kwh to take in an ‘honest’, ‘theoretical’ (at a miserly discharge rate) 60 kwh.

          People also have to remember that the EVSE charges at an INPUT to a charger rate, and the CCS and Chardemos charge at an OUTPUT rate, as do the superchargers usually.

          Each of these conventions therefore is easily understandable why it is done.

          Changing the convention now would just get people much more confused. – I hope they’ve learned their lessor trying to relabel Level 3, since most people like the original nomenclature and still mostly use it.

      2. Alan says:

        I would imagine if the 60 kWh Tesla battery was rated 208 EPA it will still be fairly close in terms of range ?

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Well, we know the Bolt is lighter than the Model S, so that variable would give the Bolt a slightly longer range.

          But we don’t yet know the variables for frontal area or drag coefficient, and those are equally important, or even moreso, when it comes to effect on EV range.

          I thought the Bolt was supposed to be a significantly smaller car than the Model S. But according to what one person posted, the Bolt actually has slightly more cabin space. Depending on how that is configured, the Bolt may well have a larger frontal area, which will reduce the range.

          But that’s not the whole story. Tesla says it has been able to increase the range just by making the inverter more efficient (see link below). My guess is that this won’t make that much difference, but it might give Tesla’s cars an edge by a few miles.

          http://www.gizmag.com/ornl-high-performance-power-inverter/34453/

          1. Warren says:

            The frontal area is almost identical by the gross W x H x L numbers available, narrower and high vs wide and low, probably comparable Cd. It is much shorter, so worse CdA.

            1. Warren says:

              Oops! Actually meant same frontal area, but worse Cd, so worse CdA.

              1. Warren says:

                Being 900 pounds lighter than the Tesla S 60 should help the combined EPA range though.

            2. bro1999 says:

              You think the Bolt will have roughly the same aero numbers as a Spark EV?

              Actually, which EV do you think the Bolt is most similar to, aerowise? Perhaps the now-defunct Fit EV?

              1. Warren says:

                Yup.

        2. Phatcat73 says:

          Volt’s are notorious for having high overhead of unused cells. Useable capacity is the big unknown for the Bolt. I don’t think we can compare apple to apples with a Tesla’s battery.

        3. Priusmaniac says:

          Since SCd is higher than on the Model S 60 KWh but the weight is lower, I would expect the range to be higher at low speed and lower at high speed. So we can expect a steeper decline of the range versus speed curve than for the Model S 60 KWh.
          Overall I think that GM achieved a very low weight considering the 60 KWh of the battery.
          In any case this car has potential to sell way higher than the 30000 per year mark. I would actually suspect the 300000 mark is more likely if they make a normal add campaign and world distribution like they would do for a gas car.

    2. A good ballpark figure for “usable energy” is ~90% of spec’d value under ideal conditions.

      For typical driving range, it’s good to set expectation at ~80% of the spec’d value.

  20. ffbj says:

    Looks promising. A year from now there will probably threads all over about all of its shortcomings.
    Like meeting a new lad or lass and thinking they are the cats meow, then later realizing that nice kitty, warm kitty, has claws.

    1. MikeM says:

      My first one had teeth too!
      The marks have faded now, 40 years later.

  21. jim stack says:

    What NO FRUNK?
    NO Super Chargers across the USA?
    NO panoramic Sun Roof?
    NO auto driving?
    NO THANKS, I’ll get the Tesla Model = 3
    nice try

    1. shane says:

      As you wish – but I’m planning to get one of these as soon as I get some other things paid off. (Of course I will check what is known about other products before signing the paperwork – but this is the front-runner for me.)

      1. sveno says:

        And you won’t even wait for the M3 reveal in March?

    2. Aaron says:

      I am kinda surprised the panoramic roof from the concept didn’t make production, at least as an expensive option.

      1. Anon says:

        Yeah, that prototype was slick… Lament the loss of the curved rear glass, myself.

        Will have to test drive one, if available in my non-CARB state.

        1. kdawg says:

          The curved rear glass was the one thing I complained about in the concept. I wish the layered tail-lights and sparkly-headlamps would have made it from the concept to production.

    3. bro1999 says:

      Have fun waiting till 2018.

      Meanwhile, I should be in my Bolt by the end of the year. 🙂

    4. PureElectricPower says:

      I like Tesla but this Bolt will be the best competitor of Model 3. Chevrolet will have mass production earlier.

    5. ClarksonCote says:

      No need to pay an additional $75k in price premium??

      Many will opt for the Bolt thanks to it costing a fraction of a Model S with comparable range.

    6. suresh says:

      if you want all that . try used model s 60. model 3 with all the options added would be similar.

    7. pjwood1 says:

      I still can’t figure how Tesla makes a compelling car, at this price point. They have nothing even close to the parts bins of the major OEMs. What they have is a $5,000 dashboard center-piece. I see challenges, mega-pressure ahead.

      1. sveno says:

        BOM for the Tesla infotainment is likely in the 120$ range.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        pjwood1 said:

        “I still can’t figure how Tesla makes a compelling car, at this price point. They have nothing even close to the parts bins of the major OEMs.”

        Well, Tesla is saying $35k, GM is saying $30k, so it’s not the same price point.

        Tesla’s strategy at keeping costs down is local sourcing and more in-house manufacturing of parts and sub-assemblies. I strongly doubt that really suffices to level the playing field with GM’s economy of scale, but perhaps it does ameliorate the difference somewhat.

        With the Bolt, GM is outsourcing the entire EV powertrain to LG Chem. Surely that’s not the way to save money, even though LG is giving GM a “sweetheart deal” on the price of battery cells.

        There is also the question of battery cost. GM’s cost of $145/kWh is surprisingly low, but some think Gigafactory 1 will reduce Tesla’s costs even below that.

        One final point in Tesla’s favor: Higher ED batteries means a physically smaller pack, which means the Model ≡ can be slightly smaller, and of course a smaller car is cheaper to make.

        1. wavelet says:

          The Tesla Model 3 price goal of $35K has always been mentioned as a pre-incentives price… So to compare with the Bolt, you need to use a $27.5 number (which seem absurdly low, but maybe the basic model 3 will be a stripped model).

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            wavelet said:

            “The Tesla Model 3 price goal of $35K has always been mentioned as a pre-incentives price… So to compare with the Bolt, you need to use a $27.5 number…”

            Ah, I had not picked up that the $30k price GM is citing assumes a Federal $3500 discount. Thanks, that explains some posts upstream that take as their premise that the Bolt MSRP will be more than the Model ≡ MSRP.

            Well, despite GM actually *gasp* being conservative on stating the range of the Bolt, the general rule from past experience is that as EVs approach actual production, the range goes down and the price goes up. While I don’t expect Tesla to make a Model ≡ with less than 200 miles of EPA rated range, it’s entirely possible that the estimated $35k (before incentives) price will creep up closer to $40k.

            “(which seem absurdly low, but maybe the basic model 3 will be a stripped model).”

            Well, all we have to go on is what Tesla says. Elon or somebody at Tesla said the Model ≡ will be aimed at the same market as the BMW 3-series. That does not suggest a stripped-to-the-bones car to me. As I understand it, the 3-series is almost BMW’s cheapest vehicle, but it is still a BMW, and not a Chevy.

