Chevrolet Bolt EV Priced From $37,495, Under 30K With Incentives

SEP 20 2016 BY JAY COLE 237

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Priced Under $37,500 As Promised

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Priced Under $37,500 As Promised

After recently surprising the market with an impressive 238 mile EPA range rating, General Motors has announced its Chevrolet Bolt EV will be priced from $37,495 including destination ($875) – again, as promised and under that $37,500 initial pricing target from 2 years ago.

“We have kept our promise yet again, first on range and now on price,” Alan Batey, President of GM North America

Chevrolet Bolt EV Offers 238 Real World/EPA Rated Miles Of Range

Chevrolet Bolt EV offers a 238 mile/393 km EPA rated range

The $37,495 price-point means that after the $7,500 US Federal incentive is applied, the Chevrolet Bolt will effectively retail from $29,995 for the base LT trim.  Also available, the Premier trim from $40,905 (+$875 DST, net $41,780).

We should note that the base model does come fairly well equipped and includes GM’s new “Regen on Demand” steering wheel paddle, rear vision camera, 10.2-inch touch screen.  The Premier trim adds leather, heated seats and surround camera.

CCS fast charging is available as a $750 option.  (Update: GM has stated that fast charging is an available option for both the LT and Premier trim, prior/other reports incorrectly stated it was standard on the Premier trim)

Check out the full list of features found on both the LT and Premier models below.

“Value is a hallmark for Chevrolet and the pricing of the Bolt EV proves we’re serious about delivering the first affordable EV with plenty of range for our customers,” said Batey,

Once again, GM also didn’t miss an opportunity to confirm the estimated arrival date for its all-electric car, stating that, “The Bolt EV will be available at select dealerships in late 2016.”

As an additional note on the expected wider release date:  it appears that GM has plans on the Bolt EV being available throughout the US (and North America) shortly thereafter, as while announcing a price of $42,795 (+$1,600 DST) in Canada – which includes fast charging, Chevrolet stated that it would be available in “early 2017”.

And yes, $42,795 (CAD) is a pretty sharp price for America’s neighbors to the north, as with the currency exchange, that MSRP works out to be $31,850 USD (+$1,200 DST – USD) while also taking into account the cost of fast charging (32,420 without doing so).

GM pretty much says it all with this graphic

GM pretty much says it all with this graphic

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Trim Details: LT, Premier (click to enlarge)

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV Trim Details: LT, Premier (click to enlarge)

Check out some promotional videos on the Chevy Bolt from GM (10 of them) here, while also the first long distance (~240 miles) test drive review here.

Categories: Chevrolet

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

237 Comments on "Chevrolet Bolt EV Priced From $37,495, Under 30K With Incentives"

newest oldest most voted

if i were to buy a bolt, i’d go for the premier trim; some nice features at a reasonable price. in addition to the federal income tax credit, many states also offer incentives. when i bought my volt, i received about $11,500 in incentives (the tax credit and a rebate).

that said, the bolt is still a lot of money for what you get, so i think that it is reasonable that gm has set modest sales targets. it’s clearly targeted for six-figure income households.

Well I think it is a lot of car for what you pay.

Perhaps you could point out to me what car offers the same combination of practicality and performance at a lower price? I’m not aware of it.

Over here in Norway where EVs are exempt from the high taxes ICE is subject to, in accordance with the polluter pay principle (EVs drive on hydropower, so the difference is huge), the Ampera-e certainly won’t have any ICE competitors that don’t cost twice as much. It will however get tough competition from Nissan and Renault who will both offer 40 kWh useable capacity at a significantly lower price.

Nissan & Renault’s 200mi-class (I’m actually from a country that uses metric as well, so let’s say ~300km+ class real range (-: ) haven’t next-gen cars haven’t been announced yet, and neither has the usable battery capacity or range, although it’s known they’re in the pipeline.
The size specs on the cars aren’t known either, and neither is the price for the Ampera-e in Europe, for that matter…

I think it’s much too early to compare prices…

I agree with the modest sales targets because most purchases are driven by perception.

But I think it’s a lot for what you get, as far as technology goes. It’s just that most people won’t appreciate that.

That’s Even “More Reason” to wait for the Model 3 for me ! $35,000 minus $11,500 Will Be Only $23,500…Foe 3 times the Car & the Prestige! It’s a N0 Brainer for this F00L…L 0 L………..

You’re presuming the federal credits will still be available when the Model 3 is released.

A 35,000 dollar Tesla won’t be worth buying. You have to assume it will be at least 42k to get the basic features people are going to want.

The median new car buyer’s yearly household income is 65K-70K, are in their 50’s, own their own home and 2+ cars, and buy a new car slightly over 30K.

To me it looks like GM is targeting the median US new car buyer, or maybe just slightly above that. Definitely not just people earning over 6 figures.

People with lower incomes will need to buy used, the same as people with lower incomes typically buy used ICE cars right now anyways. Luckily for used car buyers, much of the tax incentives are being passed through to the second buyers (excluding Tesla’s).

the trick there is to get people to look at the cost of the car after incentives. if you look at the sticker price, it’s a $40,000 car, and for that kind of money, you can get a b#@z c-class, for example.

Really? A 238 mile range BEV has the base model WITHOUT DC Fast Charging – an additional $750 option?

So, Chevrolet lied. The base price really starts at $38,245.

No BEV should EVER be sold without DCFC capabilities, let alone one with a 238 mile range. That’s like saying it’s a 238 mile city car only – because nobody will ever take a longer distance trip which requires a potentially 9 hour Level 2 charging stop, or a 42 hour Level 1 charge if you happened to go from empty to full.

Sure, you might take it for a regional trip, but it would certainly require an overnight charging stop.

if gm *lied* in your view, wait until tesla introduces the model 3 – your lie-o-meter will probably go off the scale.

What specifically are you referring to? What is the lie or lies?

Auto pilot standard.

Right at the Model 3 reveal Elon said Autopilot hardware will be included and Autopilot safety features will be standard. They have never promised Autopilot “convenience” features to be included in the base price – things like auto steering and the car driving and parking itself.

Did GM promise DCFC will be included in the base price?

He is referring to the fact that Model 3 owners will have to PAY to use their included Supercharger hardware.

And Chevy owners will have to pay more for each DC charge AND to get the optional hardware in the first place. lose-lose!

what i mean is that there is limited information on the tesla model 3, and in the vacuum, a lot of people have created their own image of what the model 3 will be. if the model 3 doesn’t live up to what was imagined, i can envision people coming to this forum and alleging that “tesla lied”. for example, i consider the allegation that gm “lied” with respect to the bolt to be ridiculous.


The Tesla Model 3 will have a huge screen in the dash, that will make the lie-o-meter easy to see. Don’t think for a minute that GM has the best deception tricks in the business.

i guarantee you that there will be people who will be on this forum complaining after tesla introduces the model 3.

