Lease A Chevrolet Bolt For Just $309 Per Month, Nothing Down In California

2 months ago by Jay Cole 106

Chevrolet Bolt EV MSRP from $37,495...but leasing available from $309/month* (including CVRP rebate)

Chevrolet Bolt EV MSRP from $37,495…but leasing available from $309/month* (including CVRP rebate)

The good fellows over at LeaseHacker have come across GM Financial supported lease program (which was released yesterday) for  the 2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV, which starts to arrive next week in California and Oregon.

Naturally, the monthly lease cost of the Bolt EV is the MSRP set by the manufacturer, adjusted by the selling price actually negotiated by the dealer, then payments based from the GM financial department’s calculated residual values.

Chevrolet Bolt EV and Volt from LA Auto Show this week (InsideEVs/Warren M)

Chevrolet Bolt EV and Volt from LA Auto Show this week – check out gallery and “Car of the Year” win here (InsideEVs/Warren M)

Via LeaseHackr, here is GM Financial’s numbers:

Residual Values (36 Months)
Trim 10,000 Miles/Year 12,000 Miles/Year 15,000 Miles/Year
Bolt EV LT 61% 60% 58%
Bolt EV Premier 60% 58% 57%
Rates
Credit Tier Money Factor Interest Rate Equivalent
Tier A+ and A1 .00050 1.20% APR
Tier A2 .00133 3.19% APR
Tier A3 .00217 5.21% APR

LeaseHackr goes on to add:

“As for rebates and incentives, there’s a $2,500 Incremental CCR incentive through GM Financial (CA or OR only). Given how Bolt EV qualifies for the full $7,500 federal tax credit, we frankly expected the CCR to be higher. But it looks like GM is passing only a fraction of that amount to lessees — and using the rest to inflate the residuals (which also lowers the payment).

There are no other incentives from GM at the time (no competitive owner/lessee cash, no Farm Bureau rebate, and the like). However, like all battery electric vehicles, Bolt EV does qualify for the $2,500 CVRP mail-in rebate from the California Air Resources Board.”

Adding all the numbers together, as an example one could expect to lease a Chevrolet Bolt EV in California under some circumstances for $309/month with essentially nothing down.

For the early days, we expect the average lease price might be a bit higher that LeaseHacker’s number, as ‘added value’ packages at the dealership level will likely find there way onto early Bolt EVs; and of course not everyone qualifies for the stated $2,500 CVRP rebate…but with that said, GM sells virtually nothing at the stated MSRP – so given a few months (or with a Costco rebate today), a payment in the low $300s for the Bolt EV sounds reasonable to us.

Want to know what lease payment you might expect for yourself?  Check out LeaseHackr’s online calculator here.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

108 responses to "Lease A Chevrolet Bolt For Just $309 Per Month, Nothing Down In California"

  1. Scott Franco says:

    Thanks! Now I have a price point for next month.

    So that was about what I expected, actually.

  2. Bacardi says:

    Don’t forget to add the optional DCFC…

    1. Trollnonymous says:

      +1

      I know many will say “hell, I don’t need no stinking DCFC….” but when you resell later, that gives you the advantage. I’m pretty sure you can’t go back and ask for it to be installed years later.

      1. MTN Ranger says:

        So far, 90% of the Bolt EV orders in CA have requested DCFC.

      2. DJ says:

        So in a thread about the monthly leasing price you think people care about resale value?

        Wow, just wow…

        I am one of those people who wouldn’t want DCFC as the option. I’m willing to bet you can find many more like us who would frankly have no problem buying it down the road some time without DCFC. Even better, when the 3 yr leases are up if you happen to be right bargain basement Bolts abound!

        1. Ziv says:

          DJ, I was laughing to myself that after reading an article about great lease deals on the Bolt, Troll’s first thought is “oh, no! Resale will take a hit if the Bolt doesn’t have DCFC!” LOL! Good to see I am not the only one laughing about this knee jerk response by a lot of people on this site.

          If I got a Bolt, I would definitely get the DCFC option, but I think it really won’t be needed by a lot of people that lease this car, and the hit that Bolt buyers take on re-sale if they don’t get DCFC won’t be that huge.

          Big point I took from this article, if you can lease a Bolt for less than $325 a month, nothing down, they are going to lease a lot of these cars! I was thinking that GM would sell or lease 25-30k Bolts in the US in 2017. If lease deals close to $309, no down, become relatively common for long they may end up selling more than 30k, if GM can get that many packs from LG Chem. And the last word from a GM rep is that they may be able to get up to 50k packs in 2017.