        2. Priusmaniac says:

          A smaller car!!!
          Wait a minute, the main disadvantage of the Bolt is that it is a too small car with no full trunk and you want Tesla to make an even smaller Model 3. 4,16 m is way shorter than a 4,6 m 3 series BMW. We are sure it is going to be smaller than the 4,96 m of the Model S but if it is not around the 4,6 m with a real trunk it is going to have much less interest to many people. We actually want an affordable electric car not an affordable micro econobox, it must have a length that is sufficient to combine look, cabin room and trunk. Bellow 4,6 m even more bellow 4,16 m there is simply no realistic way you can do that.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            Hmmm, seems you think that a sedan (three-box) body design is mandatory. Well, a lot of people disagree. A hatchback design, like the Bolt, is much more practical for carrying cargo, especially with a smaller car.

            I hope Tesla follows the lead of the BMW i3 and the Chevy Bolt, and maximizes cabin space while minimizing overall length.

            Tesla has said, repeatedly, that it will be more bold in using a different, even radical, car design for the Model ≡ than they did for the Model S. Of course we’ll have to wait to see what that “radical” design is, but similar engineering constraints lead to similar designs. My guess is that the overall shape of the Model ≡ will be a lot like the BMW i3 and the Chevy Bolt.

            I can easily believe the Model ≡ will have a smaller cabin than the Bolt. It’s been said the Bolt actually has more space in its cabin, in cubic feet, than the Model S. Since Tesla has said the Model ≡ will be 20% smaller than the Model S, that suggests a smaller cabin.

            So the cabin of the Model ≡ might be of a size appropriate for what is called a “compact”, whereas the Bolt, like the Leaf, has a larger cabin. If so, that would go a long way towards making the Model ≡ less expensive to build than the Bolt.

            1. MTN Ranger says:

              With 94.4CF of passenger space, the Bolt is EPA midsize.

              Bolt 16.9cf cargo space ( i3 15cf, Volt 19cf, Leaf 24cf, Model S 26cf)
              Bolt 94.4cf passenger space (i3 84cf, Volt 90cf, Leaf 92cf, Model S 94cf)
              Bolt 111.3cf total space (i3 99cf, Volt 109cf, Leaf 116cf, Model S 120cf)

              EPA classes:
              Subcompact 85-99.9 = i3
              Compact 100-109.9cf = Volt
              Midsize 110-119.9cf = Bolt, Leaf
              Large >=120cf = Model S

            2. Priusmaniac says:

              Well a hatchback Ford Fusion design could qualify as a competitor to a BMW 3 series but a Bolt or i3 mono volume design would be far off expectations. Beside since the Bolt is now clearly as it is, there is obvious interest to have a different shape for the Model 3 so that more diversity can be proposed to potential ev buyers, which is after all important to have a fit to different desires. Perhaps the Model 3 can have a more Mac Laren F1 look tendency but I doubt it will look like a Bolt or an i3. It would just not be a true appealing car, something that transmit passion for automobile and that really set the ev car at par or above with the, by Elon designated, BMW 3 series.

    8. Stimpy says:

      Enjoy paying $20k more.

  22. shane says:

    Great work GM! Regardless of the absolute comparisons to other existing and planned products, it raises the bar!

  23. Kosh says:

    Why so much “Junk in the Frunk” compared to a Tesla?

    1. Aaron says:

      It’s the same amount of junk, it’s just that Tesla puts it under the base of frunk.

      ***mod edit (auto) too big to embed ***
      https://teslaroadtrip.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/teslaservice-front-c1004.jpg

    2. Vexar says:

      Kosh:
      front wheel drive, smaller than a Nissan Leaf, and battery density that is much lower than cutting-edge. Also, Chevrolet owners like to “pop the hood” and show off stuff they may or may not understand.
      “yeah, this here wire is for the motor. It goes to the positive terminal right there. The other one, that goes back to the battery.” I cannot imagine the conversation will be nearly as exciting as it was with complicated combustion engines (turbochargers, overhead cams, etc).

      I am impressed with their handling review, this is a very heavy vehicle, only 21% lighter than the Tesla Model S (60), which is a full-sized sedan.

      1. Stimpy says:

        Model S is a full side sedan that unfortunately barely bests the Bolt in passenger space.

    3. Trev says:

      the Bolt is front wheel drive so everything is up there. Even though Tesla have a motor between the rear wheels, the front motor in the D models take up some of the space that their frunk offers. There’s no free lunch. Also, the Bolt is being built on the same production lines as other GM cars so it keeps tooling costs down if you install the Bolt motor the same way as gas engine.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        GM certainly did keep tooling costs down by outsourcing the entire powertrain, including battery pack, to LG Chem / LG Electronics. But that means GM has to pay LG a profit on each unit, and it also means GM isn’t developing its own in-house BEV tech.

        That may be a good short-term strategy to keep development costs down, but in the long term, GM needs to build its own BEV powertrains in-house, just as they make their own gas engines in-house, to keep costs down.

        1. theflew says:

          Does GM need to develop their own in-house battery tech? GM has the largest battery testing facility in the US. They evaluate what’s available and what will be available and pick the best for their needs. Tesla’s Gigafactory has a lot of risk and based on GM’s pack cost an unknown reward.

          GM got pack cost down by sourcing subsystems from the same supplier. Tesla is trying to do it by making their own batteries. GM’s plan only downfall is if LG Chem isn’t capable of of meeting potential demand.

  24. Warren says:

    OK. I was totally wrong about the pack size…60 kWh, not low fifties. Looks a lot like the Leaf pack layout. A 96s3p layout with 15 Ah+ cells.. The old Volt had 15.5 Ah cells, the new Volt has more Ah per cell, so I’d guess there is some in reserve.

    I wonder if Bob Lutz is smoking a cigar today? A real Motor City vs Silicon Valley SmackDown.

    I’d love for this to be my first Motown car in fifty years. Where do we get the window stickers of the kid peeing on the Tesla? 🙂

  25. David says:

    Big question now is distribution. Will it launch California only? When (if ever) will it roll out nationwide?

    Has GM made any announcements in this regard?

    1. bro1999 says:

      I’m guessing rollout will be similar to how the ’16 Volt rollout was SUPPOSED to go….until GM decided to make it CARB state only (with a couple of exceptions).

      CA first, followed shortly by the other CARB states, then everyone else a few months later.

    2. Phatcat73 says:

      i suspect too early to tell. If they can start production in June and ramp up on inventory prior to shipping to dealers in Q4, then they’ll be in great shape for a large rollout. however with anything new, delays/bottlenecks will occur.

      1. Josh says:

        At CES, Marry Barra said “in production by the end of the year”. Not at dealers by the end of the year, so my expectations will be some token deliveries in December (like 2010 and Volts) with the real action starting January/February 2017.

        Still impressive if they go from Auto Show concept to dealer lots in 2 years.

  26. Anthony says:

    So the batteries still come from S. Korea? That’s a surprise.

    1. kdawg says:

      I noticed that too. I wonder if there is a plan to bring those to Michigan. Can’t be cheap to ship 60kWh of batteries 1/2 around the planet.

      1. Anthony says:

        Agreed. I would think that no matter how cheap the labor costs are in SK vs Michigan, shipping them 8,000 miles in a climate controlled environment is pretty expensive.

        Maybe its a first-year thing. LG is being careful with risk, and if the Bolt sells in good quantities, it’ll purchase and install the machinery needed to make the cells and bring the manufacturing to the US.

        1. You don’t ship batteries in climate controlled rooms.

          Have you ever seen how Nissan Leaf, Kia Soul EV, Chevy Spark EV, Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV are shipped? They put them just together with any other car on the same freighter, with the battery installed, there is zero special handling.