Lighten up Francis. No poster should be so uptight. GM produced an unparalleled EV for the price.

You must thought that Tesla lied about its original S60 price as well (since it didn’t include the $2K SC option)

Or you must think Tesla lied about its new Model 3 as well.

It did include the hardware though, which makes is completely incomparable. You cannot add DC charging ability to Bolt after it leaves the factory.

Actually the S60 that didn’t include SC access didn’t include the hardware as well.

Don’t be silly, Tim. Yesterday half the negative posters were saying no one would roadtrip in a Bolt and today the same people are saying the Bolt needs CCS to road trip more effectively.
$30k net is a nice price point. It will come down as Chevy begins to make deals.


TimE said:

“So, Chevrolet lied.”

They lied several times regarding the Volt 1.0; but certainly not about the Bolt having DCFC capability as standard equipment.

“No BEV should EVER be sold without DCFC capabilities”

You’re entitled to your opinion, but you’re not entitled to accuse someone of lying simply because they don’t share your opinion.


+1 Pushmi-Pullyu

i’m not an ev enthusiast: where did gm “lie” with respect to the volt?

I don’t know if they “lied” but they were shooting for something like 40 miles electric range and 50 MPG on gas. They fell short of both of those with the initial offering.

The more recent model now beats that electric range but not the MPG.

i figured that the allegation was ridiculous. missing a target does not constitute telling a lie.


I totally agree. It is still a game-changing vehicle that destroys the dollar-per-mile-of-range of everything in the market, notably Model S60 at twice the cost, but you are still right. Selling an EV with DCFC as an option is a bit like selling an ICE with windscreen wipers as an option. You can still drive it most of the time, but nobody should ever buy one without and everyone will need it sometimes.

Kind of like a spare tire, which sadly is optional or not even offered in many cars.

Does the Leaf have a fast charging option?

Yes… LEAF has a DC Quick Charging OPTION… should be included… but it is also optional since both BOLT and LEAF are going for low end initial price points. Both cars include it on the high end. The LEAF can go from low battery to 80% in 30 minutes on a 44kW charger… which is what most of the CHAdeMO chargers are. The BOLT will have a somewhat tougher time since its battery is so much larger and many of its compatible DC Quick Chargers have been (the ones BMW and VW are adding to the scene) installed with 25kW of power capablity only. This means BOLT will take over 90 minutes even on the ‘Quick’ option. On the 50kW CCS Combo units it will still take over an hour if it is nearly fully drained before charging. Faster DC QC are coming… but it is also harder to find places with the electrical infrastructure to suit them… extra transformers etc… so… this will be BOLTs biggest challenge for multi hop trips. For trips where a splash and dash charge is all you need to finish a trip it won’t matter much… so 250 to 350 mile trips in BOLT… Read more »

There’s a chance I’d still get it without DCFC. All my road trips are under 250 miles, so even with one stop, I’d be fine.

I’d reconsider that if the BOLT were to be your only vehicle… for emergency trips when charging plans get blown up… or for rare longer trips… and finally just because of resale value of a more versatile car.

Contra wise, the Leaf with DCFC may sell for less on the used market than one without DCFC. The former raises concerns about the condition of the battery due to the poor thermal management in the Leaf, which is not so much the case if there is no DCFC.

What everyone seems to be forgetting is this WILL BE a 238 mile “city car” for a lot of people. Apartment/Condo/Renters that have no access to charging outside of work.

A lot of these people will be able to top of at work daily, run their errands and make it through a weekend on 240 miles.

Calm down.

Any EV is a good EV.

Yeah, because we are EV enthusiasts, we tend to think like EV enthusiasts. This does not describe most car buyers. The average car buyer looking at an EV is going to want range, even if it’s only intended as a “commuter car”. I don’t think the 200+ miles was ever intended to appeal to road-trippers. It’s for commuters and around-town drivers who want lots of range, that’s all.

“Apartment/Condo/Renters that have no access to charging outside of work”
There’s another scenario, where people don’t have access to charging at their residence or at work.
Even if people cannot charge at either, they might be able to own a bolt with little hassle. That’s the beauty of 238 miles of range and DCQC.

People don’t want to sit around a shopping center for 9hrs waiting for the car to charge on a Lvl2 charger. DCQC allows people to get something to eat and maybe do their grocery shopping while getting a charge for the week.
Unlike ~80 mile BEVs, Bolt owners might be able to get through the whole week before needing to charge again. I recommend everyone get DCQC.

Well, apartment dwellers would be wise to look for apartments where they can install an L2 charger. DC fast-charging is just not a good way to go other than for long trips. It tends to be an expensive fill-up, there are not enough DC fast-chargers out there, they seem to be broken too often, and the utilities are not real happen with high AMP draws during the day.

Utilities would be much happier with lots of people charging up slowly at night when they have lots of over capacity. And they will offer people cheap late-night rates.

We just need to get more & more apartments/condos to start installing L2 chargers. It is basic electrician work.

I think there should be an arrangement for when an apartment EV driver wants an L2 charge system, the installation cost gets split between the driver, the apartment building owner, and the local utility since they all will benefit. The driver gets to charge at home for cheap, the apartment complex gets a new permanent fixture that improved the property, and the utility gets a valuable late-night power consumer.

GM didn’t lie, it’s $37500 “capable”. 😉

I have a $100 bet going with another Volt owner that the Model 3 won’t have standard DCFC either. And it’s going to come in around 230ish miles too.

230ish miles is fine for even the majority of road trips, almost all of which involve a day or two at your destination, so charging while there just isn’t an issue

There’s a major difference between having the hardware port and getting “free” supercharging included.

Bolt gets neither. Pay for the hardware *and* per charge.

I see people confusing this comparison time and time again.

I would bet the bank that Tesla will not charge an additional $750 just to allow the Model 3 to be even able to Supercharge.

It will be baked into the base price and the customer will have options on how they want to pay for charging.

It costs Tesla more upfront but because they own their own proprietary charging network then in the long run they can probably make enough of a profit off of selling charging rates that they can pay for the network and upkeep and pay for the hardware that goes into each vehicle whether the customer uses the Supercharger network or not.

I mean what percentage of Model Ses sold to date that paid for the $2,000 unlimited charging will actually use that much electricity and wear and tear on the network over the life of the car?

GM on the other hand will rely on 3rd party networks for charging so they can really only recoup the cost by charging the customer up front or work it into their profit margin by eliminating costs somewhere else.

You’ll lose your bet.

Tesla model 3 won’t come with a standard charging port. It will come with an SC port. That is a port only Tesla uses and no one else can use unless the pay Tesla to use it. Even the Model 3 users won’t be able to use without paying Tesla to use. Assuming the CHadMA cable that is sold for the Model S works with the Model 3 it will cost you $450 to get something that will work with a standard charger.

