GM And LG Teamed Up Intimately To Produce Chevrolet Bolt, Lots Of LG Inside

2 years ago by Jay Cole 100

Chevrolet Bolt Has More "LG" In It Than Any Other EV

Chevrolet Bolt Has More “LG” In It Than Any Other EV

General Motors and LG Chem held a press briefing today from the automaker’s Warren Tech Center, Battery Lab campus to detail their expanded relationship together on the upcoming Chevrolet Bolt – a compact utility crossover that the companies promises with have more than 200 miles of range and be priced around (or lower than) $30,000 post-incentives in the US when it comes to market late next year.

GM says that into order to get such an electric vehicle to market “required an unprecedented supplier relationship combining expertise in infotainment, battery systems and component development with GM’s proven in-house capabilities in electric motor design, battery control, system validation and vehicle body/system integration.”

More Than Just Batteries: LG Will Be Supplying Both The Infotainment And Instrument Cluster In The Upcoming Bolt

More Than Just Batteries: LG Will Be Supplying Both The Infotainment And Instrument Cluster In The Upcoming Bolt

On the call was Mark Reuss – GM executive vice president, Pamela Fletcher – GM executive chief engineer for electrified vehicles, Ken Chang – LG Electronics VP/vehicle components, and freshly minted LG Chem Power CEO (and ex-GM Director of Battery Systems) Denise Gray.

“Chevrolet needs to be disruptive in order to maintain our leadership position in electrification. By taking the best of our in-house engineering prowess established with the Chevrolet Volt and Spark EV, and combining the experience of the LG Group, we’re able to transform the concept of the industry’s first long range, affordable EV into reality.”  – Mark Reuss

GM gave some backstory on the Chevrolet Bolt, which it frames as a “joint planning and research” project, stating that engineers from the two companies had considered different vehicle architectures, as well as different ranges and performance options, until ultimately landing on the decision that the Bolt needed to be “affordable and deliver 200-plus miles of all-electric driving with spirited performance. “

Good-bye MyLink, Hello LG Electronics?

Good-bye MyLink, Hello LG Electronics?

In addition to listening to LG’s expertise on what vehicle to best offer, GM noted a long list of components and systems provided by the battery maker:

  • Electric Drive Motor (built from GM design)
  • Power Inverter Module (converts DC power to AC for the drive unit)
  • On Board Charger
  • Electric Climate Control System Compressor
  • Battery Cells and Pack
  • High Power Distribution Module (manages the flow of high voltage to various components)
  • Battery Heater
  • Accessory Power Module (maintains low-voltage power delivery to accessories)
  • Power Line Communication Module (manages communication between vehicle and a DC charging station)
  • Instrument Cluster
  • Infotainment System

What is most interesting from this list, is that many of these e-drive systems were processes that GM had taken in-house for the Chevrolet Volt and Spark EV (such as the battery pack assembly in Brownstown, Michigan) – not so anymore apparently, which may speak to LG’s ability to control costs or a trade-off in the partnership.  An LG-sourced infotainment system and cluster is also a major departure from GM’s mostly standardized interior lineup.

Full Chevrolet Bolt Dash

Full Chevrolet Bolt Dash

The expanded involvement of LG inside the project may also be due to the fact the battery maker seems to have done some considerable lifting in the R&D department for the Chevy Bolt, saying it has spend over $250 million dollars between LG Chem, LG Innotek, LG Display and LG Electronics in engineering, and in a manufacturing facility based in Incheon, Korea “to support the component development and manufacturing for Bolt EV components.”

Chevrolet Bolt EV Interior

Chevrolet Bolt EV Interior

“Being selected as GM’s EV technology partner positions LG as a key player in next-generation vehicular technologies. The opportunity to work with GM on such game-changing technology is indicative of exactly the type of contributions that traditional tech companies can make in the automotive space.”  – Woo-jong Lee, president and CEO of the LG Electronics Vehicle Components Co.

LG has long expressed a desire to do more than just being a battery cell supplier to OEMs for their electric vehicles, today we are seeing the first fruits of that new passion come to light.