        2. JeremyK says:

          I think you’re right about the “risk” thing. Based on what I’ve seen in the automotive world, this is likely a case of timing. LG had open capacity in Korea. If GM used batteries from Korea, they may have been able to pull ahead the launch by X months vs. waiting for production capacity to be built out in Michigan. It would make sense that if the Bolt sells well, that LG would move production to MI (at a substantial cost savings to GM)…but at launch, it’s all about risk management, especially with a high visibility vehicle like the Bolt. Best to source the battery from a seasoned battery plant, not one that is just firing up new production lines and rapidly adding capacity.

          1. Phr3d says:

            ” If GM used batteries from Korea, they may have been able to pull ahead the launch by X months vs. waiting for production capacity to be built out in Michigan”

            ayep, and as stated – unused capacity, container shipping, did all of this leverage the unheard of price of $145/kWh? LG can, upon success, expand MI to hell and gone. The first 30k units will be about credits and buzz, if it rockets like the Volt is apparently doing, LG’s further MI investment will be peanuts.

      2. Priusmaniac says:

        Well about 20$ per 435 Kg battery pack, so that’s no big deal.

  27. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    A 60 kWh battery pack!!

    Well, okay then! I had been expressing, rather firmly, my opinion that the Bolt would have a range significantly less than 200 miles, despite what GM has been saying. Clearly I was wrong.

    A admit to being astonished that GM is gonna put into the Bolt a battery pack with as big a capacity as a Model S60. I really thought they would use something significantly smaller.

    My hat is off to GM… and I guess I’ll have to eat it now. 😉

    GO GM!

    1. Alan says:

      And dogs can look up !

    2. bro1999 says:

      Good to see you’ve finally seen the light.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        I BELIEVE, brother! I BELIEVE!
        😉

        1. SparkEV says:

          PuPu, LOL! I said something like that few weeks after getting SparkEV. Before, I hoped for GM to fail so Tesla could get bigger. Now I root for both. Now that we have Bolt as almost certainty, go Tesla, beat GM!

        2. ModernMarvelFan says:

          Welcome to the “club”!

          I am glad that you can see the light.

    3. ClarksonCote says:

      Thanks for being humble enough to admit your mistaken assumption. The majority of the population would rather look foolish than to ever admit being wrong about something.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Thank you for your kind words.

        Nobody likes to admit they’re wrong, but refusing to learn from ones mistakes is being willfully ignorant. You can certainly see some of that behavior on the Internet, but I think most people have more sense.

    4. E says:

      When has GM ever promised range and not delivered?
      What was the basis of your disbelief?

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Seriously? People have such short memories, it seems.

        It’s not just GM. Every EV maker, and yes that certainly includes Tesla, exaggerates EV range, especially in the pre-production phase. Rule of thumb: As EVs approach production, the range goes down and the price goes up.

        In fact, GM actually being conservative about the range of the Volt 2.0 is the very first case I am aware of in which an EV maker was actually a bit conservative.

        But that doesn’t cause me, at least, to forget that GM first touted a 40 mile electric range for the Volt 1.0; then doubled down on that exaggeration with “up to 50 miles.”

        And have you really forgotten the facepalm-embarrassing “230 MPG” Volt ad campaign from GM?

        Here’s a photo, in case you did forget…

        http://www.automotiveaddicts.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/230mpg-chevy-volt.jpg

        1. ClarksonCote says:

          With the Gen1 Volt, I think part of it was how they messaged it. For example, in regular driving, many people do get 50 miles of range out of the Gen1 Volt in the summer.

          But it’s EPA ratings that are important for “proof” and they did fall short there by a couple miles.

          Thankfully, they seemed to learn the lesson for the Spark EV, the Gen 2 Volt, and now the Bolt. Under-promise and over-deliver is key, especially when the EPA rating (a largely meaningless metric) is reduced in conditions like winter driving.

          1. Josh says:

            35 mile AER (2011) vs. the promised 40 mile AER was a pretty big miss (13%).

            But GM definitely learned their lesson, we have seen it two time in a row now Volt 2.0 and Bolt.

            (BTW, I still can’t stand the similarities in the names)

  28. PureElectricPower says:

    Now Tesla has really big reason to hurry up with Model 3.

    1. Alan says:

      And Nissan with Leaf Gen 2 !

  29. Sommer says:

    What`s the name of the colour in the above pictures? The Bolt looks much better now than in silver grey.

  30. kubel says:

    I’m really looking forward to this car. Time to turn in my LEAF, burn some gas, and save some money driving my beater.

  31. Warren says:

    Almost half a ton lighter than a Tesla S 60. A liquid cooled pack 2.5 times bigger than the old Leaf pack, and only 50% heavier.

    1. AlphaEdge says:

      Yeah, I was a fan of the Leaf, but now it does not even warrant attention.

      Almost twice as powerful electric motor also!

      The next generation Leaf better have better thermal management than their current Leafs, or it’s reputation will suffer over the long run compared to the Bolt.

  32. kdawg says:

    The #1 traded in car for the Volt was the Prius. I think the #1 traded in car for the Bolt will be the Leaf.

    1. Brian says:

      You may be right, but I hope you are wrong. That would mean that the Bolt isn’t growing the EV market as much as competing for the same group of buyers.

      1. Warren says:

        I am very afraid he is right. This is the EV for middle America if there is ever to be one. My fear is that gas will be at a buck fifty when this car hits the street,and hybrids and EVs will be piling up on dealer lots like the oil in storage tanks in Oklahoma.

        1. Priusmaniac says:

          That won’t be the case in Europe where the oil price is only 30% of the gas price with the remaining 70% being a combination of taxes and VAT.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            But will GM offer the Bolt in Europe? If they are gonna make only 30,000 per year, and if they are gonna sell it in China, as seems likely, then between the North American and China markets, that will leave few if any Bolts for Europe.

            1. ClarksonCote says:

              Do you have any sources on the China assertion?

              I’ve seen you mention that before, but I haven’t seen it from anyone official. I also believe that GM can’t sell it in China without severe import tariffs, the likes of which usually require international automakers to develop cars jointly in China with another company to avoid them.

              So my bet would be that the Bolt will never be in China, but if you have info to the contrary I’d be very intrigued.

              1. Phr3d says:

                Reuters headline:

                “Nov 05, 2014 · General Motors Co (GM.N) and its Chinese joint ventures sold 291,371 vehicles in China in October,” etc.

                I think they have the tariff thing covered?

    2. SparkEV says:

      Leaf trade-in for Bolt may be largest because there are more Leaf on the road. But as percentage of total, I think i3 as i3 are more expensive and its drivers better afford to change cars. Unless BMW does something (longer range, lower price or?), i3 in its current form doesn’t make sense.

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        You are right the BMW i3, especially the one without the Rex is going to be under the most pressure. The i3 doesn’t have four proper doors, only seat four, is even smaller and now has lower range than the Bolt while having a higher price. The look of the i3 is also worse than the Bolt although on that the Leaf is not well off neither.

    3. jelloslug says:

      Are you trying to say the people actually purchased the Leaf?

  33. Dave S says:

    I’m excited that the specs show it has as much or slightly more passenger space than the Chevy Trax. Riding in our Volt is a pain for grown ups that have to sit in the back. My wife has already decided that buying something real is better than waiting for the M3.

  34. Benjamin says:

    This looks like a fantastic architecture and great specs. I’m very excited to see GM pick up the challenge to design a great EV.

    Here’s hoping that they do as good a job on the Bolt on build quality and reliability as they did on the Volt.