TimE….You are so right!! Unless you’re selling a golf cart, no BEV should ever be sold without DC Fast Charging as standard equipment. Even Tesla should include DCFC on every car as standard equipment…then if I use their superchargers they can bill me for it.

TimE — If you don’t want to pay the $750 bucks, do something about it.

Grow some cajones, pre-arrange a loan at your bank/credit union, then march up to your Chevy dealership near the last day of some month next year and negotiate a deal where the dealership throws in the $750 option for free. Also demand that they don’t pinstripe it, or VIN etch it, or paint seal it, etc.

If they won’t deal, start contacting other dealers until you find one that will.

It is called an “MSRP” for a reason. If you don’t like MSRP, demand a better price.

After the initial release rush where dealerships will scalp as many whales as they can, frankly anybody who can’t manage to at least get $750 off the MSRP really doesn’t have any business negotiating a car deal in the first place.


Who cares if DCQC isn’t included in the base price. If we want to beat GM up for Bolt pricing, DCQC isn’t the place to start. Let’s talk about why GM is selling the Bolt with DCQC in Canada for $32,500 USD and selling the same car here for $38,500 USD. Now, there’s a discussion worth having.

I should have included the source of Canada pricing:

Maybe the pharmaceutical companies are involved.
Could this be considered a medicinal vehicle?;-)

Oh get over it. At least they included the destination charge.

I can see some people ordering it without the DC fast-charging. Although I’d definitely recommend getting it.

$750 to have fast charging is a must it should not be an option.

Option on base model, standard on Premier. What is your problem with that.

***mod edit (staff)***
It was originally reported the Premier would get DCFC, unfortunately in error. The feature is available as a $750 option on both trims.
***mod edit***

That should not be an option. Just shows how many corners they had to cut to achieve that price and it’s still too expensive for what it is as an overall package.

A substantial minority of the Bolt buyers will never use CCS so having it as an option makes sense. And $750 is a bargain.
Getting the net price of the Bolt under $30k is incredibly important. The median price of a new car is $31k.

It makes zero sense. For ANYONE. Even if someone could, which they can’t, somehow accurately predict that they will NEVER go on a long trip OR experience a charging issue (say, a faulty cable or a blown fuse causing you to come to a depleted car in the morning) it STILL wouldn’t make any sense whatsoever. The cars that are perfectly good for infrequent long trips are obviously more valuable than those that cannot go on long trips. And that’s the difference between having a DCFC port or not. So the second-hand value of cars without the port will be more than $750 below those who has it. In the long run people will therefore end up PAYING for not being able to fast charge. That is obviously nonsensical. This is simply a cheap trick that artificially lowers the MSRP by $750. GM knows full well that customers will have little choice but to add it – unless they really want to pay for not being able to use the car for trips and will run the risk of a small charging problem stranding them for days. I had to plug my LEAF in at work to make it back… Read more »

The reason you almost were almost stranded 5 times is because you didnt have 238 miles of range.


You mean your 110v adapter broke at work? If you had a level 2 charger at home (or access to one near by) that could still have worked. I have had my leaf 3 years and only used the high speed CHademo twice and wasn’t impressed. Level 2 is fine for a 230 mile range.

+10. My first thought on making fast charging optional is that it will create a total UNDER class of USED Bolts, totally crippling the resale value. The problem here is that too many folks new to the EV market will be buying these vehicles without understanding how important DCFC is and just decide they want to save $750. I have no doubt that at some point, at least 80% of those who decided to save the $$ will come to regret it. And then when they decide to upgrade, and dump the charge rate crippled car back into the market, you’ll end up with another tier of frustrated EV owners.

After you’ve supercharged in a Tesla, you totally see the folly of this very myopic decision by GM to not include DCFC in EVERY BEV.

Very true. However GM is not marketing the Bolt to be much more than a city car or regional car. So it does make sense from that standpoint.

Oh come on. I do think people should get the DC fast-charge option.

But that said, many of us have been living for years with ~80 mile EVs that don’t have a DC fast-charge option or have a DC fast-charge port but no DC fast-chargers nearby. It is not the end of the world.

With 230 miles of charge, there is no possibility that just running errands will get You charging midday because You must.

CCS is for long range trips, then.

Some may know that they buy second car, and will drive longer trips with their first car exclusively.

750 bucks is no small thing then 😉

If the Bolt is too expensive, then what is the Model S?

So GM shatters every existing $ per mile of range measurement and it’s “still too expensive for what it is as an overall package”. LOL.

Look if you don’t like the car and/or don’t want to buy that’s your business but calling it too expensive given the current landscape of BEVs is simply obtuse.

If I got a Bolt I wouldn’t want it so I don’t get why why you guys are so insistent it MUST have it.

Personally I would prefer the cheaper car.

Realistically if I’m going on a long road trip we’ll take our Prius V that can handle the family and gear much better than a Bolt could. Not to mention the wife isn’t gonna be willing to stop for 30 minutes every 200 miles to charge!

So I for one applaud Chevy for NOT including the DCFC and forcing many of us to pay for something we will never use…

Well they absolutely had to have the base offering at 37500USD

They should have left something else out then, it costs virtually nothing to offer it. It’s an essential part of making the BEV a desitable item. Plenty of vehicles never use the back seat of a sedan, but they are standard.

Millions of people buy cars with no back seat.

Adam said:

“They should have left something else out then, it costs virtually nothing to offer it. It’s an essential part of making the BEV a desitable item.”

The Tesla Roadster didn’t have DCFC capability. Even for customers who upgrade their Roadster with the new, longer-range battery pack, it still won’t have DCFC capability. So obviously a lot of people don’t agree with your opinion that it’s “essential”.

It’s certainly not going to be essential for people who use a Bolt only for commuting, and have another car in the garage they always use for longer trips. You can of course argue that Chevy is limiting its market for the car by making it only a “city car”, but there is a market segment for city cars. I don’t think GM will have any problem selling all it makes of this car, if they only plan to make 25k-30k of them… or even 50k, if they market it internationally.

Perhaps there’s a much bigger market than that; we’ll have to see. But judging by the very high number of comments posted to recent InsideEVs articles about the Bolt, I think there is a great deal of interest.

The Tesla Roadster doesn’t have fast charging because it is a v1.0 product that wasn’t designed from the ground up as a BEV, but instead used an existing ICE glider. This lead to compromises necessary to fit the battery pack. The updated battery added capacity but still didn’t allow for adequate cooling necessary for quick charging.

But that’s not the argument being made.

The argument being made is that a 200+ mile BEV without a DCFC port is unusable. And the Roadster fits those criteria.