Tags: , , , , ,

100 responses to "GM And LG Teamed Up Intimately To Produce Chevrolet Bolt, Lots Of LG Inside"

  1. Speculawyer says:

    Wow. That is a LOT of components from LG. They are certainly making a big push into EVs I guess.

    1. Speculawyer says:

      Maybe LG is going to give the batteries for free in exchange for the right to provide so many other components?

      1. Anon says:

        You’re hilarious! 😉

        Pretty sure LG’s charging for all components in the Bolt. Probably helps explains why there will be likely limited numbers of units.

        I dunno. GM talks a lot about being a technological innovator, but it sure seems to me, they’ve farmed out a lot of the Bolt’s R&D and production to others.

        This GM EV feels “Phoned In” to me. Maybe Apple stole all of bowtie’s EV people, too? *shrugs*

        1. Speculawyer says:

          Ooops, I didn’t mean free . . . I meant at cost. Perhaps they are gonna sell the batteries with no profit exchange for the contracts to build lots of the other components where they’ll make their money. It gives them a way to get their foot into the door of the auto parts biz.

          1. sven says:

            Interesting theory.

            1. miggy says:

              Great Aussie design, GM not interested in selling to the rest of the world so LG should take over the world wide sales outside of the USA.

              1. jim stack says:

                Also note that LG batteries are made with patents from Argonne Labs and US funding as part of the stimulus plan. So it’s LG and US making this big step for mankind. Which hasn’t been done since the space shot.

                1. Martin T. says:

                  True, but at least the Australian input gave the car a desirable EV world design factor.

                  Left to the US – some of the recent designs they really should hold their heads in shame with the resources they have by comparison.

  2. no comment says:

    my sense is that the bolt will be a good platform to help gm expand phev’s into large vehicles. the gm approach to phev’s is to give the cars meaningful aer rather than the nominal approach that other auto makers have taken.

  3. CherylG'sDirtyLittleSecret says:

    The slogan for the Bolt should be…
    “More Korean than American”.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Better Korea than the coming made-in-China Apple car.

      1. CherylG'sDirtyLittleSecret says:

        +1

    2. Mikael says:

      Nice. 🙂 In Europe that slogan would definitely increase the sales numbers if Chevy ever tries to get back into that market.

      1. Martin T. says:

        Well Kia EV Soul is best selling EV in Germany 380 in one month.

        So the Koreans are up to something – not just in the USA or Australia (We are not worthy and our population just don’t get that they could actually live with a short range electric car in the family for the MAJORITY of trips)

    3. Speculawyer says:

      It is kinda strange how LG is making this huge jump into EVs but the Korean auto makers don’t seem to be jumping into EVs heavily.

      1. Paul says:

        Chevy is for a part a Korean automaker.

        1. Narg says:

          ..and part Australian, and part Japanese, and part German… GM is a World Wide company folks.

      2. super390 says:

        There’s only one Korean carmaker that is big enough to operate worldwide, Hyundai-KIA. They seem to be in the fuel cell camp, which means they’ll wait for someone else to build the infrastructure.

        1. That will change. Selling all of 80 Tucson FCVs has made the outcome of that path clear. I don’t think they even got much of a halo effect, especially after a bunch of those FCV customers started showing up on message boards complaining about the lack of a reliable refueling infrastructure.

  4. MTN Ranger says:

    Seem like a lot more thought is being put into the Bolt than previously considered. Hopefully this indicates that there will be more than one long range BEV from GM in the next few years.

    “Spirited performance” seems to indicated the continuation of the Spark EV’s notable drivetrain performance.

    1. SparkEV says:

      SparkEV’s 0-60 in 7.2 sec will be quite challenging with Bolt battery. SparkEV battery is bit under 500lb for 19kWh. If Bolt is 50kWh, it could be well over 1000lb (1500lb?). Body is slightly bigger (heavier), much heavier battery, how much power will Bolt need? 250HP vs SparkEV 140HP?

      I suppose they could make it slower than SparkEV, but then a new EV for $30K that’s slower than 2 year old EV that was $15K? Not very compelling, especially in CA where CCS are abundant that SparkEV meets most people’s needs and distances of ~400 miles per day.