  35. SparkEV says:

    Bolt battery is over triple SparkEV, but the power isn’t even double, and its torque is less. It’s disppointing that it’ll be slower than comparably priced gas car like Subaru WRX ($27K, 5 sec 0-60). Bolt have to make excuses like Leaf, etc: “yes, it’s slower than gas cars and more expensive, but it’s EV”.

    http://www.caranddriver.com/subaru/wrx

    There was no such excuse with SparkEV (and Tesla P series). I think I’ll wait for Bolt 2.0 and hope that will be more like SparkEV and Tesla P: quicker than comparable gas cars.

    1. kdawg says:

      LOL, do we need to list all the ways the comparably priced Subaru is a disappointment compared to a Bolt?

      1. SparkEV says:

        Imagine if Bolt is not EV, but a gas car. Is it compelling? For me, the answer is no. Performance falls short for comparably sized / priced gas cars. Then the excuse is that it’s EV.

        If Tesla P90D is gas car, is it compelling? Absolutely! Being EV is just bonus. Same with SparkEV; no gas car in its price range is as quick (or smooth or quiet). I’m hoping Bolt 2.0 will be more like Tesla/SparkEV in performance than Leaf/i3.

        1. bro1999 says:

          Ok, name some “normal” gas hatchbacks/compact cars that can do 0-30 in 2.9 seconds and 0-60 in under 7 that aren’t Sport or “R” versions of the standard model. AND have the slew of connectivity features the Bolt EV offers.

          1. SparkEV says:

            Go look at Subaru WRX as an example. I even provide a link. Then there’s Camaro, etc. etc. etc.

            1. bro1999 says:

              You’re comparing the Bolt to a Camaro? Are you kidding me? You’ve lost any credibility you had. Lol

            2. bro1999 says:

              You’re just coming off as a Spark EV owner that’s bitter a bigger, better version of the Spark is coming out.

              Spark EV was simply a guinea pig to test Volt/Bolt parts in the real world. Fine little car, but nothing more than a compliance/test vehicle.

              1. SparkEV says:

                SparkEV is Chevy, why would I be bitter? But the pedestrian performance of Bolt compared to similarly priced gas cars isn’t compelling enough for me to fork over $30K ($12K more than SparkEV).

                I hope my “diss” of Bolt 1.0 makes Chevy (and Tesla) try harder. How about Bolt 2.0 AWD with 340 HP by putting SparkEV motor in the rear as $2000 option? That’ll compete against $36K cars in performance AND cheaper, pretty compelling car, EV or not.

                1. I’d like to see an AWD version, and I think the chassis leaves just enough room behind the batteries to facilitate that. Here’s to hoping!

          2. Michael Parker says:

            I think his point is that the Bolt doesn’t have any compelling offerings over similarly priced ICE cars EXCEPT being an EV (and therefore low running costs).
            The Bolt performs closer to a VW Golf which does 0-60 in 6.8 seconds. and costs $21,000.
            Bump your budget the $37,500 base price and you are competing with the Audi A3 or A4, BMW 2/3-series. Right, wrong, or indifferent, to your average consumer (who is not an EV enthusiast), it will be tough to sell someone on a tarted up econo-box when the same up-front money will buy them a luxury sedan. To me, that’s the real barrier EVs face to become mass-market.
            That’s the amazing thing about the Model S – it pretty much competes with similarly priced ICE vehicles in all regards.

            1. SparkEV says:

              Thank you Michael Parker! Sometimes, some commenters here seem to be drunk on EV flavoraid.

              Tesla P are certainly performers, but even S benefits from revolutionary tech like self driving mode, which no gas car offers.

              Unlike Tesla self driving mode, Bolt “connectivity” is meh at best; I’ve used On-Star and LTE just few minutes in the beginning to test it, then never used it again. I have phone for all that without having to worry about second account that does the same.

              1. DonC says:

                You should do a little homework on autonomous cars. The situation is not what you’re imagining it to be.

              2. Michael Parker says:

                That’s not all to say that the Bolt can’t or won’t be a great car for some people. If people can take the compromises because they care about electrification I’m sure they will be served very well by the car.

                My i3 for instance- I know I can get a faster, more luxurious, roomier, etc (I.e. better)car for the same price. But I sleep well at night because of what the vehicle stands for. I am willing to accept the compromises that EVs currently require because I care enough about the efficiency and sustainability.

                However to my point, if one were in my price range, I wouldn’t feel like I was compromising with a Model S. That’s the magic of Tesla that I hope they bring with the Model 3.

                1. SparkEV says:

                  I’m hoping Tesla and other EV makers are also seeing Bolt performance gripes and make future EV better: kick butt of all comparably priced gas cars. After SparkEV, I don’t want to make excuses for EV’s lack of performance against comparably priced cars.

            2. DonC says:

              Digital cameras don’t have any advantages over film cameras other than they use memory cards rather than film. Plus they’re 10X more expensive.

              EVs offer many advantages over ICE vehicles. No point in looking at one number and saying they are comparable.

              1. Michael Parker says:

                Well, as a photographer I tend to disagree. Lol. There is literally no disadvantage to digital at this point.
                The argument being made here would be analogous to digital v film in the late 90’s. Performance of digital couldn’t compare to film (with high end digital cameras with not even or barely 1 megapixel and terrible low light performance), but the convenience of being able to preview your images and not having to purchase film was a great feature.
                Nowadays digital sensors are so advanced that there is almost no reason to shoot film except for nostalgia. THAT’S where we need to be with EVs if we want mass adoption. Spec for spec, the EV needs to meet or beat it’s ICE competitor (price-wise).

                1. Phr3d says:

                  disagree with 90’s, it was ’05 before a dSLR was on par, and ’10 before they ‘easily’ exceeded film, but your point is still valid.

            3. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              Bolt is supposed to have about the same volume as Model S for passengers (but less for baggage), and more headspace. I don’t understand that obsession with 0-60 times. Who cares really? You may get Camaro that does it in 4 sec or so for half the price of Model S. It is not needed in street legal driving, even if some people make tons of excuses to justify their “need” for it.

            4. kdawg says:

              I stopped reading at “tarted up econo-box”. If you think the driving experience of an EV isn’t better than a gasser, I don’t know what to tell you.

            5. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              Michael Parker said:

              “I think his point is that the Bolt doesn’t have any compelling offerings over similarly priced ICE cars EXCEPT being an EV (and therefore low running costs).”

              Seriously, you think the only advantage a BEV offers over a gasmobile is lower operating cost? I take it you’ve never driven a BEV!

              Let’s review the other advantages:

              1. Much faster acceleration in the all-important 0-30 speeds

              2. Convenience of charging up at home

              3. No noxious and smelly exhaust

              4. Whisper-quiet ride better than even a luxury gasmobile

              5. Silky smooth ride better than even a luxury gasmobile

              6. No oil making the areas under the hood, inside the trunk, and underneath the car, filthy and caked with dirt over time

              7. For those who care about Planet Earth, the BEV emits no pollution or CO2 in operation

              * * * * *

              Within two generations, kids will be amazed that people ever put up with riding in noxious, smelly, filthy, pollution-spewing, noisy gasmobiles.

              1. Michael Parker says:

                I actually own a BEV – so I know full well the awesomeness of driving an EV.
                Look – I realize we commenters on an EV site love and appreciate EVs, but I’m speaking about your average consumer – they are much less likely to even consider a BEV until it’s kit is comparable to other cars in its price range (this is the barrier to mass-market). At a 37,500 base price (not factoring in the tax credit, which some people can’t take full advantage of), you can buy a BMW 328i. On paper, spec for spec the 328 is a better car than the Bolt. The average consumer will see 0-60 of 6.9 vs 5.6, Torsion Rear Suspension vs IRS, Cloth (presumably on base) vs leather, range of 200 vs 450 miles, FWD vs RWD, even Chevy vs BMW (I know, I know, but it means a lot to some people). That’s a long list of standard features that are in all respects very important to car buyers. I’m not saying the Bolt isn’t a huge step forward, but it is still a far cry from _the_ car that pushes EVs into mass-market.