          Even with good lease deals and no LG Chem bottle neck, though, I just don’t think GM can find more than 36k US Bolt buyers in 2017. If I had to bet on 2017 sales, I would still bet that they will sell/lease less than 30k in 2017. I would love to see them sell more than that, though.

          1. Trollnonymous says:

            “Troll’s first thought is “oh, no! Resale will take a hit if the Bolt doesn’t have DCFC!” LOL!”

            “If I got a Bolt, I would definitely get the DCFC option”

            ROTFLMAO….

            1. Ziv says:

              Troll, you are making a typical error of people looking at a problem. You think that what works for you will work for everyone else. I would get DCFC because the Bolt would be my only car and 2 or 3 times a year I would road trip the car 250+ miles.
              But a huge chunk of the car buying public will buy the Bolt as their second car. Why would they roadtrip in their small car when they have a roomier SUV in the garage that will carry all their luggage and gear? So why get DCFC if you charge at home 98% of the time and the 2% of the time 6.6 kW charge rates are more than sufficient?
              A lot of people that lease this car will NOT NEED or want DCFC so why pay for something they won’t use?

          2. MitchD103 says:

            Chevy does not want to sell many of these cars this car is a compliance car now and Chevy won’t be selling in all 50 states. They did a 180 on sales last week. Chevy is NOT serious about electric vehicles.

            1. JeremyK says:

              GM did the same rollout with the Volt, which was available in all 50 states after just a few months. So, how is GM not serious about EVs? Also, how is this rollout any different than Tesla?

              1. DaveinOlyWA says:

                guess we will find out but all indications so far suggest the nationwide rollout will take much more than “a few months”

        2. Bacardi says:

          Another issue is in the future, there might not be L2 charging, they may all be converted to DCFC…

          1. vin says:

            I dunno… I bought a Juicebox for ~$500 and plugged it into an existing 240V outlet. So I’m wondering… How much would DCFC cost on a residential install?

            I suspect L2 will be here for a while. It’s hard to beat for home charging.

            1. Silent Lurker says:

              I had a 240 plug put in my garage for charging my Leaf for $150.00. I had bids from $100-300.

      1. ffbj says:

        direct current fast charging

      2. mr. M says:

        Direct Current Fuel Cell 😀 😀 not.

    2. By some quick math, that would add ~$22 / month?

  3. vin says:

    Wow, that’s awesome!

    So $309/mo with $2500 down (I don’t like to include the state incentive) comes out to about $378/mo.

    Comparing it to my list of Factory offers for other EVs for November, it’s between a Nissan Leaf SL ($372/mo) and a BMW i3 ($388/mo). Bolt offers twice the range for the same monthly payment.

    1. Michael Will says:

      http://ev-vin.blogspot.com is actually the authority in listing good lease deals and there the nissan leaf is at $124 / month cost. I would still take the Bolt if a 2 year lease is available and then replace it with the tesla model 3 if I had to replace a car in the very near future.

    2. DaveinOlyWA says:

      $372 a month for a LEAF? Where are you seeing this? That is completely WRONG

      1. vin says:

        Dave – if you have not done so, you should check out http://www.nissan.com and drill down to the LEAF build and price. When I did my monthly check on 11/1/16 the lease offer on an SL was $326/mo, 36 mo, $1999+tax/lic at signing.

        (326/mo * 35 payments + 1999) / 36 months = $372/mo

        At the time the web site said the offer is good through 11/30/16.

        Last month they were at $326/mo with $0 down, but that was for MY 2016 SLs.

        I see you are in WA… if you checked https://www.nissanusa.com/ before posting, maybe the offer doesn’t show up for your zip code. I just tried a random WA zip code, and it comes up with an $887/mo estimate and no special offers. Or maybe Nissan is in the middle of updating their offers. Of all the manufacturers, they’re one of the more sporadic when it comes to updating their EV lease offers. Real pain in the ass when I’m trying to provide current information.

        PS – Mike – thanks for the shout-out!

        1. Ralph says:

          You can lease the high end Leaf SV for under 300. Your number doesn’t match reality. Then again, A Chevy dealer told me a lease would be 538; I laughed as I hung up. I suspect they can charge much more than they should if you just go in believing car salesman would never screw you to increase their paycheck.

  4. Scott Franco says:

    I think you are going to see this car take off.

  5. Four Electrics says:

    A Honda Clarity FCEV will lease for $50 more, with free fuel for three years. Given the poor state of CCS charging in California, an FCEV could result in faster road trips through the Tahoe/Sacramento/SF/LA corridor (a route amply covered by H2 stations) than a Bolt. It’s a tough call for Californians.