      1. ModernMarvelFan says:

        I hope the Bolt would at least match up with Spark EV’s performance. If not, it will be DOA.

        I also hope GM corrects the torque steer issue with the Spark EV on the Bolt. Spark EV is fun to drive but sometimes the torque steer is a bit much for my taste.

        Volt relatively has less torque steer than the Spark EV. So, GM should be able to figure out how to minimize that.

        1. SparkEV says:

          MMF, did you get a SparkEV? 🙂

          “Spark EV is fun to drive but sometimes the torque steer is a bit much for my taste.”

          I don’t blame you. At $78/mo lease, it’s cheaper than most smart phone plans. Save your Volt for those rare long distance trips or family outings.

          SparkEV has several annoyances, temperature display in Celcius being another one.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        SparkEV said:

        “SparkEV’s 0-60 in 7.2 sec will be quite challenging with Bolt battery. SparkEV battery is bit under 500lb for 19kWh.”

        The Bolt will likely have a battery pack in the range of 45-50 kWh. That’s much larger than the Spark’s mere 19 kWh, so the Bolt’s 0-60 time should be correspondingly much shorter. That is, of course, assuming GM gives it a motor sufficient to use the full power output from the battery pack. But even if not, I think it’s safe to bet on the Bolt being a lot more lively than 7.2 seconds from 0-60.

        1. SparkEV says:

          I don’t know if it’s safe to bet on Bolt being quicker than SparkEV. Motor will have to be 200+HP (maybe closer to 300HP), but the body is still Sonic. They’ll have to do some significant beef-up, which adds even more weight. If I’m betting, I think it’s less than 50% chance that it’ll be quicker.

          By the way, 2014 SparkEV had 400 ftlb with 22kWh battery, and 2015 SparkEV has 327 ftlb with 19kWh. Both have same horsepower rating. So the 2015 torque is higher at higher RPM with smaller battery? Is GM doing a VW with SparkEV spec?

      3. krona2k says:

        The batteries are more energy dense, but of course the Bolt will be heavier than the Spark EV. They should be able to make it have great performance, just look at the Model S, however I don’t think they will make the effort to make it sub 10 second 0-60.

        I’ve just recently got Volt, which I love, but compared to my previous Gen 1 LEAF it really does feel quite heavy and almost sluggish, even though I know it’s not. The LEAF is surprisingly nimble considering it’s a pretty heavy car. The ride quality is also better than the Volt.

      4. Raymondjram says:

        Potential Bolt EV buyers are sensible and will not be worried if it is slower than the Spark EV. Their main motivation is EV range.

        Only a few buyers want to race against other cars, and those are the crazy ones.

  5. ModernMarvelFan says:

    I have few LG electronics at home.

    I am NOT sure I am sold on LG quality yet.

    Then again, Chevy isn’t top among CR’s reliabilty rating either. But both Volt and Spark EV has been doing better than most people would expect or better than your average Chevy.

    So, it is definitely an interesting developement.

    With rising quality standard at Korean companies, maybe it is a good thing for the Bolt.

    We will see if that is true in few years.

  6. David Murray says:

    Wow.. Besides the frame, what part of the car is GM going to build?

    1. Speculawyer says:

      The little bowtie logo.

      1. Anon says:

        Ouuuuuch.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        LOL! Reminds me of the original IBM PC. How much of that did IBM actually make?

        Only the “IBM” name plate on the computer.

        1. shawn marshall says:

          IBM trumped the PC world when they put in a 5 M hard drive in the XT, quickly upgraded to 10 M and left everybody in the dust,

    2. ModernMarvelFan says:

      Chassis, interior, brakes, suspension, body panels, wheels, steering components, paint, glasses, interior panels, sound deadening design, lighting, safety structure…etc

    3. Taser54 says:

      Design parts, manufacture parts, assemble vs spec and assemble? I think that’s an argument that EV enthusiasts shouldn’t tread, given that so many components in vehicles are spec’ed and then outsourced to a supplier, and then assembled in a plant.