                1. kdawg says:

                  Need to get butts in seats. Best way to learn is to experience it first hand.

                  1. Phr3d says:

                    +1,
                    and like it or Not (and I know there is no end-all way of saying this) the car’s looks should probably Not be polarizing in the extreme, and its comforts should be.. uhmm.. Comforting (note the universal cry about beloved Tesla not being comforting Enough for a car of that price).
                    I humbly offer that -if this shape/style appeals to you- GM has hit every BUTTon, lol. Certainly millenials are gonna go look at one.

        2. ModernMarvelFan says:

          “Performance falls short for comparably sized / priced gas cars”

          I don’t know too many 4 door cars with this kind of performance at $30K (after incentives).

          Maybe WRX is the closest one. Or one of those Ford Fiesta/Ford Focus ST or Golf GTI…

          They are certainly far less efficient.

          1. SparkEV says:

            You point out few that do perform better than Bolt and cheaper. What I had hoped for was Bolt kicking butt of ALL comparably priced cars, like SparkEV did.

            One could say Chevy set my expectation too high, but then Tesla is also kicking butt of all gas cars of similar price, so I don’t think my expectation is unreasonable.

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              First of all, I would say that Spark EV kicked butt in similar ICE price class. It is a very good one.

              Bolt sounds like faster than a Spark EV.

              Also, Tesla doesn’t kick all butts in its price range either.

              P90D does near its price range. But the Base 70D certainly doesn’t.

              Plenty of similar AMGs, RS7s, Porsches and CTS-V can easily beat the similar priced low end Model S without trying too hard.

              1. SparkEV says:

                Bolt is quicker than SparkEV. If not, it’d be an embarrassment for Chevy.

                What I meant about Tesla performance was P, not base S.

                But to make excuses for base Tesla, they also have self driving mode which is far more useful than LTE connectivity; I mean, most of us have phones that have LTE, but no other car offers self driving mode, even at infancy that it is now.

                I’m hoping Model 3 or Bolt 2.0 (or Bolt AWD with SparkEV motor in back for 340HP?) will address my gripes: make it quicker than all gas cars in price range without making excuses for poorer performance that it’s EV.

                1. ModernMarvelFan says:

                  I agree with your point that if they sell on performance, then it won’t be nearly as price sensitive as Tesla has shown.

                  But the truth is that base Tesla Model S isn’t all that competitive or desirable, thus the lower sales numbers relative to its high performance cousins. But plenty of people want the minimum 200 miles range for EVs, but can’t afford the Tesla price. So, it is unique in that nature.

                  As far as “competitive” with similar priced ICE go, it doesn’t have to for the price class it is in since it is the “ONLY” affordable 200 miles EV in the game right now.

                  Once that is changed, then it would have to be more competitive in order to gain larger market share from the mainstream buyers.

                  1. SparkEV says:

                    Hence my hoping for Model3 or Bolt 2.0 to be better performing.

        3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          SparkEV said:

          “Performance falls short for comparably sized / priced gas cars. Then the excuse is that it’s EV.”

          I suppose it depends on what the buyer is looking for. The Leaf has a 0-60 time of over 10 seconds, and globally it’s the best-selling highway-capable plug-in EV. The Bolt is more than 3 seconds faster, so I doubt a sub-7-second 0-60 time is going to put off many buyers.

          Since the Bolt is a larger and heavier car than the Spark EV, it’s hardly surprising that the 0-60 time is longer.

          Larger car + fast acceleration = lots of waste heat in the battery pack and inverter. Even if GM could have made the car faster at the same cost, it may well have been a good choice to limit acceleration. That may well lead to better battery life, and possibly more trouble-free inverters, too.

          Those who want something faster can wait for a Model ≡, or even a Performance edition of the Model ≡ if they want to pay the premium.

          1. SparkEV says:

            I’m hoping Tesla is paying attention to performance aspect of Bolt. I really really really hope Model3 will kick butt and erase any doubt that affordable EV is competitive at all levels.

            Leaf being best selling EV means little in overall vehicle sales. Bolt (or Model3) must do better. 10 sec 0-60 for $30K car is unacceptable, at least for me, probably for most people as well. 7 sec is ok, but not “wow”. From SparkEV experience, I had hoped for Bolt to “wow”, not just “ok”

            As for 0-60 power, that’s only for brief time, not sustained, so any additional heat is minimal, and it wouldn’t affect the range all that much.

            1. Priusmaniac says:

              I am more surprised by the low 145 Km/h top speed which could be a little low on the autobahn but the 7 second seems more than fair enough.

              1. SparkEV says:

                Bolt is to be sold in NA, so autobahn isn’t likely. But 0-60 almost every day, and that’s what most NA drivers look for performance.

          2. kdawg says:

            Bolt EV 0-60 = “under 7 seconds”
            Spark EV 0-60 = 7.9 seconds

            So the Bolt is 1 second FASTER than the Spark EV. It has a 200hp motor.

            1. SparkEV says:

              Bolt is $12K more. That’ll buy lots of big macs. Far more important is comparably priced cars, gas or EV. In that, Bolt drops to bottom (see WRX link above) whereas SparkEV is on top by wide margin.

              1. MTN Ranger says:

                This is a total non-issue. I enjoyed my Volt with 9 second 0-60, PEVs feel much faster due to instant torque than what the 0-60 numbers indicate.

                The main factors that need to be addressed are charging speed, long distance charging availabilty, price. 0-60 falls way down the list.

                1. SparkEV says:

                  Underperforming is fine for some EV enthusiasts (minus SparkEV and Tesla P). But for mass market, over priced, underpeforming compact car just won’t cut it. As I wrote before, if Bolt is gas car, would you buy it for $30K? That’s how mass market judge cars, not just because it’s EV.

                  1. kdawg says:

                    I wouldn’t buy a gas car period.

                  2. mr. M says:

                    I agree with you partially. Price is very important, performance not! Most cars today have around 0-60 mph times around 10s but most cars cost way less than 30.000$. I read somewhere that the average new buyer buys for 35.000$ in the US. If half of cars cost pan 50.000$ the other half need to cost sub 20.000$, but there are cars sold way higher than 50.000$ also. Name me a no conpromise EV (regarding range) for 20.000$ without incentive. This is where EVs need to head! Because the incentive will go away.

                    I would expect the average EV at the moment to sell for 50.000$ with most of the cars sold in the US being teslas at the moment and the Leaf and Volt for pan 30.000$ being not cheap in my eyes too…

              2. Mike says:

                A WRX will go 0-60 in 4.8sec when driven in a completely abusive manner – rev it to 6700rpm and drop the clutch. When driven like a normal person, the linked C&D article came up with 6.3 seconds to go from 5-60, still revving it to redline and shifting hard. In the real world, even your SparkEV will effortlessly walk away from any sanely driven WRX.

                How can you own an EV and not acknowledge this?

                1. SparkEV says:

                  You may see it as abusive, but it was a method sanctioned by Subaru. Even at 6.3 sec would be quicker than Bolt. Just look at the horsepower for comparable cars in the C&D WRX article. Most are well above 200HP, and Bolt would be scraping the bottom.