    1. Four Electrics says:

      In fact, when traveling from Glendale to San Jose, a Clarity has the range to skip refueling at Harris Ranch. But why not fuel up? It only takes five minutes.

      1. wraithnot says:

        “In fact, when traveling from Glendale to San Jose, a Clarity has the range to skip refueling at Harris Ranch. But why not fuel up? It only takes five minutes.”

        That’s 335 miles. Even though the Honda Clarity has a 366 mile combined highway/city range, good luck making it 335 miles driving with the flow of traffic on I5 (the speed limit is 70 mph along most of its length and people tend to drive much faster). Note that the average speed in the EPA highway cycle is only 48.3 mph. Also note that there is only a single hydrogen dispenser at Harris Ranch and it was out of order the last two times I was there.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          wraithnot said:

          “…there is only a single hydrogen dispenser at Harris Ranch and it was out of order the last two times I was there.”

          The wishful thinking of “fool cell” fanboys fails to survive contact with reality, yet again.

          Like a bug hitting the windshield…

          1. wraithnot says:

            According to the “hydrogen finder” app, it looks like the Harris ranch hydrogen station is open now. There were two positive reviews on Halloween and one on November 2nd. But I did notice the station in Mill Valley, which is the only one close to where I live, is currently offline. I’m glad I don’t have to drive to South San Francisco or Hayward to fuel my Model S!

            1. ffbj says:

              The mention of hydrogen and a ranch reminded me of this:
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kqj2hkbDnyM

              1. Scott Franco says:

                Would have been better to see the drunk horse owner in the stands laughing his a** off at the announcer….

            2. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

              Below is CARB’s official mobile website for the status of California’s hydrogen stations. It’s updated every 15 minutes.

              CARB’s website is currently showing that all 23 “Retail” stations are online and fully operational, including Mill Valley. Note that two of the stations are not open 24 hours per day and will show up as offline during the overnight hours.

              http://m.cafcp.org/

              1. Wraithnot says:

                Mill valley and a station in Southern California were both shown as offline earlier today when I downloaded the app. But they are now showing as online. That might indicate some reliability issues. But at least they didn’t leave them broken for months like Blink does with some of their CHAdeMO chargers.

              2. Wraithnot says:

                Now two other stations are down (san Juan Capistrano and la canada Flintridge). Is this some sort of planned maintenance, or do these stations really break this often?

                1. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

                  Yesterday, there were some additional white “i” in a circle on the http://m.cafcp.org/ website, next to the green dots for some stations. They’re no longer there today (just ones informing that some station aren’t open overnight). Any scheduled maintenance notifications would appear as an “i” in a circle. The stations update their status every 15 minutes, so its almost real time.

                  I imagine that some stations that rely on H2 deliveries might run out of H2 before a scheduled tanker trunk arrives.

                  The True Zero H2 station network of 15 stations appears to be more reliable than the stations run by other companies, some of which might have only one H2 station.

        2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          “single hydrogen dispenser at Harris Ranch and it was out of order”

          Its status is available online and as initial deployment time passes, there is less and less chance to encounter it out of order.
          There is also coastal route available with station in Santa Barbara.
          In any case, using something refuelable in 3-5 minutes for such trip is no brainer. Either Clarity FCV itself, or something available from 21 day Avis Luxury rental paid by Honda.
          Tesla battery swap that was promised to be available in every station is dead forever, and charging at peak times may be long unpredictable adventure. CCS is even worse for now. Neither GM goes the way of Tesla blunder and tries to push battery cars for long distance travel where they don’t shine unlike they do in city traffic.

          1. wraithnot says:

            “In any case, using something refuelable in 3-5 minutes for such trip is no brainer.”

            Funny you should mention that. I actually used the battery swap station at Harris Ranch four times and the last two swaps took around 4 minutes each. But it really didn’t save us any time because right after the battery swap, I parked the car and we got lunch, used the restroom etc. The swap technology definitely seemed to work, but it was shut down due to lack of interest.

            1. Dr ValueSeeker says:

              Lack of interest, or a bigger hole in Tesla’s pocket?

              1. Wraithnot says:

                There is a pretty long thread about it on Tesla motors club, but I only counted four different Model S owners that reported actually using the swap station: https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/harris-ranch-is-getting-first-battery-swap-station.31947/page-27

                Having to make an appointment probably didn’t help things. And I’d love to be able to rent a 100 kWh battery for long trips at a swap station close to where I live. But as far as I can tell, only two of us were really sad to see the swap station shut down.