      If GM found a way to outsource components to suppliers like LG, maintain quality and keep the cost down, consumers win.

      Truth be told, the components will still be assembled at a GM plant, with the quality control process used by the Volt.

      1. JeremyK says:

        This is exactly right. There are many make-vs-buy decisions that are made when creating any new vehicle, but only for key components. GM and other OEMs manufacture very few components themselves anymore. Battery packs, e-motors, engines, transmissions are just some examples. However, packs, e-motors, and transmissions are also often outsourced. Too many variables to get in to as to why these decisions are made.

        LG has only two problems per million cells for the Volt. That is phenomenal quality.
        http://gas2.org/2015/10/14/chevy-volt-batteries-almost-100-problem-free/

    4. Bill Howland says:

      I’m not all that concerned. Almost all cars today are packages of parts from all around the world.

      Its hard to tell a chevy from a ford these days, precisely because there are more ‘foreign parts’ in all these cars than from the home manufacturer. A Tesla steering wheel looks like a Mercedes for obvious reasons.

      Johnson Controls (the old HVAC outfit) does most of the Mexican Interiors.

      I was walking around my Cadillac Dealer’s lot the other day, and was quite surprized to see many of the transmissions for the lower priced Caddys were from Peugeot. (At least I’m assuming that since they said France). What ever happened to Allison?

  7. Taser54 says:

    The joint venture with LG began in 2010.

    Look at the articles about the test fleet of Cruze EVs in Korea. GM has been testing EVs for a while, even before the release of the Volt.

  8. kdawg says:

    I wonder if LG will source any of these components out of Holland MI?

    1. JeremyK says:

      I would be on it.
      The CEO of LG Power just retired and his replacement is Denise Gray (former GM Exec).
      http://www.autonews.com/article/20150929/OEM02/150929785/lg-chem-ceo-prabhakar-patil-to-retire
      Volt and Bolt are manufactured here and GM has their battery assembly plant in Brownstown, MI. Lot of synergy to keep have an LG plant in GM’s backyard with a former GM exec at the helm, no less.

  9. Dan says:

    The Bolt is very exciting and I think it’s going to be a great electric vehicle. But there is only a year before the planned introduction and the CCS charging infrastructure needed to support the Bolt is non-existent in most of the United States. Chevrolet better start stepping up and start getting CCS charging stations installed, the way Nissan did with CHAdeMO, or the Bolt sales are going to be pretty dismal.

    1. Dan says:

      Nissan sold less than 10,000 Leafs in the United States the first year out of the gate. Nissan sold over 30,000 Leafs in 2014 but may even sell 20,000 in 2015. If the Bolt is really going to be a ground breaking electric vehicle then Chevrolet has to sell many more than Nissan ever sold Leafs and that’s just not going to happen if there is no DC fast charging infrastructure to support the Bolt.

      1. Stuart22 says:

        The Bolt’s significantly greater range reduces a dependence on and the importance of DC fast charging. That said, the more EVs become mainstream, the more numerous will be DC fast charging points.

        I think sales success of the Bolt will be more affected by the availability of tax incentives – LEAF sales took a hit when GA shut down its generous incentives for EVs.

        1. Rich says:

          Agreed on all points.

        2. Londo Bell says:

          “The Bolt’s significantly greater range reduces a dependence on and the importance of DC fast charging.”

          R u for real? That logic holds no sense!

          Most vehicles – ICE – have range of at least 300 miles nowadays. Even back some 30 years ago, 200 miles with the big V6 or V8.

          Petroleum stations are still some 1 mile or less away. In many cases, 4 in all 4 street corners.

          Fast charging stations are there for convenience – you can use it when you need it. It’s not about, let’s use that FC station some 150 mi away because my EV can go 200 mi on a charge.

          1. Rich says:

            At 200 miles range, even with out the charging infrastructure, will allow most people to consider an EV for their second car. This starts the wide spread adoption. I agree, once range increases to 250 – 300 miles range and a supercharger network, a large portion of people will start to consider BEVs as a primary car.

            1. Paul says:

              Probably you are true. But that slow adaption is because of what’s happening in the mind.

