Chevrolet Bolt EV Rated: 238 Miles Of All-Electric Range, Arrives This Year


GM bests expectations for range on the all-electric Chevrolet Bolt EV with 238 miles of all-electric range!

GM bests expectations on the all-electric Chevrolet Bolt EV with 238 miles of all-electric range!

One of the longest running questions on the upcoming, Chevrolet Bolt EV has been answered, as General Motors announced that its all-electric car will have 238 miles (383 km) of range via its 60 kWh battery.

In addition, GM announced that the Bolt EV receives an overall efficiency rating of 119 MPGe combined – 128 MPGe city, 110 MPGe highway.

Chevrolet Bolt EV WILL arrive at select dealers by the end of this year

Chevrolet Bolt EV WILL arrive at select dealers by the end of this year

“Chevrolet promised to offer the first affordable electric vehicle with 200 miles or more of range and will exceed those expectations when the 2017 Bolt EV goes on sale later this year.

With the vehicle’s EPA-estimated range of 238 miles, owners can expect to go beyond their average daily driving needs — with plenty of range to spare — in the 2017 Bolt EV when charging regularly.”

And as surely as GM solved that mystery, they kept us guessing at another – pricing.

The EV has been estimated at around $37,500 (or under $30,000 with Federal incentive applied), and the news of the 238 mile range was accompanied by this equally vague statement:

“Bolt EV buyers won’t be able to find a better value for an all-electric, thrill-inducing ride with an expected MSRP below $37,500 and before available federal tax credit of up to $7,500″

And while we don’t know the pricing – we do know that the Bolt EV will arrive in two trim levels – the LT and the Premier. With options like leather front and rear heated seats being standard on the latter. Check out the details on the two trim comparisons below.

Chevrolet Bolt EV Interior

Chevrolet Bolt EV Interior

GM North America President Alan Batey also put to rest those pesky “would they or won’t they” (Bolts EVs) show up at Chevy dealers for customers before year’s end questions.

Ample legroom in the upcoming, 238 mile Chevy Bolt EV

Ample legroom in the upcoming, 238 mile Chevy Bolt EV

“Chevrolet showed the world the production version Bolt EV earlier this year and in a few short months we’ve moved from that vision to a reality.

The Bolt EV is a game changer for the electric car segment and it will start to become available at Chevrolet dealerships later this year.

A further GM statement backed up that news, while promoting other automotive offerings that the General will have better stocked at the time.

When the Bolt EV arrives at select Chevrolet dealerships in late 2016, Chevrolet will offer a flavor of electrification to meet any customer’s needs. Whether it’s the pure electric Bolt EV, the Chevrolet Volt or the Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid, Chevrolet dealerships are full of affordable options for an efficient and engaging driving experience. More information on the Chevrolet electric family and the benefits of driving electric can be found at

The Tesla Model 3, Announced From $35,000 And "At Least" 215 Miles Of Range

The Tesla Model 3, Announced From $35,000 And “At Least” 215 Miles Of Range

Currently, only the Tesla Model 3 is seen as a real competitor for the Chevy Bolt (although we anticipate seeing a couple other offerings throwing their hat into the ring relatively soon).

As a point of reference, at the launch of the Tesla, Elon Musk stated that the Model 3 would have at least an EPA 215 milesof range, so it would appear the Bolt will have the upper hand in at least this one regard.

Josh Tavel, the Bolt EV’s Chief Engineer also got in on the range announcement news:

“While range is important, we knew Bolt EV owners would want more — more space and more power — and the Bolt EV delivers.  Our team took special pride in optimizing every aspect of this vehicle, especially its impressive range and ride dynamics.”

Also of interest:  GM has put out a series of 10 short films (like the one below) on what the Chevy Bolt EV -and its 238 miles of range can do.   Check out all of them here. Also, the first long range (240 miles) test of the Bolt EV has already been accomplished – check out that video journey here.

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

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

More details, including the pricing will be released at a later date.

Category: Chevrolet

Tags: , , , ,

504 responses to "Chevrolet Bolt EV Rated: 238 Miles Of All-Electric Range, Arrives This Year"
  1. odycuz says:

    Woohoo! My guess of 235 was pretty close! I’m assuming this 238 means the lighter footed among us will see 250+ for a good portion of the year. This also means I can count on this being my next car as I need about 200 (plus) cushion to drive around the Big Island and pass a charger if it’s out of order…

    1. Miggy says:

      Great to see 383km range.

      1. Brandon says:

        All this talk about Tesla Model 3 and Chevy Bolt.
        Many are forgetting that the next gen LEAF will be an available 200+ mile EV too.

        1. Ash09 says:

          Would be nice if Nissan would give us some info soon on it…

          1. William says:

            Wait a few more weeks. The 2017 Leaf will ship in December. The Leaf won’t be the “Long Range Leader” among the ICE OEM’s. The Chevy Bolt has the “Honors” for at least the next 1/2 year.

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          But will Nissan put an active TMS (Thermal Management System) for the battery pack into the next-gen Leaf?

          So far, all the signs I’ve seen point to “No”. If that’s the case, count the Leaf out as far as being a real contender. People are going to thing twice about buying a car with such an abysmal resale value.

          However, leasing may still be a good option, especially if the next-gen Leaf is priced significantly lower than either the Bolt or the Model ≡.

          One thing that will help Nissan here is near-term production. Nissan is already producing the Leaf, so unlike Tesla, they don’t need to ramp up from a dead start to produce the car in large numbers. And unlike GM, Nissan has not locked in production limitations such as farming out the entire EV powertrain to a new and untested outside company; nor is Nissan dependent on a company they don’t control for their supply of battery cells.

          Nissan will be able to fully supply the market for the next-gen Leaf this year and next, however large or small that market is. That will almost certainly not be true for the Tesla Model ≡ or the GM Bolt; both will almost certainly be in much higher demand than either Tesla or GM will produce over the next couple of years.

          1. mike says:

            If they didn’t need that at 24kWh they surely won’t need it at 60 unless they go for a more fragile chemistry like the one used in Tesla. Larger battery means less cycling (number of cycles, their depth and rate/power).