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            “In any case, using something refuelable in 3-5 minutes for such trip is no brainer.”

            Better stick to a gasmobile then, since no hydrogen dispensing station will fill a “fool cell” car’s tank that fast.

            Real world filling time is reported at about 10 minutes.

      2. ModernMarvelFan says:

        “In fact, when traveling from Glendale to San Jose, a Clarity has the range to skip refueling at Harris Ranch. But why not fuel up? It only takes five minutes.”

        But I can “recharge/refill” my Bolt most of the days at home.

        The Clarity requires me to drive 20 miles out of my work just for a fill up each time and that already cuts my range down by at least 40 miles each time…

        I also think Bolt will kick Clarity’s butt in performance unless Honda is going to upgrade it this time around.

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          There is little point to buy it if you need to go 40 miles roundtrip to the side to refuel. But for many living in San Francisco or Los Angeles areas, where most of CA population lives, the distance is much shorter if they can use their commuting or frequent traveling route closer to a station to refuel occasionally.

          1. ModernMarvelFan says:

            “But for many living in San Francisco or Los Angeles areas, where most of CA population lives”

            City of SF is less than 1 million in population.

            SF Bay Area is about 6-7 millions in population. But that means many of the buyers would have drive miles out of their way to reach the nearest H2 stations.

            That is something they don’t have to do today with gas station or electricity.

            Most people live within 2 miles of gas stations and feet of electrical outlets.

    2. JyKiaNiroPHEV says:

      Don’t forget the 21 days free luxury car rental.

    3. Bacardi says:

      It’s not just “$50 more” though, the $309/mo Bolt is finalized numbers with $0 drive off…The Clarity requires $2,499 due at signing which is only a portion of the drive off, which with TTL will most likely be closer to $3K drive off…Then you still need to add TTL into the $269 but there are still incentives as well…

      Also while fuel is free (up to $15K per lease), it’s currently only available at 12 locations which states, 6 in the SoCal area, 5 in NorCal and one in Sac., that makes it appear you’re not getting free Hydrogen when traveling from the Bay area to L.A or vice versa…Yet there are additional benefits, 20K miles a year and 21 days of a luxury rental…

      1. Michael Will says:

        Also hydrogen is a dead end except for military applications, battery charging is getting better and better, and the energy efficiency of direct electricity instead of producing, distributing, storing and dispensing hydrogen is a lot better for the battery cars. Charging stations are much cheaper (L2 charger is like $600 nowadays, 50kW DC fast chargers are like $35k, a hydrogen fuelstation cost several million to put up according to http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56412.pdf

        When we do a weekend trip in our Tesla Model X we just have lunch at say Harris Ranch…

        1. Bacardi says:

          I would agree that barring a major political shift (and odds are CNG would be favored over Hydrogen), hydrogen is nearly dead…Yet you can only “qualify” for the Clarity if you live within 10 miles of one of the 12 approved refilling stations so you’re most likely going to stay relatively local anyways but can utilize the 21 days of a luxury rental if you want to go to somewhere that may not have a refilling station…

        2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          “Hydrogen fuelstation cost several million”
          Yes, assuming technology will not improve. Even then, the paper you have linked notes $5 mln per 1500 kg/day station. But you are not restricted by max kW output like with chargers. These stations can increase output at peak time as hydrogen provides cheap storage. E.g. H2Logic CAR-200 station (list price is not advertised, but recent public contract was 2 mln euros for 2 stations) with 200/kg day capacity can output 100 kg during 3 peak hours. It is small station for initial deployment. E.g. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Cryogenic Liquid Pump Project would provide > 100 kg/hr and >1000kg/day capacity.
          https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/htac_nov14_9_beckman.pdf

          How much Tesla charging station with 100 kg H2/ 3 hour peak capacity would cost?
          You would have 33 kg/hour, or 33kg*33kWh/kg/1h = 1089 kW. Battery cars have somewhat higher mpge, but on the other hand they can’t charge at maximum power all the time, average may be just half of maximum. You would need 1089/135=8 Tesla charger blocks 135 kW each. Average Tesla station has about 6 plugs and 3 charger blocks (2 plugs per block). Book value by Tesla financial disclosure is around $339,000 per station, or $113k each. 8 blocks $113k each comes at whooping $904,000 book value. Now what is cheaper? A 3-5 minute refueling station that provides energy storage and may even provide balancing service for electric grid if needed?
          Or pathetic 30-60 minute charging station, that takes so long to charge that you need full time employee to provide valet service to move cars around, because owners would not want to babysit their cars for so long and would leave them blocking the chargers, and would need to throttle output and create long lines in summer in South (like it happens in California now) or in winter in North when electric grid power generators can’t keep up with demand. By the way, demand power charges in San Diego were $42/kW/month last time I had checked. It would mean 1089 kW * $42 * 12 = $548,856/year just to keep lights on such charging station because demand charges typically go for full 12 months once you reach peak power for just 15 minutes at any time, and they are mandatory for high power customers.