I completely agree. And the same goes for heated seats – at least here in Norway. It’ll be interesting to see if they tweak the trim levels on the Ampera-e. Don’t know how much the heated seats are or whether you can get them on the LT (low trim?) version. But we can add $750 to the base price because NOBODY should get this car without the CCS port. (Seriously. The second hand value if omitted will suffer more than the $750 it costs. This is just a cheap trick to make the price seem a little lower. It is only slightly less stupid than if wheels weren’t included.) It’s still an important car and I’m excited about it, but I must say I’m a little disappointed they couldn’t refrain from this sleazy-salesman trick. It’s like that Buddhist saying about defilement. Imagine someone prepares you the perfect cup of tea, but immediately before serving dips the tip of a needle in some dogshit. Then they stir your tea with the needle, and serve it to you – saying “it’s just a little bit of shit”. In a similar way, when GM pulls any dirty little trick, just a little can… Read more »

Heated seats are in the comfort and convenience package on the LT trim.

The packages are like the Volt.

I have a 17 LT Volt with the comfort package and unfortunately only the steering wheel and front seats are heated. Have to get the Premier for back heated seats.

Also they changed it for the Bolt but for the LT Volt you cannot get either the confidence package or the confidence package 2 unless you start with the Premier. I think they said you can get the confidence package 1 with the Bolt LT.

$158 per mile

Maybe time for an update on this article:

According to another article, this $37,495 already includes Destination Freight. Looks like that is $875, so MSRP might be $36,620.

Sorry–according to the graphic MSRP is $37,495…

The Bolt EV website says MSRP does not include destination freight.

The Bolt EV press release says that MSRP *does* include destination freight.

Get it together GM!

No, it just seems that the Chevrolet website has a couple of standard footnotes may be applied to some quoted prices, but the MSRP is not asterisked.

When was the last time GM rolled the destination fee into the MSRP? This is a big deal if true and might indicate a trend for different pricing structures that are more transparent.

It’s very confusing. Why would they include destination in MSRP but make DCFC an option?

My sincerest hope, as the owner of Volts and a Model X, is that the competition between the Bolt and the Model 3 makes better vehicles for everyone. I am hoping the Bolt has negligible vampire losses like my Volt does- and put a fire under Tesla’s butts to better manage the vampire losses that I have in my X. Meanwhile, once the Model 3 is available, with access to supercharging, I hope that GM revisits its assumption that a laissez faire approach to a charging network is reasonable. The Bolt simply cannot be THE family vehicle until drivers can buy it with the confidence that they will not have to stop for HOURS before they can get back on the road again. Of the two, the charging rate is MUCH more critical. Within days of getting my X, I was on the road for my 1400 mile trip between homes. I quickly got used to seeing, and loving, 300+ mph added back to my range. But several weeks back, I went to a supercharging desert in North Central PA for one of my long bike rides I like to take. I used a destination charger at a location I… Read more »

Vampire loss in the Volt? What loss?

My Volt never loses range

thats what he wrote. “… hoping the Bolt has negligible vampire losses like my Volt does”

I guess some people don’t know what the meaning of ‘negligible’ is. There obviously MUST be some losses over extended periods of time, but I have never noticed a loss of range in the few weeks one of my Volts has sat idle.

Meanwhile, my X loses MILES a day. It is enough that it would be a deal killer for me getting a Model 3, even though I have a reservation. That vehicle would be idle most of the time and I could conceivably use more miles just sitting there than while the car is in motion. Not good for a backup auto.

I think he is saying that his Volt has no vampire loss and his X has vampire loss.

My understanding is that NCA batteries are inherently more prone to self discharge. They’re more energy dense but also harder to make safe and they appear to have a significant parasitic discharge.

You’re not making much sense. On the one hand you argue that charging rate is super important. On the other hand that Bolt will run up against a wall of charging envy.

But Tesla doesn’t actually have great charging rate. It has a great peek rate, which is all we usually hear of. But it’s average rate isn’t very good. If the Bolt supports 100 kW it’ll beat Tesla on average rate well before Model 3 arrives, also for those who buy it now. 150 kW chargers are here in 2017.

I’m assuming the Bolt will have similar tapering characteristics to Spark, and that is to be expected since they both use LGs cells.

GM has advertised that the Bolt can charge for 90 miles in 30 minutes and/or 160 miles in 60 minutes. So it looks like the Bolt hits the “taper point” about 40 or 45 minutes in.
Not bad, not great.

Your assumption is probably wrong. The 2014 Spark EV used A123 LiFePO4 cells which were famous for very rapid charging. When GM switched to LG they apparently used a “high power” version of their lithium ion chemistry to maintain rapid charging ability.

Bolt EV has much higher specific energy than Spark EV, which they almost certainly achieved by trading off some of the rapid charge ability.

That is to be expected. PHEVs, like the Volt, need high power batteries; long-range BEVs, like the Model S, need high energy batteries.

All other things being equal, we should expect the Bolt to taper its charge more like the Model S.

However, all other things are not equal. Tesla/Panasonic is not using the same battery chemistry as GM/LG Chem. Will the Bolt charge more like the Spark EV, with a taper much shallower than that of the Model S/X? I don’t know; that’s something I don’t expect to be given a solid, reliable answer until we get multiple unbiased reports from real-world customers.

My ‘charging envy’ comment is about availability (with no network), as much as it is about rate of that DCFC- especially since it appears that some buyers will forego the OPTIONAL DCFC, creating a huge UNDER class of EVs for the second hand market.

I have put no instruments on my X to measure kw, but the display does show mph and amps while supercharging. What catches your attention is the mph added back. And that rate of added range stays near 300 mph for much of the supercharging period.

‘Envy’ only exists once you have a comparison, and we won’t know about the comparison until these vehicles are actually out and available.

“they will not have to stop for HOURS”

An hour, to about %80. The situation does not require exaggeration.

Canadian pricing announced as well
Base model Bolt EV MSRP of $42,795* CAD (not including destination/freight charge).
Plus – DC fast charging is standard in Canada! 😉

*Pricing can be as low as $31,434 (plus the freight charge), after the eligible Ontario provincial incentive applicable to the base model of the Chevrolet Bolt EV of $11,361

*Note- This is a pre-tax equivalent of the expected Ontario Provincial EV Incentive of $12,839 on the base model of the Bolt EV.

Where did you find that information? That would be an oddly low price considering it equates to 32300$ US at the actual exchange rate. And normally cars are more expensive in Canada then US. If true, makes me wonder if Bolt will be cheaper then M3 in Canada.

I wonder where you took the Canadian price and your other information

Is it possible to provide the s.v.p. Link?


J’aimerais savoir où vous avez prix le prix canadien et vos autres informations

Est-ce possible de fournir le lien s.v.p.?


How much money will the car dealers make from this car?

Is this a corner not worth cutting?

If they don’t make money on it, they won’t promote it.