            1. Gary says:

              Ummm – they DID need it at 24 kWh.

              LEAF has by far and away the worst battery degradation problems of any BEV. The new chemistries have helped, but have not solved the problem.

              It’s OK for a 3 year lease, but the after that the value is in the toilet

              1. mike says:

                There no major reliability problems with Leaf’s batteries. The main complaint is about continuous dc charging/driving on a hot day.

                Resale value is mainly a function of technology progress. You pay extra to enjoy driving an EV earlier than others.

                1. odycuz says:

                  Um Mike, I know 3 leaf owners who have never charged level 3, and the car has never experienced even 90 degree weather. Hawaii is a very mild climate 60-85 degrees.. and yet, 3 LEAFS have received a battery replacement this past year.

                2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                  mike said:

                  “There no major reliability problems with Leaf’s batteries. The main complaint is about continuous dc charging/driving on a hot day.

                  “Resale value is mainly a function of technology progress.”

                  Well, in a way, your last sentence there is correct. The reason the resale value of the Leaf is so abysmal, compared to other PEVs (Plug-in EVs), is because the car lacks an active TMS for the battery pack.

                  And you yourself mentioned one of the Leaf’s problems: That the lack of TMS limits the speed at which the car can be charged. For on-the-go charging, this presents a serious limitation, and is indeed an example of how EV tech from other companies has progressed… and left the Leaf behind.

            2. EVT says:

              They definitely need thermal management if they plan on selling that vehicle anywhere in the south. The Leaf’s 25% degradation of batteries in two years is unacceptable, people that bought the Focus Electric are way better off in driving range now even though they sacrificed trunk space initially.

              1. Guy Albanese says:

                I have lost very little with my 3 year old LEAF.

                1. EVT says:

                  I guess it all depends on where you live, and how you use it, though I’m not crazy with fast charging or anything just wish thermal management was put in place to extend battery life

                2. KenZ says:

                  Yep. I bought a used 3yr old Leaf, which now has ~37,000 miles, and still has all 12 bars. Works fine. Bargain for under $10k.

                  1. William says:

                    My Leaf is at 37,000 mi. as well. After 3- 1/4 years, all 12 bars are still showing. I am experiencing degradation at about a 4% loss of total battery capacity per year. This is about what people are experiencing in moderate climates, that charge their batteries in approximately the 20-80% battery capacity window. The build date has to be after 03/2013. At least the all Tennesee built Leaves and batteries are showing this outcome. 2015 and beyond are “supposed” to be even slightly better. We will have to wait on that 3 year report in 2018.

        3. HN says:

          The current Leaf isn’t very appealing in exterior styling. Unless the next one has better styling it will be hard to sell.

        4. GMan says:

          Any update on next generation Nissan Leaf?

        5. yuval says:

          If Nissan treats Leaf two owners as it does Fluence ZE owners in Israel and Denmark with deficient deteriorating batteries and churlish offers to kill the car for a gas burner I would not want to be Nissan owner. My first battaey dropped by 40 percent in two years and my replacement battery dropped to 70 percent in 9 months

    2. Mike says:

      I saw a guesstimate of 237 yesterday on another thread. You were close, but not the contestant closest to the actual range without going over. 🙂

  2. KM says:

    What? 238? That’s really good.

  3. Stimpacker says:

    Thanks for the late night (or early morning) news, Jay!

    1. Jay Cole says:

      GM playing games with us, lol. Good thing we are open for business from 7am to 3am, (=

      1. Will Elon buy one of these, or Tesla, and pick it apart, while they finalize the Model 3 Design, looking for any new tricks from GM?

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Of course they will. So will every other auto maker interested in producing compelling PEVs (Plug-in EVs). Just as GM and others will buy a Model ≡ as soon as they can.

        2. pjwood1 says:

          Elon knows Tesla has some superior tech, but that the production management, economies of scale, drivetrain smarts, tooling, etc. of a company like GM is a force to reckon with. 238 miles was a “screw margins, release the hounds!” maneuver.

          Even if they took a Bolt apart, what I think they’d find is something they’d understand but couldn’t replicate.

        3. Waiting says:

          Let’s not forget who released all their patents on EV technology, possibly making all this competition possible!!!

          1. emergymatters says:

            Sorry, the patent “release” is still bogus PR. Please name a company using a Tesla Patent with a written license agreement that cannot be pulled on a whim.

            Open Source means License, Code and workign reference design and a support forum and organized manager

            Tesla’s “OpenSource”
            No written license
            No source code released
            No design references
            No Support Forum or manager

        4. TomArt says:

          Why? Tesla already has the superior drive train. Always have. Fastest mass-production vehicles ever.

          1. ClarksonCote says:

            Based on what? They’ve replaced infinitely more drivetrains than GM has had to.

            Are you referring to 0-60 times? I guess then it would be superior, until it breaks, or until the subsequent replacement breaks.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Pushi says its a superior drive train. Therefore all other comments are invalid.. The Oracle at Delphi has spoken.

  4. Darren says:

    Wow! Phenomenal! Great job GM and Mary Barra!

    1. Darren says:

      Great scoop Jay!

  5. Pete says:

    Why wait on a Model 3, Tesla you loose the range game… Congrats GM, I didn’t expect such high range.

    1. Rob Stark says:

      Ha ha ha.

      At least 200 miles becomes 238.

      We don’t know what at least 215 miles becomes.

      238 does not necessarily beat “at least 215” miles.

      Bolt is still a small Honda Fit type hatchback without access to a nationwide and worldwide 135 kWh plus fast charging network.

      Tesla Model 3 is a luxury compact sedan with AT LEAST 215 miles of range with access to the Supercharger Network.

      Congrats GM, the gauntlet has been dropped on not only Tesla Model 3 but LEAF 2.0.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        The “3” supposedly is 55 kwh.

        Remember all the GM-bashers – “NO WAY could a chevy ever have a 60 kwh battery in it for a reasonable price”.

        Or, “150 mile range, if that!”.