          One or another may be marginally cheaper depending on scale, but they would not be comparable even if hydrogen station would be much more expensive (it is not). Anyway it is the same as comparing electric scooter with your Model X. Refueling station provides 100% functionality for long distance travel or people who can’t charge at home and unlimited scaling, charging station doesn’t. 350 kW CCS/Chademo stations will be quicker and closer to acceptable charging time, but they will still be too expensive and too demanding for electric grid.

          Charging at home isn’t free either – you need few hundred dollars for proper charger for EACH car and service from qualified electrician to make new line that can keep up with max power overnight. Just don’t start promoting charging from shoddy 110 V outlets without even smoke detectors in a garage, you don’t want to see national headlines “battery car burned a house when left charging overnight”, it is not good for EV advocacy.

          1. Scott Franco says:

            Who let the FCV fanboys in here?

            1. AlphaEdge says:

              Terrible! Only EV fanboys allowed in here.

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            zzzzzzzzz wrote… or more likely, copied and pasted:

            “Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Cryogenic Liquid Pump Project would provide > 100 kg/hr and >1000kg/day capacity.”

            There are too many errors of fact and false assumptions in that wall-of-text post to count, but I couldn’t let that one pass.

            1000 kg would be enough to fill about 100 cars. Compare that to the average California gas station, which services about 1100 cars per day.

            Also, H2 filling stations which can service only 36 cars per day cost about $3 million. I hate to think how many millions that so-called large-scale H2 filling station would cost!

            But that’s okay, zzzzzzzzzz. I’m sure you can ignore that reality check just like you ignore every fact and limitation regarding using compressed hydrogen as a fuel. It’s amazing what you can claim when you don’t let science, economics, facts, or real world limitations get in the way! 🙄

      2. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

        Bacardi said:
        “It’s not just “$50 more” though, the $309/mo Bolt is finalized numbers with $0 drive off…The Clarity requires $2,499 due at signing which is only a portion of the drive off, which with TTL will most likely be closer to $3K drive off.”

        Nope, that’s completely wrong.

        The Bolt requires a $2,500 down payment, and with TTL is $3,686 to Drive Off. In CA, you get $2,500 back as a mail-in rebate (CVRP) on the Bolt. The Clarity requires a $2,499 down payment, but you get a whopping $5,000 back in CA as a mail-in rebate (CVRP).

        Bolt lease cost from LeaseHackr (link at end of article above):
        Drive Off: $3,686
        First month’s Payment incl. tax: $309
        Down payment: $2,500
        Registration and doc fee: $420
        Total MSD Payment: $0
        Tax on cap cost reduction and fees: $457

        https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/eng/eligible-vehicles

        http://insideevs.com/2017-honda-clarity-fuel-cell-lease-pricing-lower-than-expected-at-369-a-month-bev-phev-coming-soon/

        1. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

          Bacardi said:
          “Also while fuel is free (up to $15K per lease), it’s currently only available at 12 locations which states, 6 in the SoCal area, 5 in NorCal and one in Sac. . . .”

          That’s also completely wrong.

          There are 23 “Retail” hydrogen stations in California, not only 12 as you claim. There are also 5 older and less reliable “Non-Retail” hydrogen stations that the Clarity can use.

          You must have misread the following quote from the Clarity news story:
          “Retail leasing will be available to residents who live or work near Honda’s network of 12 approved fuel cell vehicle dealerships located in select California markets. This network includes six dealerships in Southern California, five in the Bay Area and one in Sacramento. Honda will further develop its dealer network as consumer friendly hydrogen fueling stations become available.”
          http://insideevs.com/2017-honda-clarity-fuel-cell-lease-pricing-lower-than-expected-at-369-a-month-bev-phev-coming-soon/

          List of California hydrogen stations:
          http://m.cafcp.org/

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            You claim your source is CARB, yet your last link obviously goes to a California Fuel Cell Partnership website, which of course is funded partially or wholly by Big Oil.

            You’ll pardon me if I don’t take Big Oil propaganda at face value, when it comes to their claims of how many stations are actually open for business and aren’t limiting customers to only half a tank of H2.