              I bought an EV as my only car and not only for commuting. It works. You only have to change some habits. The most important: do research where to charge before leaving. That indeed is very different from the old thinking that you will be able to find a petrol station on every corner. But if you drive prepared it already works with single car, is my experience. And I’m living in France, of all places, where charging infrastructure is still in its infancy when compared to Holland, Switzerland or Britain.

              1. Mark C says:

                Paul, I appreciate your reasoned response. I too live in an area where charging infrastructure is very weak. That was a major factor in me holding out for a longer range EV than what was available with the iMiev, Leaf & Volt when they arrived.

                With the longer range EV’s coming soon, it will be a non-issue for me. In the last two years I’ve made only 2 trips a 200 mile range EV wouldn’t easily handle, even with the heat or AC blasting.

      2. JeremyK says:

        I don’ think there is any research or polls which support your conclusion.

        Data shows that most EV drivers charge at home and at work. A nationwide charging network has not been a factor for the early adopters, so it may not be a factor for future buyers.

        Most people own more than two cars and most still have at least one ICE in the garage.

        1. Dan says:

          Here is some research for you. The Tesla Model S costs three times more than a Nissan Leaf but there are currently more Model Ss being sold than Leafs. It’s easy to conclude that one of reasons the Model S is selling so well is that it is supported by a nation wide fast charging infrastructure whereas the Leaf is not. Speaking for myself, I am very tempted to go into hock up to my eyeballs to buy a Tesla primarily because it has a developed fast charging network. Not having a fast charging network that would allow me to travel cross country has kept me from upgrading my FFE to a car I can afford that has fast charging capabilities. Here is some more research for you, a lot of fast charger providers are going broke because a lot of the chargers hardly ever get used. Maybe if the fast chargers were along highways where people need them for long trips instead of clustered in cities where everybody home charge, the chargers could make some money.

          1. no comment says:

            i think a better explanation for why more model s cars get sold than leaf cars is that electric vehicles appeal to people who live in high income households; people who are more likely to be able to afford a model s. unfortunately, i suspect that there are those who are buying the model s who can’t really afford it.

      3. Phatcat73 says:

        I have an 84 mile Leaf w/oquick charge, along with a 100 mile RAV4 EV w/o QC. I would naturally feel more comfortable in a 200 mile Bolt w/o QC, and even moreso with QC or supercharger access.

        I suspect many people will be trading up, like me, unless there are aftermarket battery upgrade solutions.

        1. Dan says:

          Phatcat73, if you want to upgrade your Rav 4 to CHAdeMO, Quick Charge Power can do it for you.

    2. Speculawyer says:

      Yeah, I’m not a fan of the looks of the Bolt but by FAR its biggest problem seems to be that there will be no useful charging infrastructure to take advantage of that 200 mile range.

      The SAE-CCS chargers that are out there are few and 50KW at best. GM needs get lots more SAE-CCS chargers out there if they really want to sell this car. Either that or license access to the supercharger network from Tesla.

      GM had BETTER have some type of charger infrastructure plan for the Bolt because if they don’t, the Bolt may be DOA.

  10. Robb Stark says:

    Sounds like the rumors of the Apple iCar; a BMW sourced glider with Apple electronics.

    Bolt will be a GM glider with LG electronics but badged a Chevrolet.

    1. Anthony says:

      This is what I was thinking when I read this article.

      While EV enthusiasts may want to celebrate the Bolt, it might end up being a negative turning point – GM is happy to let all that EV knowledge live outside of GM. It seems like its less of a commitment to EVs on their part, at the same time its also less risk, but is less risk on EVs important right now? Teslas are becoming more popular, and I would think that EVs in general will become more popular as the battery and powertrain prices drop into ‘positive ROI w/o incentive’ range. I would think some day GM would want all this information proprietary for a competitive advantage. What is GM’s competitive advantage for the Bolt – GM styling, interior, aero?