True. But their margin doesn’t necessarily have to be exactly the same as on other vehicles. The Bolt gives Chevy dealers a car to sell to customers who otherwise wouldn’t consider a Chevy. And they are on average more affluent and therefore more attractive clients. And the car is more expensive than the average Chevy. These facts motivate dealers to push it, even if the profit per car sold should be a lower percentage than their typical ICE offering.

I think you are right. And I hope Chevy dealers think the same!

Also a way to get the eco-buyers in: Chevrolet will now have the Volt, Bolt and Molt*.

* Malibu Hybrid :p

Why does a dealer or salesperson care if the Bolt brings in a more affluent customer? It’s not like there’s an upsell opportunity.

At $27.5k Bolt would be a terrific upsell for customers looking at a Sonic or something, but 37.5k is a bridge too far for those folk.

Problem is US car dealers get >50% of their profits from service, not sales of vehicles.

EVs have much lower service costs (a battery replacment is an eventual big one, but that’s a onetime item many years in the future) than ICEs, so less attractive for dealers.

They won’t promote it anyway.
I had to beg to buy my two Volts.

Maybe a few will promote it, but they will be few and far between. Just like Volts.

+10, sadly. Why on earth would we think that GM would VISIBLY promote the Bolt when we have had TWO generations of the Volt to see how they do with EVs.

I watched A LOT of Olympics, with A LOT of Chevy commercials. In one study group, someone actually thought the car under the tarp (a Malibu) might be a Chevy Volt. In another, the study group was shown a list of awards and one woman stated that the Green Car award was important to her. Two TOTALLY awesome opportunities right there in their own commercials to promote the Volt…and…crickets. The Bolt is just around the corner now and those same commercials could have mentioned it…and…crickets. I hope I am wrong but I see ZERO difference between Volt and Bolt (NON) marketing.

Well, GM did put some money to sell the Volt. Not very good commercials though.

But they probably expect the cars to just sell themselves and they will at the small volume that they want. They’ll just be like Tesla . . . let the interested people come in on their own.

This isn’t much news since this is pretty much what GM promised from the start.

That is good that it is confirmed.

Since the release of the Volt, GM has done a much better job of under promise and over deliver. I hope they keep it up.
I hope next August sees them roll out the 2018 Bolt with a lower MSRP and with the CCS improved to 75 kW charge rate capability. 100kW capable would be like getting biscuits with my beer.

Prediction: GM will roll a 100kW capable charger after Model 3 hits the streets.

Instead of leading the way, GM would play follow the leader? Never!

$750? I wonder how much a chademo retrofit would cost? It’s not like the car isn’t going to have a can bus communication on it.

I’m pretty sure it has a CAN bus regardless; it is used for a lot more than CHAdeMO!

I wonder when we will get the details on what charging rates it supports. CCS with 150 kW is coming already in 2017, so anything below 100 kW would be a huge disappointment.

I don’t necessarily agree it would be a huge disappointment, and here’s why:

With this much range, once you do stop, you can afford to stop for an hour to have a nice meal, for example. There’s not as much of a need to quickly charge several times during a trip because your battery is only 100 miles of range. It’s 238 here, so 4 hours of driving at 60mph average speed.

That being said, I think it would be better for them to make it 100kW since it is more future proof, and technically easy to do. They may be holding off on that for the next model year or something though, and for the majority of people, 50kW charging is unlikely to be a deal breaker.

It’s not 4 hours of highway driving. At 70 mph your might get 3 hours. Widely spaced chargers means it’s stopping around 2.5 hours. An hour’s charge then gets you another 2 hours of driving.

A 525 mile trip will have 3 one hour stops. 11 hours instead of 8. The Bolt just isn’t designed for cross country travel. It’s a “regional” car. Which is fine for the target markets (Uber/Lyft and family second car).

60mph is also highway driving. There are many 55mph highways in our country.

If you’re relegating “highway driving” to “interstate driving” then you’re correct that it’s less time at 70mph.

I still don’t see this as an issue. In my driving patterns, I make a 375 mile trip a couple times a year. I can drive for a few hours, stop for lunch and charge for an hour, and then make it to my destination. Total trip time of about 8 hours (most of my driving is not on the interstate to get there).

I don’t think many people regularly drive on trips exceeding what I’ve stated, and if they do once or twice a year and take their second vehicle, what’s the big deal? We’re making mountains out of mole hills here.

80 mph is highway speed, too. At least that’s the speed limit on IH-10 to my west and the 130 toll around Austin.

Your 375 mile trip what I meant by “regional”. LA to SF (or Vegas or Mammoth). San Antonio to Dallas. Lexington to Chicago, etc. The Bolt can do those with one stop, if you drive carefully and there’s a charger in just the right spot.

Cross country is more like San Diego to Tahoe, Atlanta to Miami, San Antonio to Taos for skiing or to Kentucky as my father drives to see relatives. Bolt is not designed for that. And that’s perfectly OK.

Correct. For San Fransico, San Jose, Sacremento and Los Angeles, it means a 1 hour stopover mid way between the cities. This a a huge part of the traffic on I5 in California. Tesla can do that in 30 minutes at Harris ranch.

Thats the difference here in the home state of Tesla.

CAN bus is old technology (1990s). I believe virtually every car made today has it.

Right after the car’s announcement one of the chief engineers said it would be either 50kW or 60kW, they hadn’t decided yet.
It’s obviously finalized by now, but I haven’t any official number.

The charging times GM mentioned in PR seem to be based on a 50kW calculation with some tapering.

You are grossly underestimating how hard it would be to add Chademo. You don’t just throw new components onto a CAN bus and expect it to work. You’d probably need a new component on there that sits on the existing CAN bus, spoofs messages from the PLC controller that manages CCS charging in order to convince the battery pack to stay on and not throw all sorts of diagnostic codes, and then hosts a new and separate CAN bus to send messages out over a Chademo port. Where would you even put a Chademo port?

GM could pull this off if they wanted to offer it in Japan, but i give it an absolute 0% chance of somebody pulling this off on their own in any practical way.

What reason could anyone have for owning s 235 mile BEV without a DCFC port????? Even if you only used it once s year, it’s worth the cost.

Seriously, without getting technical, the DCFC port is like running a couple of high current cables from the side of the car to the battery, why would this be an option?????? If anyone buys a non DCFC version, I hope it’s a dealer fit option at a reasonable cost, because used value will suffer.

I can’t be bothered looking now, but how much power does the onboard charger handle? I’d expect to pay $750 to increase the onboard chargers power rather than for DCFC!

Only morons will consider buying it without the port. And I think GM will make sure to let their sales organization point out to customers how not adding it might hurt second hand value. It is all just a cheap trick to lower the MSRP.

A somewhat stupid trick perhaps, as even “a little bit of ****” is enough to spoil a good cup of tea.

On the other hand, it is clear that adding $750 to the MSRP doesn’t dramatically change what they are offering. So I think one shouldn’t make too much out of this irritating but widespread business practice.