        2. Bryan Whitton says:

          Hey, Honda and Toyota are scams because they are taking tax dollars to build and sell cars. Isn’t that the way it works.

    4. WadeTyhon says:

      It’s a pretty easy call for Californians.
      The Bolt is the smarter choice for literally everyone.

      Even Honda doesn’t necessarily think the Clarity FC is the best choice.

      The EV and PHEV versions of the Honda Clarity will be here soon after the FC version. They will most outsell the FC version very quickly.

      The only way Toyota could sell the Mirai in any meaningful numbers was by selling it to employees at a discount over the summer on *top* of $7500 in Toyota discounts on the car and the income tax credit.

    5. Scott Franco says:

      I would wait and get the FCV when it comes back off lease. At that time you will get one for free, or next to it. The car is a lab experiment being sold as a car.

      1. Ziv says:

        I doubt you will be able to buy a used Honda Clarity after they are leased. Why would Honda commit itself to maintaining adequate parts and service for a couple hundred cars? I bet they crush most of them. Maybe send 2 or 3 to a museum somewhere after they tear out the drivetrain.

        😉

        1. Scott Franco says:

          Right answer.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Scott Franco said:

        “I would wait and get the FCV when it comes back off lease.”

        Why in the world would any sane person buy one after it came off the lease, which means no more “free” fuel?

        Do you really wanna pay $140-160 a week to fill up your gas tank, and limit yourself to the few H2 filling stations which happen to be open at any time? And to you really wanna run your car on a fuel which, on a well-to-wheel basis, is even more polluting than gasoline for the same energy content?

        The wonder isn’t that so few people have bought “fool cell” cars. The wonder is that anyone has bought even a single one!

        https://cleantechnica.com/2014/06/04/hydrogen-fuel-cell-vehicles-about-not-clean/

    6. unlucky says:

      Because I don’t want to go to the gas station! I can fill a BEV in my garage, not so with an FCEV.

      If I only drove SF to LA and back every day maybe I’d get the FCEV. But I don’t.

  6. Trollnonymous says:

    And don’t forget the stealership markups……lol

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      I would think that would be the sticking point for those who want to get a Bolt right away. How many stealerships are gonna tack on a “market adjustment” inflation to the MSRP, because there’s a lot of demand for this new vehicle?

      More to the point, how many dealers are not going to add on a “market adjustment” to the price tag, in the first few weeks of sales, and possibly also later if this car is in high demand?

      1. Georges says:

        Pmpu
        Thats one of the first questions you ask over the phone. When i bot the volt i just told them it had to be msrp. If you look at the window sticker its easy to find out. The car would be fun for the right price.

      2. Gary says:

        There have been no reports of any dealers getting over MSRP on cars configured during the first allocation cycle. There have even benn some getting various discounts (Costco, etc).

      3. Scott Franco says:

        My order for the Bolt was quoted at MSRP, on the nose.

  7. The Woodster says:

    Yeah, but then you have a fuel cell vehicle. Not as good for the environment and much more complex under the hood. I would much rather have an EV that’s fully charged every morning with tons of range like the Bolt.

    Other auto companies are also WAY more invested in EVs these days than FCVs, so electric is the future.

    Maybe FCVs are okay for long haul trucking, but for the average person, they don’t need to commute from Glendale to San Jose.

  8. georgeS says:

    so this 308$ lease is for a 37495$ Bolt, with no tax and license and the 2500$ CVRP mail in rebate used as a down payment on the lease???

    Not sure how the CVRP is included in the 308$ number.

    1. ClarksonCote says:

      It isn’t. It sounds like the leasing company is using $2500 of the $7500 tax credit to reduce up front cost, but saving the rest for residual to still effectively reduce the monthly payment.

      The CVRP of $2500 is different, just inconveniently the same value. At least that’s how I read it.

      1. Georges says:

        I agree clarkson. I dont think the cvrp is included in the 308. Sounds like a reasonable ccr and residual. No tax and license or dc charging though not to mention a few

        1. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

          It’s not included. In the LeaseHacker article next to the Down Payment box it says: “In CA, you get $2,500 back as a mail-in rebate (CVRP).”

          http://leasehackr.com/blog/2016/11/21/bolt-ev-lease-program-announced-309-month

        2. bro1999 says:

          It’s included. The 2500 down payment is supposed to cover the rebate.

          1. georges says:

            who wrote this article:)

          2. JyKiaNiroPHEV says:

            Looks like bro1999 is the only one who understands leasing.