                  I gripe about Bolt price/performance precisely because I drive SparkEV. If there was no SparkEV, my expectation would be that EV _must_ be high priced and underpowered (ie, Leaf, eGolf). I expected better from Chevy with Bolt as successor (or big brother) to SparkEV. It should be cheaper and better performing than comparably priced cars, gas or otherwise, not the sorry excuse for being an EV like Leaf is/was.

                  1. ModernMarvelFan says:

                    I guess you would have to wait for the Bolt SS or Bolt (lightning version?) =)

              3. kdawg says:

                Bolt is 12K more but will be available to everyone, not just a compliance vehicle, and it will hold a lot more people, and will have a lot more features, and …..

                1. SparkEV says:

                  Again, you completely miss the point. I’m not arguing SparkEV vs Bolt, but against comparably priced cars. $30K for 200HP is scraping the bottom when $22K Ford Fiesta ST is 200HP. With SparkEV, you pay less for more power. With Bolt, you pay more for less power.

    2. taser54 says:

      Really? You’re going with that? What’s your excuse for being slower than the Bolt in a smaller, lighter vehicle?

      1. SparkEV says:

        You’re not reading “comparably priced”. With SparkEV and Tesla P, they perform better than any car in their price range, not so with Bolt.

        1. kdawg says:

          The Bolt provides more gas-free driving than any car in its price range.

    3. krona2k says:

      Come on! That kind of performance for that money with extremely low running costs is impressive by any reasonable consideration.

      1. SparkEV says:

        Bolt isn’t bad, but not as good as I had hoped. I guess I’m spoiled by SparkEV and Tesla P performances.

        1. Priusmaniac says:

          Perhaps you should remember that the Model S 60 KWh has 5.9 seconds from 0 to 60 mph, so the Bolt in only 1 second slower.

          1. SparkEV says:

            I’m more referring to Tesla P as I mention often in this thread.

            Even so, 1 second is HUGE. If Bolt had 5.9 sec, it would be in upper-middle of the pack in $30K compact car. But 200HP puts it at near bottom or the very bottom.

  36. John says:

    Well, this pretty much settles it for me. Not going anywhere a 2016 Leaf when our 2013 lease is up in June. I’ll wait several months for the Bolt and be down a car for that time instead, and do so happily. I think it will be worth it. Big time kudos to Chevrolet for this, and that’s from someone who hasn’t bought an American car in over 15 years.

    1. John says:

      anywhere near

  37. krona2k says:

    Oh yes! Nissan better be making LEAF 2.0 have similar performance. Will it be Bolt, LEAF or Model 3 for me when the time comes?

  38. Tesla stock already running down more and more. Tesla will not be able to compete with the decades of experience in efficient manufacturing of the traditional car brands.

    1. Bob says:

      Is that why GM is buying the batteries and electric motors for the Bolt from LG – due to GM’s “decades of experience”?

      1. JeremyK says:

        GM’s knowledge of batteries and motors is deep. Read this and get educated:
        http://www.wired.com/2016/01/gm-electric-car-chevy-bolt-mary-barra/

      2. Trollnonymous says:

        Don’t forget also that LG had a big part in the design of the Bolt despite “decades of experience”……lol

        1. kdawg says:

          GM’s design. LG did the build.

    2. Koenigsegg says:

      Trollololololololol

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Counter-Strike Cat trolled:

      “Tesla stock already running down more and more.”

      GM stock price is down lately, too. The entire stock market is down, mainly due to worries about economic downturn in China.

      No doubt you’ll imagine some way to blame all of that all on Tesla, you short-selling troll.

  39. EngravEER says:

    Any word on how GM is going to heat and cool the cabin on this puppy? Love our Volt, but compared to the heat pump on our Leaf SV, the resistive heater on the Volt is a real range killer 🙁 Hoping for something other than resistive heating in the Bolt!

    1. I hope they have all the seats heated, and I really hope they have a direct heating windshield defroster. And hopefully the steering wheel is also heated – with all of those things, we would almost never need a cabin heater, anyway.

      1. Karl says:

        Agree on all three.

        Add to that the ability to turn on and off climate control features remotely via internet connectivity (not dependent on specific carrier cell connectivity like leaf).

      2. Priusmaniac says:

        On the windshield defroster, I would really like that electric cars start to make use of the much higher available electric power compared to gas cars and increase the resistor power to at least 10 KW in order to enjoy instant defrost, something that is is simply impossible with a gas car. Ev manufacturers should not stick to standard windshield defroster powers and thereby waist an obvious potential instant defrost advantage they can offer as an extra to their customers.

  40. Ahldor says:

    Judging from the cutaway picture of the Bolt, GM really seems to like the looks of cumbustion engines.. 😀

  41. CDAVIS says:

    Chevy Volt vs. Tesla Model 3 + DC Supercharger Network
    —————-

    Who Wins?

    1. CDAVIS says:

      Or…

      Chevy Bolt vs. Tesla Model 3 + DC Supercharger Network
      —————-

      Who Wins?

      1. Stimpy says:

        How about:

        Chevy Bolt + $15k extra in your pocket VS Tesla Model 3 with mid-level options and DC Supercharger network?

        1. Koenigsegg says:

          Model 3.

          If you have eyes you can see the Bolt. And it is not a car I ever dreamed of driving.

          Go ahead and save $15k by driving a dorky looking car with no style 🙂

          1. ModernMarvelFan says:

            “a dorky looking car with no style”

            One man’s dorky looking car with no style might be another man’s dream machine.

            Prius sold in the millions by being a “dorky looking car with no style” in my opinion.

            1. Priusmaniac says:

              Well my old vintage Prius 2 is still ok after 250000 km, still has 400 miles range and tops at 182 Km/h on the autobahn. It is 4,45 m long instead of only 4,16 m, that is 29 cm more, and it is a quiet nice tech look. Ok after 12 years some orange lights stay on, when I open the trunk I have to take care not to have the handle in my hand and it is now completely outdated but I consider it like an old veteran of the battle towards vehicle electrification. That’s perhaps I still like its look although purely on look I quiet like the Ford Fusion.

          2. scott franco says:

            I have been told I am dorky looking and have no style, so its a match!

          3. kdawg says:

            Tesla’s cars make me yawn. I hope the Model 3 has more “dork” to it then.

  42. Koenigsegg says:

    If only it looked good

  43. Warren says:

    Personally, I think GM’s plan to be able to build 30K a year is more than enough. Tesla imagining they will sell 500K a year is total fantasy, unless half the Greenland ice sheet breaks off and floats past Washington, DC.

    1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      Tesla sold 45k Model S last year, and their cars start at _$70k_.

      BMW sells 500k 3 series and 250k 5 series worldwide.

      The US luxury vehicle market alone is 1M and that’s with vehicles that cost you _more_ to run than a mainstream ICEV. Then there’s the near luxury segment with pricing over $30k that sell a good chunk.

      Now consider that even a relatively small BEV like the Bolt can have ample passenger and cargo room, and that many developed countries have punitive gasoline taxes that make running on electricity much cheaper than running on gas.

      Now consider that 30k/year is only 2.5k per month.

      500k is not fantasy, and 30k/year is very conservative for the Bolt.

      1. Warren says:

        I only wish that were true. I talk to average Americans all the time about EVs. Most have heard of Tesla, but aren’t sure what they make. The folks buying Teslas in record numbers are rich, tech folks who need to have the very latest supercar to be seen in public. Average Americans think electric cars are goofy golf carts for tree hugging liberals, Musk’s internet millionaire halo is a liability amongst these folks.

        1. Warren says:

          Average Americans…folks who buy Chevys… bought 27,095 GM “green” cars in total in 2015.

          http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/07/december-2015-green-car-sales/

          Just because we EV geeks think the Bolt is a great car, don’t imagine Joe Sixpack gives a damn.