        Glad that GM stuck to their guns and consistantly puts MUCH LARGER THAN EXPECTED batteries in all their EV offerings.

        If M-B ever put an 18 kwh battery in any of their PHEV offerings, I’d faint.

        Or that ‘super range’ $450,000 M-B roadster with the wopping 140 mile range.

        The Lowly BOLT just made all those crappy offerings from others, exactly that: Crap.

        1. no comment says:


          do you have a b#@z-o?

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          I’m one of those who made early predictions that GM’s BEV, what became the Bolt, would have only 150-160 miles of EPA rated range. It seems pretty clear that we were wrong on that prediction.

          Where GM has chosen to limit the Bolt is in quantity, not quality. Farming out the entire EV powertrain to a new, untested company (LG Electronics’ new automotive division) is a pretty clear indication that GM has no intention of ramping up production of the car soon, or quickly. Likewise, GM’s refusal to make any plans to buy or build its own battery factories is an indication of the lack of interest in building compelling long-range PEVs (Plug-in EVs) in large numbers.

      2. przemo_li says:

        Would love electric Honda Fit designed from ground up for battery pack.

        Best in class interior space and utility and electric drive O.O …. Where can I order it???

        1. Ziv says:

          The Bolt is closer to the Honda Fit in size than you might think. True, it is 8″ longer than the Fit, but the WB is just 2.8″ longer and the height is less than 2″ higher. The Bolt is a bit wider, by 2.8″, but the Bolt also ends up with interior volume that is slightly larger than a Tesla S!
          The Bolt reminds me of the Fit in a lot of ways. Check one out when they arrive in your area, you might find that the Fit is less of a car than the Bolt in a lot of ways.

      3. Kdawg says:

        Bolt EV is bigger than a Honda Fit.

        I wonder if Tesla is going to pick their pencils back up to try to increase the range of the base Model 3.

        1. Rick says:

          Elon did say 215 minimum and that they hope to exceed that.

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          This is one place where being the second to production gives Tesla an advantage. They can respond to GM upping the ante regarding range, and note that Tesla hasn’t actually said how big the battery pack will be; only that it will be under 60 kWh.

          But I don’t know that Tesla actually will actually increase their planned battery pack size. Sure, it sounds good for GM if they can say the Bolt beats the Model ≡’s range by 30 miles or so. But will that really matter much, when GM is only planning on making 25k-30k Bolts per year, while Tesla is planning to ramp up to about 400,000?

          And let’s keep in mind that so far, all we know about the Bolt’s range is what GM has claimed. The official EPA rating for electric range may be lower, as it was for the Volt when it debuted.

          1. Rick says:

            Ah but wait, can you upgrade the range on the model 3. The Bolt is maxed out.

          2. Kdawg says:

            “They can respond to GM upping the ante regarding range”
            And cut into profits

            “But will that really matter much, when GM is only planning on making 25k-30k Bolts per year, while Tesla is planning to ramp up to about 400,000?”
            GM has the capacity for much more than that. Those #’s are just guidelines. Market demand will determine production. Also, Tesla can promise me the moon, but until I see it, it’s just promises.

            “And let’s keep in mind that so far, all we know about the Bolt’s range is what GM has claimed. The official EPA rating for electric range may be lower, as it was for the Volt when it debuted.”
            Manufacturers do their own testing and tell the EPA. The Volt’s EPA range was not lower. Not sure where you are coming up with that.

            1. HN says:

              “GM has the capacity for much more than that. Those #’s are just guidelines. Market demand will determine production.”

              GM may be able to increase Bolt production somewhat, from 25k-30k to 40k-50k may be but not to 200k -300k if there is demand for it. Because there isn’t enough capacity for Li-on batteries from LG Chem.

              1. Kdawg says:

                LG has multiple plants and has more capacity at the Holland plant, which can put out 1.5GWh now. Their new plant in China, which only took 2 years to build, will produce enough batteries for 50K vehicles, and 200K vehicles by 2020. Who knows how many more plants they will build or expand existing plants.

                Note; the Gigafactory won’t reach full production until 2020 (IF they stay on schedule). That’s 4 years for other battery companies to expand.

            2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              GM has the capacity for much more than that.”

              Of course it does. And if GM brings production of the EV powertrain in-house (or assigns it to an automotive supplier which isn’t new and untested), then they should be able to ramp up production rapidly.

              GM can also supplement its supply of batteries from other manufacturers; Samsung, Panasonic, and others.

              What GM can not do is get that same sweetheart deal on battery cost from other supplier. It seems almost certain that GM got that low, low price of $145/kWh from LG Chem only by signing a contract with LG Electronics for the entire EV powertrain.

              Bottom line: GM can ramp up production beyond what LG Chem and LG Electronics can supply only by cutting into their already very thin profit margin on the Bolt. And if you think GM is gonna do that… well then, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I’m willing to sell you.

              1. Kdawg says:

                See above. LG is has the ability to continue to expand. They’re going to have to anyway with all of the contracts they have. EVs aren’t slowing down anytime soon.

          3. Darren says:

            238 is the EPA range, not GM range . .

            This post is the announcement of the EPA range

            “With the vehicle’s EPA-estimated range of 238 miles,”

            Read the post.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              I did read the article (not “post”), thank you.

              And what I know, which apparently you don’t, is that auto makers conduct their own tests according to the EPA’s standards. What GM is actually saying here is that they’ve submitted a claim to the EPA for 238 miles of range. The EPA doesn’t usually reject such claims, altho the rejection of Ford’s inflated claims of range for its PHEVs (Fusion Energi, C-Max Energi) two years ago was certainly in the news; see link below.

              My point is that this isn’t yet an official EPA rating, despite what the article says. We’ll know it’s official when we see news that includes an image of the EPA’s window sticker for the Bolt.