          3. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

            Per Leasehackr:

            Drive Off: $3,686
            First month’s Payment incl. tax: $309
            Down payment: $2,500
            Registration and doc fee: $420
            Total MSD Payment: $0
            Tax on cap cost reduction and fees: $457

            1. georgeS says:

              so bro is right. The 2500 CVRP is being used to off set the 2500$ down.
              yes?

              1. bro1999 says:

                Yes. The actual final monthly (after factoring the $2500 CA rebate) is $336 if we convert it to a true $0 down lease and roll EVERYTHING into the monthly.

              2. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

                Yes, the $2,500 CVRP will eventually offset the $2,500 down payment, but there is a timing difference (the weeks/months that it will take to get the rebate check). You’ll still have pay a $2,500 down payment to drive off, then you’ll get a state rebate check in a couple of weeks/months for the same amount.

                I don’t know what bro is trying to say with regards to where “it’s included.” In your comment above, I thought you were asking whether the “CVRP was included in the 308” as a Capitalized Cost Reduction (CCR). It is not.

                I’m from NY, so take what I say about the CVRP with a grain of salt. But be aware of the new limitations to the CVRP. In addition to the generous income limitations, a person can take only two rebates after 1/1/15 (with some exceptions). So if you’ve already bought or leased two EVs and received two CVRP rebates after 1/1/15, then you’re ineligible for a third rebate. I believe a spouse would be entitled to their own two rebates, if you are ineligible and are willing to put the car in their name.

                “Rebate Limit”
                “Except for rental, public, and car share fleets, no single entity is eligible to receive more than two CVRP rebates either via direct purchase and/or lease as of January 1, 2015. All rebates issued prior to this date do not count toward the two rebate limit.”

                “Individuals or businesses that have met the rebate limit with non-fuel cell vehicles may apply for one additional rebate for a fuel cell vehicle.”

                https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/eng/eligibility-guidelines

                1. bro1999 says:

                  The leasehackr deal is $309 a month, $2500 down, plus 1st months payment and fees. Since MOST people will qualify for the 2500 CA rebate, thay rebate effectively cancels out the $2500 down. So it turns into a $0 down, $309/month lease, with just 1st month payment and fees due at signing.

                  1. JyKiaNiroPHEV says:

                    Add costco pricing, gm private offer and a college niece or mom on social security and you can get the bolt for less than $260/month.

  9. Koenigsegg says:

    My Volt costs less and is better lol

  10. CLIVE says:

    Still not zero emissions

    1. goodbyegascar says:

      By that logic, neither is your computer.

      1. CLIVE says:

        No tailpipe. I hope that help you get my drift.

        1. AlphaEdge says:

          That smokestack at the coal plant is a tailpipe. 😉

  11. William says:

    Tesla Lease is at least twice as much! Twice the car at least. At least one can settle on the Chevy Bolt with a chunk of leftover cash in pocket monthly savings. It’s just a Premium Tesla Nuts or Pedestrian Chevy Bolts decision, on the EV driving experience.

  12. sven says:

    Finally a real car that will kill the overrated Tesla that only kill drivers all over the world. Go Bolt.

    1. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

      For the record, I did not make the above comment.

      ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven (the one you’ve all come to know and love)

      1. goodbyegascar says:

        I couldn’t tell the difference.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        A difference which makes no difference is no difference.

  13. bro1999 says:

    So after digesting the Bolt’s lease numbers, they actually aren’t as bad as I first thought.

    GM seems to have inflated the residuals about 10%….Volt’s 36 month residual is 48%, while the Bolt’s is 58%, and I see no clear reason why the Bolt’s residual would be 10% higher…unless GM is intentionally inflating it to make leases more appealing.

    So the $0 down, $336/month lease after taking into consideration the $2,500 CA rebate (not to be confused with the $2,500 LEASE cash being offered) and converting it into a true, nothing due at signing except 1st month’s payment, is not too bad.

    Doing the same math, a fully loaded Bolt Premier with fast charging and premium paint would run about $430/month.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Also, it is likely there will be some additional incentives available.

      ALL Chevys are currently eligible for a $500 Farm Bureau rebate…I think the only reason the Bolt hasn’t been added yet is because it’s technically not for sale. Expect the Bolt to be added come December.

      Also, I’d be shocked if there isn’t a $500 lease conquest/lease loyalty rebate offered either. And of course there may be a consumer purchase rebate. The ’16 Volt had $1k cash on the hood upon release (and still does in CARB states), even with pent up demand.