          1. Nichen says:

            Well let’s change perceptions and create demand for Joe sixpack 🙂

            1. Warren says:

              I’ll tell you what vehicle GM will easily sell 30K of next year.

              http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/09/autos/gm-chinese-built-car/

          2. SparkEV says:

            But consider that Bolt will take sales away from practically all existing mid level EV of $25K to $65K (ie, non Tesla), probably even some Prius drivers. Then 30K Bolt/yr may not be nearly enough.

            1. Priusmaniac says:

              “even some Prius drivers”

              Well that could be but in my case I will be waiting march to see the Model 3 and accordingly I could still shop for a CPO 45-50 k$ Model S as well. I won’t buy a short ev range plug-in Prius but an i5 rex could also be interesting.

              1. SparkEV says:

                Locutus to Prius drivers:

                I am Bolt of Chevy. Resistance is futile. From this day forward, you will drive EV.

    2. TomArt says:

      I do not necessarily agree with you, but the imagery is priceless!!!

      “…unless half the Greenland ice sheet breaks off and floats past Washington, DC.”

      LMAO

  44. MTN Ranger says:

    I’m surprised nobody has mentioned weight, especially compared to the light weight champion, the BMW i3.

    BMW i3 2,800 lbs, 21.6kWH
    battery weighs 507 lbs
    Body weighs 2,293 lbs

    Chevrolet Bolt 3,580 lbs
    60kWh battery weighs 960 lbs
    Body weighs 2,620 lbs

    Only an additional 327 lbs with much more interior room (94.4cf vs 83cf) and luggage space (16.9cf vs 15cf).

    1. Good points – when steel is designed right, it can be kept light.

      1. Stimpy says:

        I don’t have a link but I thought I read read the Bolt body was aluminum and there are even some CF parts on there.

  45. Interesting – it looks like the half shafts are concentric with the motor shaft. That means the motor shaft is actually a tube, and one of the half shafts passes through the center of the tube. This also means the half shafts are equal length.

    1. jelloslug says:

      That will help cut down on torque steer.

    2. Zoomit says:

      Yep, just like in the Spark EV. Getting that power to the ground is the challenge with the FWD layout. The TM3 will have a real advantage here.

  46. Speculawyer says:

    60KWH! Great Scott!

    I expected something below 50KWH.

    If someone builds something with better aerodynamics, they should be able to hit 250+ miles range with a battery that big.

    1. SparkEV says:

      Some crazy guy drove almost 140 miles on SparkEV. I wonder if there’ll be someone crazy enough to test the max range on Bolt.

      1. TomArt says:

        “If”?!?

      2. scott franco says:

        Where did he find a road that goes downhill for 140 miles?

        1. SparkEV says:

          Flat road, 24 MPH, 6+ hours. I think it’s digital trends web site, and Insideevs had an article on it as well.

    2. Ambulator says:

      “If someone builds something with better aerodynamics, they should be able to hit 250+ miles range with a battery that big.”

      Yeah, but I’d rather have a practical car. With larger batteries you can go that way.

  47. scott franco says:

    I guessed:

    40kW battery: Wrong and glad to be so.
    50kW charger max: Right and sad to be so.

    Where are the active thermal details?

    1. HVACman says:

      GM specs list battery TMS “coolant” capacity, so that means glycol-based cooling. Zooming in on high res illustrations of the pack strongly suggest the glycol coolant circulates through the pack bottom plate and that there are passive thermal fins between each cell, connected to the cooled bottom plate.

      Note that GM highlighted the new Bolt cell chemistry, saying it works well “hot”, allowing for a smaller active cooling system. This gybes with the bottom-plate cooling concept, which is more compact, efficient, lighter,and less expensive than the active thermal inter-cell plate concept used in the Volt.

  48. Nichen says:

    The specs are very very impressive indeed. I would guess the Bolt has an average max range of about 215-220 miles per charge. And that makes it a true gamechanger.

  49. MDEV says:

    This impressive specifications deserve a red of rapid chargers from GM. If they are seriously thinking in a killer product this is the next step.

    1. TomArt says:

      Exactly – another place where Tesla is still ahead.

    2. scott franco says:

      I’m guessing that GM realized that even if they introduced something like 100kW CCS chargers, they would still have a lot of ground to make up on having a “red” or charger network.

  50. Adam says:

    Looks good, onboard charger of 7.2kW seems pretty weak for s 60kWh battery pack, should have at least 11kW.

    And under no circumstances should DC Fast charge be optional on car with a battery of this size.

    Even with DC, it’s not going to be anything than city car unless the charge rate with CCS can be increased to 100kW and there are RELIABLE charge networks on rural highways.

    It’s basically the perfect city EV, but missing the critical elements that make a Tesla great. We shall see in March, but I still expect the M3 to be great, have RWD, a frunk and an already known good long distance charge network,

    1. Priusmaniac says:

      There is a good chance that the Bolt will appear as a first draft compared to the Model 3 when that one is presented with some more length for a real trunk, 135 KW supercharger capability, 180 Km/h top speed, 5 second from 0 to 60 mph, 11 or 22 KW on board charger, 200 + miles of range and of course a great and appealing looking car.

      1. SparkEV says:

        “5 second from 0 to 60 mph”

        I’m drooling… That’s the $30K EV I’d trade in my SparkEV for.

  51. Jonathan says:

    Tesla better blow my socks off with the Model 3 unveiling! Because if I have to plop down thousands of dollars and wait an extra 12mo for a Model 3, it better be much more impressive than this. Frankly, I’m not sure it can be much better or different because if it is, it will likely cannibalize the current Model S market. Why would you pay $70K for a base Model S when you can get a Model 3 with similar specs.

    1. SparkEV says:

      How about 340 HP AWD for Model 3? If Chevy also stuck SparkEV motor in the back, that’s pretty much what it could’ve been. 200 HP for Bolt is lacking, and Tesla could do lots of things to do better: power, self driving mode, supercharger, aerodynamics, etc. etc.

      1. ModernMarvelFan says:

        at the same $37K price? I doubt it.

        I am sure the $55K version will. But I don’t think the sub $40K version will.

        1. SparkEV says:

          How much would it have cost Chevy to put SparkEV motor at rear for AWD? Maybe $3K extra (2K for motor, 1K for controller)? I think it’s doable. I hope it will be done.

          1. ModernMarvelFan says:

            It is not just the motors.

            Battery also matters. Even in the Tesla S60, the power is limited by the battery.

            Adding another 100HP motor would do wonder for the power rating, but it will easily add $4K to $5K cost to the car. In addition, I am NOT sure if the 60kWh battery can “sustain” that type of discharging rate without getting overheated.

            1. SparkEV says:

              0-60 power is not sustained, but burst. Besides, SparkEV at 19kWh is good for 130 HP. Linearly scaled, 60kWh should be good for about 400 HP. Now THAT (400 HP AWD Bolt) for $4K more would kick butt of all cars in price range, including WRX STi ($36K). Maybe that’s much, but even 330 HP would be competitive, though may not the very top.

              I hope Tesla Model 3 does better.

    2. PVH says:

      It is mission impossible for a small car maker to beat a GM or GM equivalent on prices. If specs are better and prices similar, they will be strings attached.

    3. Someone out there says:

      If the analysis of the model 3 on the site Seeking Alpha is anything near reality the model 3 will be awesome!
      http://seekingalpha.com/article/3258855-will-teslas-model-3-compete

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        Great link. Thanks for posting.