          4. no comment says:

            if tesla intends to meet its stated delivery goals, at this point, they are stuck with what they have got. if they try to start re-engineering the model 3 at this point, it will delay delivery. i don’t think tesla can afford that.

            the bolt and the model 3 are substantially different marketing strategies. the model 3 is really positioned against the benz c-class/bm 3-series. to that extent, i would expect model 3 prices to range from $35,000 to $60,000. i would expect that higher end model 3’s would have more range than lower-end model 3’s.

            the bolt is more of a “niche” car for gm, thus the comparatively modest sales projections. of course, if the bolt does prove that the interest in bev’s has extended beyond the ev enthusiast segment, gm can rearrange production capacity to produce more bev’s.

            so, gm is in a pretty good position right now: being first to market, they are going to be in the best position to assess the real market for bev’s. there is a certain elon musk “cult” segment, that won’t buy anything but a tesla, but it also remains to be seen how “real” that segment actually is.

      4. Neromanceres says:

        Does this really look like a Honda Fit sized vehicle to you? (Below is a Bolt EV next to a Gen I Volt)

        1. Foo says:

          Perspective can be misleading.

      5. Erik says:

        There’s about 800 existing CCS stations around the country, with, what, 300 superchargers?

        And that’s without a flagship CCS car. Plus, Model 3 is going to at least have to put.

        1. Foo says:


          Most every Supercharger “station” has multiple stalls — 4, 6, sometimes 10 or more — located along major travel corridors. And there is natural incentive for people to charge (usually no more than an hour) and then quickly leave (since they are traveling).

          Most CCS “stations” are single installations, most often uselessly located in cities, and always occupied by some greedy SOB and their Leaf all day long.

      6. steve says:

        Haha the big difference is that its right here right now… the real thing !!! In 2 or 3 years when model 3 gets out the bolt will probably even be better… if you like to talk without any hard evidence !!!

    2. tosho says:

      The base Model 3 will be cheaper than the base Bolt.
      The Model 3 will have multiple battery options. There might be even a 300 mile Model 3.
      If there is a lot of demand for the Bolt you might end up waiting for it much longer than for a Model 3. (GM will build a maximum of 30k to 50K a year)

      1. wavelet says:

        GM hasn’t actually said how many they can build. The only statement about that was on someone asking whether they could scale to 50K: “Yes”.

        The model 3 will be available in volume at best 1.5 years after the Bolt.

        Scaling production isn’t just about batteries — there are lots of other systems in a BEV, as well as logistics, QA, assembly etc.

        Tesla has a lot less experience than GM in heavy-industry production, and it remains to be seen if they can scale 10x in 3 years, like they’re currently claiming (~50K cars in 2015 to 500K in 2018).

        1. przemo_li says:

          Tesla could only do 80k of 80kWh cars per year, with Panasonic that is 3 times bigger then LG.

          Now tell us again how GM can build more then 50k 60kWh cars in a year?

          Some of naysayers try to pretend that with EVs established ICE players have big advantage. No. Battery pack production is bottle neck. Tesla+Panasonic is way head of everybody in this regard.

          Tesla+Panasonic is thus market leader and others simply can not approach the scale*.

          BYD have huge investment plans, so they spend enough moneys to fight for Nr1 spot.
          But one could say that its BYD+China 😉 So they do not need to care as much about CapEx nor about immediate profitability – two main reasons cited by established ICE manufacturers as to why EVs are not good investment targets.

          1. Jacked Beanstalk says:

            LG are building more battery capacity in expectation of volume not only from Bolt sales but other undisclosed automakers who want in on the same battery tech.

            50K is what GM can build in the first year of Bolt production if required. That’s based on actual scalable capacity of various suppliers. Oddly enough the Bolt batteries are not made in LG’s Michigan plant but in a Korean plant, but if sales volume requires it then LG can begin manufacturing them in the MI plant as well.

            After the first year, scalable capacity can expand to 70K Bolts/year as a result of certain suppliers building greater production capacity. I cannot say which ones but GM are not their only customer.

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          wavelet said:

          “GM hasn’t actually said how many they can build. The only statement about that was on someone asking whether they could scale to 50K: ‘Yes’.”

          Not quite. The statement (which was perhaps nothing more than an off-the-cuff estimate) that GM could ramp up to 50k Bolts per year, if the market was there, came from a GM rep who was queried about how GM would respond to higher demand. Unfortunately for his rather optimistic statement, we know that LG Chem makes contracts for delivery of battery cell in quantity, two years in advance. So unless the contract with GM specifies that LG must be able to supply double what the initial order is, that is physically impossible. And given that LG Chem hardly increased their output capacity during the first half of this year, it looks rather unlikely that LG is ramping up to enable delivery of a significantly larger number of cells.

          “Scaling production isn’t just about batteries — there are lots of other systems in a BEV, as well as logistics, QA, assembly etc.”

          True, but a supply chain is only as strong as its weakest link. It doesn’t matter how many drive shafts or car doors GM can build, if there are no battery packs to fit the cars that have them.

          “Tesla has a lot less experience than GM in heavy-industry production, and it remains to be seen if they can scale 10x in 3 years, like they’re currently claiming (~50K cars in 2015 to 500K in 2018).”

          It is almost a lead-pipe cinch that Tesla won’t ramp up production of the Model ≡ as fast as Elon wants. But so what? The point is that Tesla is going to ramp up production as fast as they can, while GM has no desire to do so. GM has a strong reason not to kill their own market for their better-selling — and more profitable — gasmobiles.

          Arguing that GM (or Ford, or VW, or Toyota, or Nissan, or…) could out-produce Tesla in making compelling PEVs (Plug-in EVs) is like arguing that Eastman Kodak could have out-produced any other camera maker in making digital cameras. Sure, Kodak could have — but they didn’t, because they didn’t want to.

          1. Sri says:

            In 1975 a company created Digital Camera for the first time..

            its name is …..

            Eastman Kodak.

            1. no comment says:

              …and texASS instruments developed the first personal computer. the reason why texASS instruments didn’t produce more personal computers than anyone else wasn’t because they *couldn’t* do so, it is because they didn’t want to produce personal computers because they believed that there was a market for them.

              1. wavelet says:

                Nope, not TI (you’re presumably thinking of the 99/4, which I actually got to use when it was intro’d).