      It reminds me of the Dell computer model, or Boeing’s failed attempt at distributed design with the 787 (main design done by Boeing, smaller companies to detailed design on their own parts). Once you lose the core competencay,

      1. Rich says:

        GM has a major obstacle to overcome, which is their entrenched power train management team. In addition to some of your points, this is probably the only way GM could effectively build and all electric car. As sales gain momentum and population starts migrating to BEVs, GM may pull some of the areas back in house. This is probably a 10 year migration.

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          Isn’t the CEO Barra an Electrical Engineer by training? (instead of the traditional mechanical engineering in charged of powertrains)

          1. Rich says:

            One down, 300 to go. 🙂

      2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

        If you look at how the automotive industry works, it’s really not that odd.

        GM designed the car bits.

        I note no mention of a heat pump in there…

        1. Paul Stoller says:

          They also designed one of the most important components of an EV, the traction motor. Sure, LG is producing it for them, but they still have the engineering chops to design it in the first place.

          If GM quit’s producing it’s own traction motor altogether then I might share your concern, but after the capital GM has already put into it’s own traction motor production I don’t think they are abandoning traction motor development as a core competincy.

        2. kdawg says:

          Yep. Most/many car parts are actually from suppliers and the “car maker” just assembles them. I think it was Ford or Chrysler who had a car that was almost 100% assembled by a supplier, Magna, but they did some final step to call it their own.

        3. Djoni says:

          Disagree!
          Because, that might be the “-Electric Climate Control System Compressor”
          Climate isn’t limited at cooling!

        4. MikeM says:

          “Electric Climate Control System Compressor”

          I saw that and ‘assumed’ it included ‘heat pump’. (What other kind of compressor does an EV have?)

          But you are right. It doesn’t explicitly say it. Hmmmm!

          1. HVACman says:

            There is a reason for using LG for the electric compressors. LG is a major manufacturer of mini-split heat pump systems that can heat with the heat pump cycle down to -10 deg. F. Takes special inverter-driven compressors, refrigerant valves, and electronics. The Japanese and Koreans are the world’s experts on these systems. Expertise that GM’s climate systems engineers probably don’t have. I’m betting they will be providing similar high-tech compressors and support devices for heat pump heat for the Bolt.

      3. JeremyK says:

        Trust me. GM does not order these parts out of af a catalog. The designs that GM uses are proprietary and any work that was jointly developed between LG and GM (i.e. battery chemistry or e-motor design) could not be shared with a competitor like Ford or Nissan. Again, these components are likely designed initially by GM, then tweaked by the selected supplier for manufacturability, cost, and performance. GM is very much involved in the design of their components….especially in the powertrain area, which includes batteries and e-motors.

  11. David says:

    So it is better to buy from an American company (GM) who’s car is mostly designed and built overseas from foreign components.

    Or from a Japanese company (Nissan) that has a factory here and is building batteries here.

    Or from an American company who’s car is designed and built here (Tesla).

    1. Sri says:

      a car you can afford, would be a good start. let other things fall in their place.

    2. Steve says:

      Tesla gets the 17″ display from Foxconn, not sure what else.

      It’s an international world. You can’t put that genie back!

    3. Rich says:

      I would rather support our middle class than the 1% and another country’s middle class. Nothing against other countries.
      Tesla is trying to manufacture the highest percentage made in the USA vehicle (Model 3). At one point, there were statements that it would be a higher percentage than the Ford F150.

    4. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      I’d say it’s best to buy the car which best fits your needs, and not worry so much about where the parts where made or where the car was assembled.

      But if “Buy American made” is really important for you, then by all means buy a Tesla car.

  12. David says:

    You do have to wonder what GM provided to the Bolt. Sounds like an LG car with GM’s wonderful marketing behind it.

    1. GeorgeS says:

      @David

      “Sounds like an LG car with GM’s wonderful marketing behind it.”

      Do I sense some sarcasm in that comment?
      GM should probably sub out the marketing to LG while they are at it.

      I have an LG smart phone and I like it. Americans love Hyundai cars (Korean made). I bet they could sell more cars if they put a LG emblem on it.

      Anyway. I am shocked how much of this car will be made by LG. It totally took me by surprise……but I guess that’s OK. Whatever needs to be done to get EV’s out there for the masses. The clock is ticking in the CO2 department.