Tera, I agree with you most of the time, but I don’t think the Bolt needs CCS as standard this year. There will be a ton of people that buy the Bolt for commuting and or a town car for the dogs or the trip to Home Depot. And they may never road trip their Bolt.
Will it burn them on re-sale? A bit. But getting the car profitably under $30k net is important too.
Would I buy a Bolt without CCS. No.
But we are talking perfect vs. profits here. The two are warring on each other and one had to give way. It would be perfect if GM threw in CCS as standard but that would cost them a noticeable portion of what the profit will be on each Bolt sold.

There will be a lot of uninformed consumers that will buy them without the port and then complain when they find out their 300 mile road trip is going to take an extra 9 hours.

An extra 3-4 hours actually, as the L2 charge rate is supposedly 25mph.

Its a good point. Those GM commercials are clearly aimed at the EV uninformed. Somewhere there is bad press waiting for GM when non-QC users find out the hard way that their car CANNOT travel and could have if they purchased the DCQC.

i have stated this before, it would be a mistake for gm to market the bolt as being a car for long distance trips. even with the dc fast charging option, you get about 160 miles of range on a 1 hour charge. you would have to be a fairly extreme ev enthusiast to not object to the idea of driving 2 hours and then stopping for 1 hour.

It would be fine if they allowed anyone who purchased the Bolt without CCS to later take it into the dealer and have it installed. As far as I am aware this is not possible on the Spark EV.

Offering it as a later upgrade would probably be beneficial to the dealers as well as customers who make the poor choice of saying “Nah, I’ll never use that.”

I agree, the ability to install one later is a good idea, and it would be a service the dealers could perform on these otherwise seemingly service-free vehicles.

Yes, I agree. This would be a way around the resale problem. I would have to pony up and buy the capability if it could not be added later.

Otherwise, we take three trips a year to a beach house that is 212 miles from our home. As an avid cyclist and past hang glider pilot, I have no problem flying without a net. IMO, the perfect scenario in these times would be one BEV and one EREV(PHEV) per household. Problem solved. (for many)

I find it a bit amusing that the same people who made fun of the Volt owners that never used the backup now find it odd that someone would not consider the backup just for emergency. Bottomline, no one scenario fits all. Some people even refuse to buy a cetain auto simply because the color is wrong. Nope, not gonna drive that color. I know of at least one that thinks it has to be black. =)

That is exactly the setup we have – one Volt and one Spark EV. Any trip over 40 miles one way we take the Volt. It works very well for us.

The Bolt would allow us to take more frequent trips on electricity. And the Volt would be used almost entirely to commute to work or when we go out of state.

As far as mocking the Volt… a small minority of people are just blind fans of one brand or another. They mock all cars that don’t check the exact same boxes as the EV they have chosen for themselves. 🙂

Because someone’s leasing and wants a peppy suburban people-mover but won’t use all the range?

Because someone is not going to use it to travel long-distance, and is very unlikely to run out of range, and it’d be cheaper (and possibly faster) to call a flatbed on those occasions than pay $750 up front for the option and a chunk of money every time someone wants to charge?

There’s no reason it should cost $750 either.

There is no reason why GPS or a nice set of wheels or premium paint or an upgraded stereo should cost $750+ bucks either.

Welcome to the world of new car options. The MSRP profit margin on options are huge compared to the profit margin on the base car itself.

I’ll take a Premier. I want the heated seats, roof rails, and fast charging. Now to decide on color….

Also, when do we get ordering info??

Also, looks to me that there are not many options to add in that would inflate the price (3 options for LT trim, 2 for Premier). A fully loaded Bolt may only run about $42-43k or so, or just 12% more than a bare bones version. Compare that to a Tesla. 😉

Tesla has said that the average Model 3 will cost about $42k…

And if you check every box, you’ll probably get close to $60k. And if you want one late next year, early 2018? You better check a lot of those boxes!

I think people are going to be surprised at the price of a Model 3 fully loaded. Based on the Model S options and adjusting them relatively lower, a fully loaded ludicrous Model 3 could easily hit $80k or more. I’m estimating for my order with a larger battery, AWD, supercharging, paint, glass roof to be around $56k. If I want it sooner, it will have to be a performance with same options around $66k.

Where’s the navigation option? Are they doing away with that entirely in favor of guidance through Android Auto and Apple Carplay?

Can someone explain in detail what kind of charging can or cannot be done with and without the fast charging option?

Any Bolt:
120V “trickle” charging using household outlet (~3-4 miles per hour)
240V 7.2 kW charging (25 miles per hour)

Bolt with CCS fast charging port ($750 option):
~90 miles in 30 minutes
~160 miles in 60 minutes

Thanks! So regular CCS 50 kW charging as option, questionable approach….

I thought they somehow had the option to at least charge at 100 kW or more….

They had 90 miles in 30 minutes on their preview page, then they removed it reference to the fast charging and there were indications that they were still testing. Then they’ve put it back and Pam Fletcher had reiterated 90-in-about-30. So I think they’ve stuck to 50kW, at least for now.

Just speculation, but right now 50kW is pervasive, and 100kW is not available in many spots. It may be that the whole system is designed for 100kW, and Chevy may push an “over the air” update to allow it once there are more CCS stations available.

They have stated the vehicle will have OTA updates, so it’s possible. It’s also possible they’re only advertising 50kW rates despite 100kW capability, due to the limited chargers that have 100kW at this time.


Are 100kW DC chargers available anywhere in the US at this time? I didn’t think there were any.

I don’t know of any, which is partly why I think they’re advertising 50kW rates. If they advertised 100kW rates then nobody achieved that, people would complain.

Still TBD is whether or not they have the hooks and handles in to support 100kW charging. They were certainly considering it during the design stages, and they were quoted as such, but we just don’t know yet.

I agree. We also have to remember that 100kW doesn’t cut the charging time in half over 50kW. It’s more like it cuts it by 25% when charging from a low SoC due to tapering.

“It may be that the whole system is designed for 100kW”

I don’t think so. Chevy originally said that the Bolt would charge at 50 kW or 60 kW and that they hadn’t decided which. Why would they even consider 60 kW if it were capable of 100 kW?

The dialogue I had seen before involved discussion on whether or not they would support 100kW charging.

In a DCFC system, the only real difference between 50, 60, or 100kW is the gauge of the wire going from the port to the battery, assuming the battery can keep itself cool.

With Chevy’s TMS, I am confident the battery could keep itself cool, but Chevy may want to remain conservative on the charge rates.

I think both Nissan and BMW eventually made fast charging a standard feature. I agree that BEVs really need that feature as standard even if the buyer doesn’t want it. If the feature is there, it will eventually get used. If not by the first owner, by the guy who buys it on the used market a few years later. The public charging infrastructure needs more compatible vehicles and vice-versa.