        I agree on almost all they say with only a doubt on the battery module 10 which is not allowing flat back floor surface.
        Good reading. I liked it.

  52. EVdude says:

    Your move Nissan.
    a huge marketing push behind their 30kwh LEAF?
    Ford and VW patting themselves on their back with their 100 mile models?
    This will change everything, suddenly everyone else will need 200 miles range or a MUCH lower price to compete. I would imagine upping the range would be cheaper than slashing the price by the required 10k…

    1. TomArt says:

      Agreed! GM has just done to the mass market segment what Tesla did to the sports car and luxury segments.

  53. Bill Howland says:

    HAHAHA!

    Nailed it spot on !!!

    While Inside evs was saying, “6.6 kw” then later, “at least 6.6 kw”, then later “7.7 kw”, I reported weeks ago my source said

    7.2 kw , which is exactly what it is!!!

    My Source is the Best!!

    (Assuming that the charger meets Euro standards of > 0,99 PF, this means the charger will take full power at only 225 volts.

    So this means charge times will not be significantly lengthened at either 200 or 210 volt public charging spots.

  54. Bill Howland says:

    And it means if you have 240 volts at your house, you can charge your bolt full power with a cheap or existing 30 amp evse, like that cheap , ugly $400 GE (new) (Hammond) Durastation.

    1. MTN Ranger says:

      This is a good $400 choice too: http://www.metroplugin.com/shop/eaton-level-2/

      1. Bill Howland says:

        Great find MTM RANGER if u can get it at this price..

        Last time I checked the big box stores, they wanted over double this for the 30 amp model. 25 foot cord also!

  55. Roy LeMeur says:

    “Interviews with EV enthusiasts indicated their desire for one pedal driving capability on the Bolt EV. One pedal operation boosts the thrill and uniqueness of EV driving,” Tavel said.

    The irony is rich with this being that in 1990 when AC drive pioneer Alan Cocconi was helping GM develop the prototype/concept vehicle of the EV-1 with the really dumb name “Impact”, he had the one-pedal driving with regen well-integrated even way back then. The GM suits drove the car and liked that feature but insisted that the public wouldn’t like it and/or would be too stupid to understand it. The feature was removed from the final design for this reason.

    Now… virtually all factory produced AC drive vehicles do this to some extent and everyone loves it once they have tried it.

    1. Warren says:

      We didn’t buy the BMW i3 Rex because it was too expensive, but what really ended our interest was the one pedal regen. Not that it had it, but that you didn’t have the option of not having it. My wife absolutely hated it.

    2. Ambulator says:

      I’ve tried driving my Volt in low extensively, and I don’t like it. It’s ok in heavy traffic, but not on the open road.

      1. Warren says:

        Exactly!

  56. Bill Howland says:

    Disques doesn’t like me today, keeps erasing my typing.

    To sum up, I can’t believe the VALUE this car represents for effectively, under $30,000.

    GM just keeps outdoing themselves. No other company has such a huge performer remotely ready for sale at double the price. I want one.

    1. Priusmaniac says:

      The price will effectively depend on where you live, 30000$, 37500$ or even 37500€ which is 40672 $.

      1. ClarksonCote says:

        The same is true for any car with a plug today. What is the point?

        Bill’s statement was in context of the US, and in the US, he is correct that the price will effectively be $30,000, for those that have $7500 or more in annual tax liability.

        1. ClarksonCote says:

          In fact, in many states it will be less than $30,000

          1. Karl says:

            For example, in Colorado, the Bolt would also receive the maximum $6000 credit, bringing it to $24k.

  57. Tesla Compare says:

    Can I ask a serious question? Why is there all that stuff in the front? It almost looks more complex than an ice car.

    Whenever we see Tesla cutaways there is just the battery skateboard, motor in the back, and some suspension stuff in the front. Super simple. Is there more to a Tesla than that that is just being hidden in all those pictures?

    1. Bone says:

      Heating / cooling, power steering, etc. I guess Tesla cutaway drawings are simplified. There is no way to make realistic comparison between the two without stripping down actual cars.

      1. Mike says:

        Exactly right. A Tesla has all that stuff too but they like to show the “skateboard” with only a motor/inverter package, battery, and suspension.

  58. Alex says:

    All forget Nissan present the Nissan IDS and Ghosn said it has a 60 kWh battery without batting an eyelash. In fact Ghosn know all about Bolt since 2014, and the Leaf 2 will be sold in Japan, China, Europe and US, not only US and limited Europe.
    People looked the film “revenge of electric” cars know Ghosn will fight back!
    Before first Bolt will go to customers Ghosn will present the Leaf 2 with 100 kW charging (not 50 like GM), wirless charging, autopilot features.
    Only question is can the Leaf compete with 200 HP, with narrow tires like the IDS its easy to beat Bolts range but it will have problmes to bring the grip on the street.

    1. kubel says:

      If the pack weighs close to what the Bolt weighs, they can’t get away with using the same 107HP motor to move the car. I’m thinking they will go with 150HP.

      1. ALex says:

        The max. output of 24 kWh battery was 90 kW, perhaps the motor could do more. But i will be hard for Nissan because they will sell two versions, a cheaper 40-45 kWh and 60 kWh. Problem will they take two different engines or one compromiss with 150 HP for both.

  59. Bill Howland says:

    Well, the BOLT as is will have superior range for a BEV compared to anything in its price class. Not bad for an EPA rated “Mid SIZED Station Wagon”.

    I’m unsure whether the CCS fast charging facility will be standard, or, optional as it is in the plain-jane-trim-levels-Leafs. If they want thousands for it, I’m not ordering the option. I think on the Leaf – 6.6 kw over 3.6 is a $1580 (or more) option, and to me its just not worth the added expense. But if CCS is Standard on all trim levels, then 50 kw charge rate to me is more than adequate.

    The thing I want is the 220 mile range (I had thought it was rated at 203, but many seem to think here it will easily do much better than that).

    That means I can take a 350 mile round trip ‘mini-vacation’, charge up for around 5 to 6 hours at a public spot (Level 2), and safely make it back home.

    1. Lou says:

      Bill: I was initially a little disappointed to hear that the Bolt will come with CCS as an “option”. Seemed to me at the time that it should be standard. After thinking about it, I realized that there are very few times when I would “need” to QC a 220 mile EV. In fact, taking the Bolt on vacation the Jersey shore would be challenging more for trunk space than range issues. 4 adults would certainly be comfortable but that rear storage space is not great if car has 4 people in it.

      As you mentioned about charging, I could spend a few hours at a public charging station and get 75 miles in less than 3 hours. If I were to travel from my home outside Philly to the Buffalo area(eg), though, I’d feel a lot better if I could QC along the way.

  60. mr. M says:

    Took me 2.5 days to read all the comments. Interesting thoughts everyone 🙂

    1. offib says:

      Sorry for not making an input. I tend to avoid the busy parts. I don’t even know if I get replies or not!

  61. Terry says:

    There are at of EV naysayers like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. They are continually for polluting petrol and big oil and spout stupid comments like Palin does about drilling. However they cannot explain why more EVs keep coming with gas prices so low. Our gas price hear in smalltown MO 1.27.
    An EV should be cheaper to make than a gas vehicle. We are very good at making electric motors. An electric motor should be less expensive than all the moving parts of gas engines. There is also no regulations on EVs except safety. These are some of the reasons why EVs will become more and more popular even if gas prices stay low. Also EVS may prove more reliable in longevity we have only had 4 to 5yrs of EVs. Hybrids like prius do not count. Hybrids like prius are a gas engine with a big electric starter that runs on electricity for a few miles at low speed no highway speed.