      Way to go GM and LG chem!!

      1. kdawg says:

        And don’t forget, Denise Gray (from GM’s battery team) is now CEO of LG Chem.

        So it’s still like “keeping it in the family” 🙂

        1. no comment says:

          the point you make is not frivolous at all. gm is a major customer for lg chemical, to have a ceo who is well connected with a major customer is an asset.

    2. Sri says:

      Did Mary Barra said No to your date or something. You sound like a creep with an agenda.

      1. Rich says:

        The only thing out of line is personal attacks. Are you on the Bolt engineering team? If not, why are you taking statements about GM personally?

  13. larry4pyro says:

    If that’s what it takes to get a 200 mile EV out at a price the average person could afford, I’m all for it.

  14. Fabian says:

    Hurry up and take my money!

  15. Nelson says:

    GM needs to stop being stubborn and partner with Tesla for the use of the Supercharging Network. Sallow some pride and dump CCS, agree to source the Tesla plug, license the charging algorithms as well as help fund further expansion of the Supercharging Network. I don’t see GM being very successful 10 years from now if this does not happen.

    NPNS! SBF!
    Volt#671

    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

      what is the point of partnering with Tesla if one can’t use it for your local charging?

      I think Tesla SC model will run into “abuse” problem once that 500,000 model 3 come online.

      1. Rich says:

        If Tesla charges a $2,000 one time fee when purchasing a model 3, that would provide $1 billion in revenue to continue building out the supercharger network. Hopefully that’s enough money for the SC to continue expanding.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        ModernMarvelFan asked:

        “what is the point of partnering with Tesla if one can’t use it for your local charging?”

        No company participating in using the Supercharger system would want customers to use Superchargers for local charging. Local charging should be done at home, or at worst at work.

        If Superchargers start being used much for local charging, that will quickly run into a “Tragedy of the commons” problem. That is, the system would quickly become so clogged with people misusing it for local charging that it would be unavailable for people to use it as intended — which is only for travel beyond the car’s normal range.

        I expect this problem is unavoidable in China, where it’s very difficult for the average person to get a slow EV charge point installed at home, or at a parking lot within walking distance of home. But anywhere else, nobody should have to put up with people misusing Superchargers for local charging. If people can’t charge at home (or at worst, at work), then they simply shouldn’t buy a plug-in EV. Period.

        1. mr. M says:

          …and with that reasoning you explained why some think FCVH are the future.

          In the future there must be a solution for people without a plug at home, otherwise the only soultion for 60% of the world will be driving a Fuel Cell Vehicle when oil is bured.

          10% of US population, 40% of Europe population, 60% of Japan population, 80% of India, China population –> 60% of the world don’t have a home with a plug (streetside).

          1. Djoni says:

            Link or reference are welcome.

            1. brian says:

              I’m not sure about other countries, but for the US, a quick search turned up this article on this very website:
              http://insideevs.com/58-percent-of-us-population-cant-join-ev-revolution-without-a-plug/

    2. no comment says:

      gm has to be more cautious than you because they have significant capital tied up in their business decisions whereas you have nothing at stake. it is very risky to commit to proprietary, single source suppliers. committing to tesla’s proprietary system would be a big advantage to tesla and a big liability to gm. the people at gm are undoubtedly aware of how stupid such an arrangement would be, so i don’t expect gm to get themselves tied to the tesla supercharger network any time soon.

      as far as you are concerned, you are free to purchase a tesla…

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        I agree, it would be a very unwise business decision for GM to make its BEVs dependent on a charging network built by a rival company.

        It may make more sense for the various EV makers to form a consortium to build out an EV charge network to rival Superchargers, rather than wait for there to be sufficient PEVs on the roads to create enough demand to support independent for-profit fast charging (or ultra fast charging) stations.

        If the various plug-in EV makers could settle on a real charging standard, rather than competing charging formats, that would help greatly in pushing the EV revolution forward. But whatever standard they decide on must be made with the idea that it can be upgraded in the future, as battery packs get larger capacity and get the ability to charge faster.