                The first consumer-priced personal computers were either the Apple II (if a BYO-display-device is considered OK), or the Commodore PET (if the display is considered mandatory).

                If price is irrelevant, the the 9825/9845 by HP were probably first.

                1. no comment says:

                  if don’t consider the 99/4 to be a personal computer, then that’s your choice, a lot of people don’t share your opinion:


                  i definitely would not have considered the hp 9825 to be a personal computer; it was closer to a glorified calculator.

                  1. wavelet says:

                    We’re straying from EVs (-:, but you misunderstood me, so I’ll just clarify.

                    The 99/4 was certainly a personal computer, but it was only intro’d in 1981. That’s 4 years after the Apple II, PET and Radio Shack TRS-80 (also launched mid-1977).

                    By 1981 I’d already been writing commercial software for the PET for a ouple of years.

          2. no comment says:

            ramping up production requires massive amounts of capital. even if one believes that panasonic has a massive production advantage over lg when it comes to battery production; tesla has a fairly massive production disadvantage relative to gm when it comes to automobile production.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              Quite true.

              However, it’s very well documented that Tesla is spending billions to ramp up both battery supply and its auto assembly capacity.

              Contrariwise, LG Chem apparently is doing rather little in ramping up its own battery production, which is very odd considering the growing list of customers for its new, lower-per-kWh cost for li-ion batteries (see link below).


        3. Jacked Beanstalk says:

          Yep, 50K in the first year is possible. Word is, they can then scale to 70K/year within a year.

          The potential is there, GM engineering did everything right. GM designers not so much. GM marketers are incompetent. Thus I dont expect anywhere near 50K/year in sales.

      2. David says:

        Literally everything you just said is based on nothing but speculation. GM is delivering a 238 mile $37,500 EV later this year. Literally a mic drop.

        Tesla has yet to deliver on anything related to the Model 3. It’s purely a concept at this point. (This coming from a Model 3 deposit holder)

        1. Ed says:


          1. Spider-Dan says:

            They literally dropped the metaphorical mic.


    3. BoltBOltBoLT says:


      you will spend 37.5k buy a electric chevy sonic ( msrp 15k ) lol

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        This GM bashing is just as untrue and inaccurate as statements made back in 2010-2011 about the GM Volt; claims it was nothing more than a Chevy Cruze with an electric motor.

        Just because it’s built on the same platform doesn’t mean the overall quality of the car has to match.

        1. ffbj says:

          True. For one electric motors are just so much better, though he has a point in that the body is the same.

          1. Breezy says:

            The body isn’t the same.

        2. Spider-Dan says:

          Didn’t you hear? The Volt is just a tarted-up Cruze, and the ELR is just a tarted-up Volt, so really, the ELR and the Cruze are the same car. Which anyone can tell by sitting or riding in both of them.


    4. TomArt says:

      It is way too soon to claim the range/price winner. Tesla products have always exceeded the promised range and acceleration. The Model 3 will most likely do the same.

      And, as always, the big question for any non-Tesla 200-mile EV: where are you going to charge it? No intercity travel for the Bolt…

  6. JP says:

    It is a nice bonus, but you STILL can’t travel with it. GM should’ve reduced the battery size AND the price to match or beat the Model 3. That would have been the smart play.

    1. none says:

      Awesome! I can get 62% of the way from Phoenix to San Diego. I better bring a LOT of water for that 146 mile hike.

      1. Texas FFE says:

        The distance between the DCFC charger in Glendale, AZ and the one in Rancho Miarage, CA is only 260 miles. You could reduce speed and make it stop at any of the RV Parks and charge for an hour or so. You can walk if you want to but most people will choose to charge and drive.

        1. koz says:

          No, most people would choose not to drive a BEV at all under those circumstances. Only BEV die hard will drive. Tesla Superchargers ideally spaced already test the limits of what most people are willing to do on long drives.

          Thankfully there are plenty of people that can still buy Bolts and not need to drive them in this manner.

          1. Texas FFE says:

            What circumstances? There’s no hardship here. Stopping and getting a bite to eat while you grab a few electrons is no hardship and is what most Tesla drivers still do if they venture away from home.

            It looks like the Tesla worshippers are crawling out of the cracks. I think the 238 mile rating really cut at the heart of their idolatry. I expect them to say anything they can to discredit this serious competition to their idol.

            1. Klaus says:

              Have you used RV park charging? I have. It’s a pain in the ass compared to supercharing. Last time I did it one park mgr had no idea what to charge and I spent half an hour convincing him to let me charge. I would have done it a week ago, but all plug spots at the RV park were full and guess what, RV’s don’t leave after a half hour of use, so I was forced to level 2 charging nearby.

              Not to mention hours restrictions for checking in, the need to purchase and carry adapters, etc.

              To consider RV park charging perfectly fine for average drivers is absurd.

              1. Texas FFE says:

                Actually I have traveled between Texas and Colorado several times by EV charging at RV Parks most of the time. Some RV Parks are problematic but most are not. When you find an RV Park that has a friendly atmosphere you become a repeat customer, I think you need to try a few more RV Parks before you condemn them outright.

              2. Texas FFE says:

                BTW most RV Parks have 24 hr drop boxes and I’ve used these drop boxes many times for late night charging.

                1. Klaus says:

                  I didn’t condemn them outright, I said they are not a comparable experience to supercharging. There are real disadvantage to RV parks vs supercharging, not to mention the speed of the charge.

                  Again, if you think charging a Bolt at an RV park is essentially the same experience as supercharging, that’s your opinion. I suspect you’re in the minority.

                  On a more general note, the 238mi range of the Bolt is great to see! If I wasn’t a Leaf owner, I’d consider one this fall. However, having an EV as my only vehicle and wanting to keep it that way, has me looking forward to the model 3. The supercharging network, along with AWD and winter package, that should come with it are advantages over the Bolt for me.

                  I hope Chevy sells ever Bolt and increases their production expectations. The more EV’s out there, the better!