  14. kubel says:

    This “deal” not only assumes California incentives, but it also assumes a $1,000 dealer contribution (that’s not going to happen) and only 10,000 miles per year (ultra-low mileage). $373/mo for 15,000 miles per year and 36 months in California for a base LT. Not a terrible deal.

    But expect $513/mo for the same thing in Michigan, for example.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Costco Auto pricing (which should be released any day now) will offer at least $1,400 off MSRP…so a little more than the assumed $1k dealer discount.

    2. DaveinOlyWA says:

      you pretty much nailed the fact that we got screwed again…

  15. Steven says:

    Until it’s sitting on a dealership lot in Pennsylvania, I’ll still call it a compliance car.

  16. Texas FFE says:

    Just in case anybody is interested, the 2017 Focus Electric showed up on Ford.com. It has a 33.5 kWh battery and 50 kW CCS charging, but we knew that. What’s new is the price is less at $29,120 and that includes CCS capabilities.

    That’s not a bad price considering how well equipped the FFE is. It looks like the Leaf is in big trouble if Nissan doesn’t dramatically lower the price or come out with a much larger battery. I’m surprised Insideevs.com hasn’t already picked up on this and provided an article/review.

    1. Jay Cole says:

      Hey Texas FFE,

      We reported on the spcs/upgrade a few months ago…but had been sitting the official release until we save the EPA release rating the battery, which is now, lol. Anywhoo, it’ll be out at some point today. (=

      Update: And here it is:

      2017 Ford Focus Electric: 115 Miles Of Range For $29,120
      http://insideevs.com/2017-ford-focus-electric-115-miles-of-range-for-29120/

  17. John Ray says:

    I posted this awhile back on another site, but it seems appropriate here. Let me save everyone the trouble of wading through the comments:

    [Non-Tesla Product] doesn’t have Tesla’s charging infrastructure, so Tesla is clearly superior.

    [Insert Non-Tesla Product] buys their batteries from [Insert non-Tesla Battery Supplier], so they are supply constrained.

    [Insert Non-Tesla product] may cost half as much, but it is one fourth the car.

    I can’t believe that [Insert Non-Tesla product] doesn’t come standard with DCFC. This is an enormous, epic mistake which will result in [Insert Non-Tesla product] being practically sales-proof.

    [Insert Non-Tesla Product] is a sub-micro, miniature car – practically not a car at all.

    I can’t drive [Insert Non-Tesla Product] across the Country like I do several times a month, so it just doesn’t work.

    [Insert Non-Tesla Product Manufacturer] refuses to immediately stop making ICE vehicles so they are not committed to EVs.

    [Insert Non-Tesla Product Manufacturer]’s dealer network is not interested in selling cars or making money. They only like to make people miserable – that’s their currency.

    Even though it doesn’t really exist in production form, I haven’t actually driven it or seen it in person and all I know about it is what I have read on the Internet, the Tesla Model 3 is superior to [Insert Non-Tesla Product] in every possible way.

    The only reason [Insert Independent Product Reviewer] likes [Insert Non-Tesla Product] more is because they are being paid by [Insert Non-Tesla Product Manufacturer].

    It’s [Insert Republicans or George W. Bush or Big Oil or Vast Right-wing Conspiracy]’s fault.

    [Insert Non-Tesla Product] is ugly.

    Please don’t be upset Tesla fans. I am just trying to save you valuable posting time.

    1. ziv says:

      John, you have done Insideevs an incredible service! You have summarized the responses to nearly every article for the past 2 years! I don’t need to read the responses to any more Insideevs articles every again!
      My day just recovered an extra hour, saved from my otherwise needless scanning of the responses to every Bolt/Tesla/Leaf article yet to arrive!
      LOL!
      😉

      1. John Ray says:

        Heh, heh, just doing my part for the greater good. ;^)

    2. Texas FFE says:

      No, your comments are not appropriate here. You are a Tesla zealot, you to find a life and quit spewing out hatred and nonsense of anything non-Tesla.

      1. John Ray says:

        Quick, we need another Tesla drag race video.

  18. Alan says:

    An unusually high number of people lease EVs partially because they don’t want to miss out on technological improvements – particularly with respect to range and fast charging. You also have to worry more about battery degradation in a car with 80 mile range than a car with 200+ mile range. Because I don’t like the waste of people replacing their cars every 3 years, I was hoping more people would choose to buy this car than lease it. (Yes, I know, cars get resold at the end of their lease, but I don’t like the “disposable car” mindset. I want these cars to stay on the road for as long as possible.)

    1. Spider-Dan says:

      The good news is that by and large, EV lessees stick with EVs when they make their next purchase. (I can count myself among this group.)

Leave a Reply