  16. goodbyegascar says:

    Is everyone forgetting that the Chevy Bolt was an engineering impossibility only ten or fifteen years ago?
    Not available at any cost.

    I was really jazzed when AC Propulsion introduced the all-electric Scion eBox in 2007. I remember that it had a 150-mile range. The conversion cost was $50,000 on top of the cost of buying the Scion. In other words, the Scion eBox must have cost at least $65,000. I couldn’t afford to buy one, but I felt excited that it was available to anyone for the first time.

    So now we can expect the Chevy Bolt to arrive in showrooms around 2017. It might be the first long-range electric car that’s priced within my reach. A 200-mile range for just $35,000? I won’t need a tax incentive to justify that purchase. I think it’s going to be a great car!

    1. przemo_li says:

      Its Model 3 thats priced 35k before taxes breaks.

      GM always claimed “30k” AFTER tax breaks. That means 37,5-40k starting price.

      Of course both estimates are long-ago made. Both can cost higher for any reason.

      Though it would be silly for GM to cost more then Tesla for less bang 😀 so I think prices will change.

      1. mr. M says:

        But GM might be 1-2 years earlier to market than tesla. So customers have no choice than to buy the Bolt or nothing.

        1. bro1999 says:

          Then when Tesla does eventually release the Model 3 to the masses, GM would then be positioned to undercut Tesla on price, as the Bolt will have probably already been in production for over a year.

  17. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    “More Than Just Batteries: LG Will Be Supplying Both The Infotainment And Instrument Cluster In The Upcoming Bolt”

    This is yet another bit of evidence supporting why I think Apple wants to be a supplier to auto makers, rather than Apple actually making its own EVs. I strongly suspect Apple wants a slice of the infotainment and instrument cluster market!

  18. Narg says:

    Wow, I was very interested in this car until…

    1. The price. They need to shoot for $20K not $30K
    2. That interior! Gads! UGLY!

    1. I think the interior is beautiful.

      1. Texas FFE says:

        First time I have seen these photos, very impressive! This is a real world car, not the cosmetic sterility of the prototype. I can feel myself driving this car. I’m glad Chevrolet is trying for a more traditional interior instead going all out futuristic with floating displays like the prototype and the BMW I3. But I’m also glad the primary display appears to be all LED fully configurable instead of having a few analog gauges cramed in there.

  19. Lou Patrick says:

    Biggest takeaway to me is the fast charging infrastructure(or lack of one). I realize that the CCS format is visible in CA, it is hardly ‘everywhere’ and if GM really expects to sell the Bolt in any meaningful numbers it needs to find a away to give QC access to its customers. I took a trip to Montreal from my home in Philly this past summer in my Volt. Could not do that in a Bolt today, hard to believe that there are going to be a significant number of CCS locations next year. I truly hope that I am wrong. Maybe CCS and CHaDeMo will come to some sort of understanding(I highly doubt it!)that will facilitate many more combination units, and existing CHaDeMo units can be upgraded. If that does not happen and we are looking at a continues relative paucity of CCS availability, the Bolt then becomes a “2nd car” for most families. Admittedly, I don’t drive from PA to Canada very often, but do travel occasionally to NYC, which is about 100 miles. Can’t do that safely in a 200 mile EV without QC’ing. With so few CCS stations in the East Coast(I have yet to see even a single one out here)GM is putting a real damper on the Bolt’s acceptance if they ignore the actual QC situation. The Bolt might still turn out to be a very nice car, but it will not appeal to many families as their primary(or only)car.

    Lou

  20. Josh says:

    I am surprised that GM is giving up the infotainment systems. I see this as a big future monetization piece.

    LG has never made an auto interface have they? I wonder how LG will do in their first iteration. I guess this means CarPlay will be gone also. Strange to have it in the Volt and not in the Bolt.

  21. CopperRoad says:

    Here is LG’s infotainment page -> http://www.lgvccompany.com/en/infotainment-devices

    LG is apple’s largest display partner — so they have a strong connection. Why would CarPLay be a no go for the Bolt?