            2. Brandon says:

              I believe the point that koz is making is that most people wouldn’t reduce speed and charge at an RV park, and IMO he’s right. Most mainstream drivers won’t relish doing that.
              But for those of us who would do that, fine.

              1. Texas FFE says:

                EVgo has been installing CCS stations farther and farther into the desert between California and Arizona. I expect the DCFC gap between California and Arizona, at least in terms of the Bolt, to become insignificant in the near future. But I do disagree that Bolt owners won’t venture out into the desert, people are adventurous and resourceful and I don’t believe they will shy away from a minor charging gap if needs warrant.

                1. Erik says:

                  There’s currently one at Morongo, which is like 120 miles from LA

                  1. Texas FFE says:

                    There are some CCS stations near Palm Desert which are even further than Morongo Valley.

                2. Ziv says:

                  I read that EVGo has started installing 60 kW charge rate chargers, but I can’t find it now that I am trying to find it again. I hope they up their game and drag everyone forward with them. 75kW charging makes long distance driving much easier. 50 kW is nice, but faster is better.

            3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              Texas FFE said:

              “Stopping and getting a bite to eat while you grab a few electrons is no hardship…”

              If it was just a “few” electrons, it wouldn’t matter. Stopping every hour or 90 minutes to recharge for 45 minutes or an hour is a serious inconvenience. EV advocates like us need to stop pretending otherwise.

              When you talk that way to someone who’s not an EV advocate, it just makes you look like a fanatic, and someone to be ignored.

              The EV revolution will be better served if we EV advocates own up to the limitations of current EVs. The way to get more people to buy EVs is to convince them that their virtues outweigh their current limitations, not to pretend those limitations don’t exist.

              1. 2011 Leaf Owner says:

                Well said.

              2. Ziv says:

                Push, I don’t think driving at 65 for 3 hours and stopping for 45 minutes then driving for another 2 hours is a problem. Obviously, more is better but this is pretty good.
                In fact, I think the Bolt is a good bit better than I had imagined it would be for road-tripping. More importantly, I think the majority of people that would consider an electric car won’t see it as a problem, either.

                1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                  Ziv, thanks for your input.

                  I see a lot of argument back and forth about the limitations of (apparently optional) 50 kW charging for the Bolt, as compared to Supercharging a Tesla car.

                  As SparkEV has pointed out, the tapering on Supercharging is quite significant. If, as has been claimed, tapering on the Bolt will be minimal or nonexistent (at least up to 80% charge), then perhaps the Bolt can truly challenge Tesla cars for long-distance travel.

                  However, as I think we all know, claims from companies selling a product refer to optimal conditions, rather than conditions most often found in the real world. So I think we’re going to have to wait to see actual reports from Bolt drivers — drivers who don’t work for GM — reporting on their actual, real-world experiences with taking the Bolt on a road trip, before we can have sufficient information to make an informed opinion about the capability of the Bolt for long distance travel.

                  1. Ziv says:

                    I just read on the Chevy site that “You can charge fast enough to get 90 miles in 30 minutes or 160 miles in 60 minutes”.
                    So the Bolt may actually have a bit of taper before 80% unfortunately.
                    But on the plus side, 45 minutes will be virtually all at full speed and that will get you 130 miles. So 45 minutes gets you nearly 2 hours of driving. You won’t want to drive at 75 mph obviously, or rather, you may want to but it will trash your efficiency.
                    I think that is acceptable for most people that want to drive an electric car, if they don’t roadtrip every day.

              3. HN says:

                “Stopping every hour or 90 minutes to recharge for 45 minutes or an hour is a serious inconvenience.”

                It is very inconvenience for waiting anything more than 25-30 minutes every 2-3 hours.

            4. Get Real says:

              Well unlike your anti-Tesla ravings TFFE, this Model 3 reservation holder says a big congratulations to GM for building the first non-Tesla long-range compelling BEV!

              Like I said in an earlier post, this was Tesla’s master plan all along to force the laggard OEMs through its competition to start doing this.

            5. Waiting says:

              For an hour or so???????????? I’m not stopping on a road trip like the one ‘None’ mentioned for 5.84 hours of charging (25 miles/per hour), just so that I could finish the remaining 146 miles. Not when I could drive a Model 3 from Phoenix to Mexicali, spend 20-30 minutes to charge, and then continue to San Diego.

              1. Texas FFE says:

                You completely missed it didn’t you? It’s 23 miles, not 146 miles. But I guess you are to do your best to crtisize the Bolt no matter how dumb it makes you look.

                1. Waiting says:

                  You replied, “You completely missed it didn’t you? It’s 23 miles, not 146 miles. But I guess you are to do your best to crtisize the Bolt no matter how dumb it makes you look.”

                  Wow! Why are you getting personal? ‘None’ said the remainder of his trip would be around 146 miles (not 23), based upon the estimated range of the Bolt that you provided. Then you posted something about charging at RV locations and other locations. Even with a 240v charger, Chevy says the Bolt charges at 25 miles per hour. For the 146 miles that ‘None’ would need to complete his trip, that’s 5.84 hours of charging. I simply said, no way would I put up with sitting around that long to charge an EV. And for the record, I think the Bolt looks like a great BEV, but I would never use it for a road trip. Around town it would handle all my needs and more….but not traveling which is why I lean toward the Model 3. When you respond to people who question your conclusions, you may want to attempt to be civil.

                  1. Texas FFE says:

                    Question my conclusion? You didn’t even read my conclusion or if you did you completely misunderstood it. What did you not understand about there is only a 260 mile gap between CCS chargers?

                    That leaves only 22 miles from the rated EPA range of 238 miles, not 146 miles. I don’t know I’m even bothering with you, you’re obviously not interested in logic or reason. You appear to be just another brain dead Tesla cultist.

          2. Texas FFE says:

            BTW those RV parks are used frequently by Tesla owners charging between California and Arizona. There are also a few Tesla destination chargers that the Bolt can charge at with a $200 adapter.

            1. ClarksonCote says:

              One interesting note on Bolt EV Charging. The website states, “Up to 90 miles of range in about 30 minutes of charge*” for the Bolt EV, and it does NOT say any conditional statement about “when optionally equipped with DCFC capability”

              So does this mean the Bolt EV may have DC charging standard?