You guys have it wrong. There are plenty of people who don’t need DCFC. This may be hard for you Californians to understand, but more than half of US households have multiple cars. At 200+ range you drive the heck out of it 360 days a year then take your ICE on the occasional road trip. Man, you guys act like DCFCs are everywhere and convenient.

I am one of the many Tesla owners who have never once charged outside of my home. I agree resale is a small factor, but not if you lease smart guys.

So let them offer the lowest price possible to get people interested. I bet 98% of the cars on dealers lots have em. That’s how these guys all operate.

After moving from CA to MI two years ago, the premise of having DCFC anywhere near where I would need it has pretty much disappeared. There are a couple in Ann Arbor, which is 20 miles from my house. If I go north, no DCFC at this point. If I go to Chicago, no DCFC at this point. If I go to Ohio, basically no DCFC the two routes I usually go. I commute 125 miles/day and am seriously considering this, but at this point don’t see any reason (other than resale) as to why in 2016 I would order a car with 50kW fast charge. When 150 comes out in several years, and when many more chargers are built in several years, it’s not like 50 kW is going to be a huge resale value… as you say pretty much 100% of my charging would be done at home if I purchased a Bolt in 2017.

I think a wrestling match between the bean-counters and the engineers and the bean-counters won.

That’s like the nerd Olympics.

I thought that was Quiz Bowl?

Fleets, in particular, probably won’t need DCFC if their area of operation is not that large.

I expect they’ll find most people will add $750 DCFC, and sometime next year you’ll have difficulty finding a Bolt to buy without DCFC.

I think you’re right. The base leaf is/was offered without the chademo fast charger port, but I know my local Nissan dealer ordered all of their stock with the option. You couldn’t buy a Leaf from them without it.

Well said Ericonline!
In my part of the American outback DC fastchargers are few and far between. It is likely to be that way for many years to come.

I advise everyone to order every option on the Bolt, including DCFC and premium trim so that in 2-3 years, I can pick up one of these off-lease and save big $$$.

Your assistance is appreciated by this frugal poster.

Sure, will do, if I get one.

BMW had the DCFC port as an option to begin with on the i3 and quickly made it standard.

A base i3 is also $42,400

The option was also cheaper at $500. Odd world where the Chevy option costs more than BMW.

It was $700 for CCS when the i3 was first sold. It became standard the next year; however, the base rose by $1000.

We should really avoid quoting peak charging power for DCFC. It’s misleading. A 145 kW Supercharger sounds like it’s 3x faster than a 50 kW CCS. The relevant measure is miles of charge per unit of time up to 80% SOC. This depends on the vehicle as well as the charger.

The Bolt charges at 90 miles in 30 minutes.

An original Model S 60 charges at about 115 miles/30 minutes.

The Model 3 will charge at ?

Every currently available Model S charges about 150 – 180 miles in 30 minutes. I expect Model 3 to be similar, due to the low drag/highway efficiency.

You can still buy a Model S 60. Looking at this video, going from the 5 minute mark to the 35 minute mark, only 130km, or 81 miles of range was added.

The Bolt EV should get 90 miles in that time.

I’d be interested in seeing how the charge time has changed since that video was made. Remember the 60 is now an electronically limited 70, so it should be capable of higher charge rates than the old 60 pack originally released in this vehicle.

I certainly wouldn’t get one without DCFC. We are retired, and would be using it mostly for weekly shopping, and doctor visits, but also for going to maple syrup festival, etc. So DCFC would be essential for those longer trips. And one of our kids would end up with this car eventually, with no more than 50K miles on it. Both are dedicated city dwellers, with no parking space, much less landlord or job provided charge outlet. DCFC may be their only practical option. That said, we will probably lease for the first time ever. Given our ages, and current global situation, three years is an eternity.

My random thoughts that I may or may not said before… GM could have beat the TM3 on all three fronts, range and price, but didn’t…Had they the media would have a field day. Their target should have been $34,995 which is extremely easy to do…Do not include the $875(?) destination charge in the price, MSRP of $36,620 for a $1625 delta…How in the world could GM find a way to lower the price by $1625? Very simple, do not accept the “standard” incentives, do not accept the $1000 off private offer or $500 off conquests… If they beat the TM3 on price, I’m okay with it not having DCFC standard, if you can’t be it on price than I’m not, wish they could have made it standard because I think a few years lots of people may regret buying one without it and the resale demand (not value) will tank… Seemed they “listened” to those whining that the Gen2 Volt lost it’s side mirror blinkers but it’s only offered on the Premier…I guess they didn’t listen to the garage door open… I really wish they just made automatic/emergency braking standard and optional on the top trim only…That’s required to… Read more »

“GM could have beat the TM3 on all three fronts, range and price”
What is the 3rd front?

Whoops! Beating it to market…

Oh yeah, I should have thought of that. Doh

SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD

I’m sure for Model Year 2018 if IIHS is requiring it, GM will adjust the packaging.

GM is keeping in line with the Convenience Packaging I and II across their lines for standardization. I think that’s a small inventory and brand control methodology. Some folk want a basic car with less tech; Some want it loaded.

GM — well done.

For me, fully loaded please. Now for the leasing agreement details — hope they mirror our Spark!!!! 🙂

The side mirror blinkers are needed for the EU. The Volt Gen 2’s not sold in the EU so they don’t have them. But since the Ampera-e will be sold in the EU, they need them available and it’s no big deal to include them in the Premium trim.

It’s much too premature to jump to conclusions.
1) According to one of Jay’s clarifications here in the comments, US law now requires including the destination charge in the MSRP. If Musk didn’t, the $2500 base-price difference might actually be just $1300 (Tesla’s dest. charge is $1200 vs. $875, and substract 875 from the 37500).

2) It’s still not know what the base Model 3 trim will include… Maybe the stuff the Bolt has standard will reduce it still further, or the servicing costs.

A lot of talk about the tax rebate/incentives.
The Bolt will sell most likely under GM’s goals.
Sure they may get close but the big hindrance is the buyer will still have to finance the entire car (minus any down) and there just aren’t that many people who has that kind of finances.

The Model ≡ buyers have that but the Bolt may or may not sway them to buy a Bolt.

You are out of touch with reality. A typical GM truck sells for more than Bolt msrp. How come there are enough people to finance Corvettes and $80k Escalades, but not enough people for Bolt?

WTF are you talking about?

I thought this was about an “affordable” EV?
Where the hell does a customer looking for a bigass pickup/SUV/Vette compare to someone looking for an affordable 200+ range EV?

Put the drugs down dude…..

Are you serious, the dated 108 range LEAF manages to sell 1,000 units a month but you don’t think this car can sell 3 or 4 thousand month? They’ll sell all they can make the first year then scramble to increase production.

They’ll sell as many as the stealerships will be willing to push.

Again, let’s all wait and see what the stealership markups will be.

Please go out and take sticker price pics and post them to insideevs Bolt threads.