              Also, 90 miles range in 30 minutes sounds like 50kW charging to me.

              1. RobertM says:


                DC Fast Charge capability is available to Bolt EV owners for an additional cost

                1. ClarksonCote says:

                  Thanks, you’re right. I expected them to state that caveat as well on the link below, but they did not.


              2. Bill Howland says:

                No, unless the concierge I spoke with was mis-informed. The Bolt website has been recently updated with new info, one thing interestingly is now the charge time is 9 1/2 hours up from 9. Perhaps because all the pics show it with a 30 amp wallbox.

                But then, it does seem that the 32 amp charger will be standard, and it will be 120 volt compatible (but no info as to whether there will be the choice of 8 or 12 amps). And either Bosch or GM calls the outlet a ‘110’ which is accurate enough without splitting hairs. And its optimistic for my neighborhood as I’ve previously explained.

                So I want an LT without the CCS, and without all the automatic crap that the Premiere has.

                1. ClarksonCote says:

                  The site (link: ) states 25 miles per hour of charge, which seems to agree with what you said here. 238 miles divided by 25 miles would be about 9.52 hours. Slightly hand-wavy (ignoring the subtleties of potential nonlinear charging regions, and 25 miles/hour is “approximate), but it sounds like you’re right.

                  1. Bill Howland says:


                    From the ‘b-roll’ vids on another article, the 8 and 12 amp level 1 charging rates ramain just as from the very first Volt.

        2. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

          This Exactly. There’s an upper limit of the Tesla supercharger network and advantage has been tapped.

          Now with just as long legs and public format CCS that will build up naturally with demand, it will outpace and charge in logical areas. RV parks are a temporary (and mostly nice) areas to recharge.

          That quick bit between Phoenix and PalmSprings? Enjoy that one Carls’ Jr. as your sole choice.

          Most places in Cali, where there’s a supercharger, there’s 3x CCS chargers nearby — and growing. VW will be a large part of that going forward too with their settlement agreement.

      2. Leaf2012 says:

        Even if the Bolt only has 50kW CCS charging you would only need one charging stop of about 45 minutes for that 355 mile trip. Or you can split that charging time into 2 or 3 stops if you prefer or if there are no fast chargers in the middle of the trip. Remember you can do other things while the car is charging. Most people do not drive 6 hours non-stop without even going to toilet or grabbing something to eat anyway.

        1. Ziv says:

          I am really hoping they “future proof” the Bolt and make it capable of charging at 60+ kW charge rates. Making a 40-45 minute lunch break every 2.5 hours isn’t much of a problem. For most drivers it is the amount of time they need to stretch their legs and grab a bite, as you note.
          But going from 50 to even 60 kW charge rates would chop 15-20% off the charge time needed.
          Given the likely 220 mile hwy AER this isn’t absolutely needed, but it would be nice.
          238 miles is huge.

        2. Ziv says:

          Just noticed something on the GM site. It says you can charge the Bolt and get 90 miles in 30 minutes or 160 miles in an hour of charging. So the charge rate taper at the end of the charging looks to start at around 40 to 45 minutes.

      3. Goaterguy says:

        Imagine a world where you could buy any other car that would fit your needs…

        I travel to Asia and Europe multiple times a year, guess the Bolt is not for me as it can’t fly or drive under water.

        Some people should think before posting.

    2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      GM doesn’t need to beat vaporware, it is impossible. Sure GM and crowd will do it when vaporware will be become reality, if ever, but it will take long time, maybe GM will be releasing new model by then.

      1. Erik says:

        Exactly. This is the 2017 Bolt, the 2018 won’t change much, since there won’t be many model 3s (if any), but I could see a price drop and an option for a bigger battery. 2019 would be prime for a mid-generation refresh, then a brand new, true Model 3 killer in 2021.

        Plus pickup trucks and SUVs, I’m sure.

  7. Someone out there says:

    GM hits it out of the park! 238 miles is massive! Great job! This sets a new standard for future “affordable” EVs. This also puts the model 3 under pressure. The 3 still has the Supercharger advantage but the other standards are coming along nicely although slower.

    Tesla just got a huge competitor, I wonder what this will do to the 400k preorders?

    1. bro1999 says:

      Definitely not 400k anymore. Lol

      1. przemo_li says:

        Never really was 400k. Tesla posted only 380ish thousands.

        Nor should we expect it to budge much without second unveiling event.

        Fast charging rules supreme though. Both cars are affordable for both potential buyers groups. In fact both potential buyer groups are exactly same group 😉

        So if on of the cars can post significant better fast charge times and enough production capacity, its over for the second one 😉

        1. Kdawg says:

          The question is, will Tesla have to accelerate part 2 of the M3 unveiling? Bolt EVs are rolling off the line now, with retail production ones, not far away. Once those hit lots at the end of the year and in Jan 2017, those sales could be taking sales from potential M3 buyers.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            What does it matter if potential Model ≡ sales are “stolen” over the next 2-3 years? Tesla will sell as many Model ≡’s as it can make over that period. Only when Tesla’s production of the Model ≡ approaches demand, will competition become important.

            Of course, it is prudent of Tesla to look ahead to the time when there will be real competition for the Model ≡, so keeping potential buyers thinking about the M≡ is a good thing. But in the near term, it doesn’t matter because nobody will be building compelling PEVs (Plug-in EVs) in the quantity that Tesla plans to.

            1. Kdawg says:

              “real competition”

              I just threw up in my mouth a bit.

              1. super390 says:

                CUVs make me throw up in my mouth a bit too. But if they must be sold, and sold at a premium price, better they be EVs.

                Meanwhile, I want a high-performance mid-sized luxury sedan for that kind of money. And better it be an EV.

                So I’ll wait. I don’t see what crime I’ve committed in your eyes except to not hail the mighty GM as though it was somehow more American than Tesla.

                1. Kdawg says:

                  Did not accuse you of any crime, and didn’t suggest GM is more American than Tesla.