The average new price on a car in the US is 33k so the Bolt will cost less after rebates…

Hopefuly they will make DCQC standard once the model 3 rolls out but I cant complain about the price as I had to pay extra for it on the Leaf I bought too…

I believe the Prius was the #1 traded in vehicle for the Volt. I wonder if the Nissan Leaf will be the #1 traded in vehicle for the Bolt EV.

If I were to bet, it will still be the Prius/PiP.

I bet dealers are going to lowball values of trade-ins on the Bolt, assuming strong demand for it.

I guess we will have to do a better job at evangelizing to buyers on how to correctly purchase an EV.

Because if people plan ahead, there is no reason why they would need to finance the $7500 incentive.

Option 1) Lease. Done.

Option 2) Starting in December, go to your HR department and have them set your federal tax withholding to $0 dollars starting with your first Jan paycheck, so they don’t withhold any federal taxes. Now this part is very important! Put that money into a separate account until you accumulate $7,500 bucks. Then go back to HR and have them put your withholding back to normal. Now take that $7,500 in cash to the dealership and use it as a down-payment.

There is no reason to wait until you get your tax return to get that $7500, as long as folks plan ahead.

By that process you’ll still have to wait……lol

Yes, but you won’t have to wait until you get your tax returns back….

Less wait if you do it right.

I wonder how much the confidence and comfort packages will be?

I suspect that GM has baked into these opening prices a fair amount of slack so that when the Tesla Mode 3 is released they can drop the price some and/or add in features like the DCFC (which I agree should be standard on any compelling BEV).

The big question in my mind is how many of the dealers will resist selling them and how many will go to non-CARB states?

I have to have the heated steering wheel and the heated front seats in the winter so I don’t have an option. I have to buy that package so the $37,495 price promise was not met for me.

The vast majority of the population of the planet lives in areas where those isn’t needed.
And either way, they never promised those would be standard, so certainly broke no promises.

I rode a motorcycle in winter in Boston for a couple of years, without heated grips, so not very convinced of the “have to have it”.

These items are only standard on luxury cars anyway.

“We have kept our promise yet again, first on range and now on price,” Alan Batey, President of GM North America


So is fast charging standard on Premier trim on no? Greencarreports article still says CCS is standard for Premier.

I am going to venture that the Bolt will be a city car commuter car for most owners, so lack of standard DCFC is probably not a show stopper. I do, however, think its going to be problem for first time EV owners who do not realize what they are giving up by not opting for DCFC, until they try an plan a road trip.

SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD

Most cars never go beyond 50 miles of home in their lifetime.

Road trips more often than not are done with the family Minivan/large SUV. For those couple only/singles folk that decision making will probably come into play for the DCFC option.

I welcome options instead of forced buys. That’s my preference. Others prefer no option and fully load out their products all the time. eg. I prefer just a little extra leg room on flights and will option that out, but would never PAY for business/first class service. To each their own.

General Motors wanted more than $37,500 for this car, so they raised the price without actually raising the price. They know no one with half a brain will buy his car without it being DC fast charge capable. I have a 2016 Chevy Volt. It does not have DC fast charge, but it’s not a problem with The Volt, because it has a backup plan. With the Bolt, when you run out of electricity you will need a tow truck. It will not matter if you are 5 miles from home are 238 miles from home. You will need a tow truck.

SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD

You do realize that retail Level 2 charging is widely available (in CARB states at least), so the chance of being stranded is as likely as that dude in an ICE waving his gas can. One can’t stop stupid human tricks.

Our Fiat 500e has Level 2 only in in 20k miles, not once an issue.

SparkEV…., if you have a Chevy Bolt that doesn’t have DCFC and you are 50 miles from home at a level 2 charger, it will take you about 5 hours to get enough charge to take you home. That is my definition of being stuck. To charge the bolt to 80% is not anything to write home about either, because it takes 1 hour and 20 minutes to charge to 80%, but if you are desperate it can be done.

ericonline (Houston via SF)

Not everyone lives in San Francisco. There are many large US cities with few DCFCs, especially outside of the city limits on highways where they are actually needed for road trips. Some people will choose not to pay for something they don’t need and/or can’t use. San Francisco may be the center of the universe, but it isn’t the whole universe.

More than 50% of households have multiple cars. Most people in this country live in homes with private garages. Many people will buy a BEV and use an ICE for road trips. It’s great that GM has made the base price as low as possible. We should be congratulating them instead of whining about what is not included. Hopefully many people in the middle of the country will take a look at the Bolt.

Well, BMW & VW supposedly completed their East Coast and West Coast CCS corridors.

Yeah, it is not the whole country but at least we are making progress.

The bulk of EV sales will continue to be in California for now though due to the CARB incentives, state incentives, an interested population, high incomes, high gas prices, mild weather, carpool lane access, etc.

Do we know how much each of the two LT and two Premier packages will cost?

Also, is the ‘premium audio’ worth the extra dough?

Whatever that cost is, most stealerships will bump it up with stealership markups.

Just look at all the buzz! No way these stealerships are going to let this frenzy get away from them……lol

Any info on leasing?

The first somewhat affordable long-range EV.

EVs are just starting to hit the mainstream now. Nice job, GM. Keep up the good work!

lol…. +1

When you ask many people what an “affordable” car is, the name Civic, Tercell, Sentra, Hyundai Elantra, Cruze, Focus or Scion names come up.

Someone must have much different cost tiers on what “affordable” means.

Well I can tell you what is NOT associated with affordable… Tesla

That we can agree on! +1

But I don’t think they ever said their products were “affordable”…

ericonline (Houston via SF)

There are many people that can only afford to buy a $1,000 beater. So I guess some people will complain until someone comes out with a 200 mile BEV with DCFC for $1,000.

Between the Volt and the Bolt, I just can’t seen how hydrogen cars can compete. Electricity is much cheaper, the cars are cheaper, if you really need fast refueling then go with the Volt, you can charge up at home, you can generate your own electricity with solar PV, etc.

I just can’t see how fuel cells compete.

Fuel Cells will establish themselves in the large trucks, long haul tractor trailers, and shipping.

Shipping? As in boats? Where fuel density is king, and they use some of the most nasty fuel already because there are no emissions regulations in international waters?

Do you mean that shipping? Or “shipping” as in UPS or USPS?

The later as in otr, is my guess. Not ships.

GM has the car to beat at this time….Nissan — what’s up?!?

When the M3 comes out in a year or so, GM will likely lose that title — but for now, they win the range/affordability game.

The biggest problem with the bolt is it is a Chevy

Chevy can build quality cars when they choose to. The Volt won the J D Powers Award for 3 years running. The Volt is simply a very nice car in nearly every way. If you don’t have to put an adult in one of the back seats.
The Corvette is a great sports car considering the price they sell for & the Silverado is an excellent pickup.