              2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:


                In case it’s not clear from my other posts here and elsewhere, I think the Bolt is (or will be) a compelling PEV (Plug-in EV). My only serious complaint about it is that, in my opinion, GM very obviously has no intention of making and selling it in large numbers. I think I’ve given some pretty sound reasons for that opinion.

                If you disagree, if you think GM will rapidly ramp up production of the Bolt… well, let’s wait a couple of years and see who is correct, okay? In the meantime, no point in aiming pejorative posts in my direction merely because I’m not a GM cheerleader like you.

                If I slam GM unfairly, then by all means point that out and criticize me. But I don’t think I deserved that comment from you.

                1. Kdawg says:

                  I get tired of those cliches. It’s as if, Tesla is the only company capable of making a decent plugin. I did miss the part of your post where you said “in the quantities Tesla is”, because I stopped at “compelling”. Sorry.

                  I agree that GM will take it slow, at first, w/the Bolt EV, but I also think there is less market for GM electric products vs. the rah-rah Tesla group, regardless of the product. That can be a temporary situation.

                  I also think it’s a concern for Tesla if they start losing a lot of sales to competition because they are building a gigafactory, and need to be able to sell all the cars/batteries they produce, in order to get the cost savings of scale. Right now it seems like that won’t be an issue, but it wasn’t long ago when no one knew there was going to be a 238 mile BEV for $30k after credits. Toyota engineers are saying it’s cheaper to build BEVs than hybrids now (just not the longer range ones). Once (if) they join the bandwagon, they could use their cachet to take even more sales.

                  The silver lining is Elon is getting his wish, of pushing all the OEMs to EVs. Tesla stockholders may not be happy though.

    2. danzorr says:

      Come on! That roller-skate-looking Chevy thing will never be a competitor to a Tesla. Maybe a Cadillac could be, but not a Chevy. The Tesla starting price will be cheaper and it will be a more luxurious, better-looking car. Even if the M3 base range ends up being less than the Bolt, there will be at least one higher-range option that will be 250+ miles.

      1. Kdawg says:

        Don’t worry. It’ll all be OK.

        1. WadeTyhon says:

          You mock him now, but Tesla is going to revolutionize the tissue industry with the sexiest, highest performing Kleenex-killer on the market.

          1. sven says:

            Tesla will redesign the tissue box opening and replace the oval opening with falcon-winged door lids. If you’re right handed and reaching for a tissue, the right FWD lid will open and the left FWD lid for left handed people. These FWD lid openings will be far superior because they are larger than tradition oval openings, and when used outdoors in the rain the FWD lids will even keep the tissues dry when opened. 😀

            1. WadeTyhon says:

              Brilliant! They’ve almost thought of everything!

              I’m going to be holding onto my money though for the next model which has complex mood sensors and AutoDispense for when you are crying, sneezing, or watching the Model Y unveiling.

        2. b says:

          The problem is even there is no model 3, who is stupid enough to buy 37.5k electric chevy sonic??!!

          And top speed is pity 90mph which is even worse than its ICE version’s 125mph

          bolt’s horsepower definitely smaller than 120HP

          How dumb to buy this crap

          37.5k you can buy a top trim pilot highlander

          30K you can buy a top trim accord

          1. Bill Howland says:

            Well, my supposed DOG of a car, the 2014 ELR was test driven sunday by a guy who floored the accelerator while it was in its slower EV mode, and he said “Wow! That’s plenty fast enough for me!”.

            Zillions of VW microbuses with 53-57 hp engines were purchased. Of course all the ‘big experts’ at the time said such a vehicle was unusable and that ‘no one’ would buy it. The ones from the 1960’s in good shape go currently for more than $100,000.

            So much for big experts.

          2. Spider-Dan says:

            Nearly 200,000 people bought the “$40k electric Chevy Cruze” or the “$35k electric Nissan Versa.”

            Amazing what an EV drivetrain can do.

          3. Kdawg says:

            “30K you can buy a top trim accord”

            Who the F want’s an Accord??

            Take your meds

            1. Rick (no, not that Rick) says:

              My wife loves her Accord! And it only cost $29K.

              1. Kdawg says:

                But don’t you see the lunacy of going onto a pro-EV sight, and in response to an article on the first affordable long range EV, posting “How dumb to buy this crap”?

                Then suggesting people buy a Honda Pilot or Accord?

          4. fotomoto says:

            The same reasoning can be used to dismiss the Model 3.

          5. WadeTyhon says:

            Well, this is InsideEV’s right? I don’t think the comparison vehicles you suggested would be good alternatives for anyone who was considering an EV in the first place.

            I will love my future Bolt EV. I’ve had two chevy EV’s now and they are fantastic. But I hold no ill will towards any Leaf, Tesla, BMW i3 owners. 🙂 The end goal is the same.

          6. Dr. Miguelito Loveless says:

            Obvious troll is obvious

  8. LEAF_n_PiP says:

    Are they still using the 60kWh battery, or did they up the size? I know it’s a small car, but with how tall it looks I would have assumed the coefficient of drag would prevent it from getting that much range.

    1. Bill Howland says:

      There was info about them modifying the design through standard wind-tunnel-testing to decrease the horsepower requirement, and, of course, it uses more a more efficient motor than the old fashioned induction job used in the Tesla Products.

      So if the “S” 60 kwh model could go 206 miles, it no great surprise this vehicle can go 238, and its boxy shape and flat floors mean a huge amount of usable space inside for people and cargo.

      1. przemo_li says:

        Bolt is ———1,624 kg (3,580 lb)
        Model S 60kWh is 1,961 kg (4,323 lb)

        Model S steats confortably 5 adults and have best safty ratings ever.

        Its to be seen weather Bolt can deliver those two, or maybe they where sacrificed for the weight efficiency. 😉

        1. x says:

          (big) tesla supporter here.
          You cannot compare the two, MS is about twice the price, it’s in a different class.x

          1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

            “different class”. It is very different car, yes. But you can’t define class just by price tag. You need to provide features to justify price tag, or competitors will eat you.

            1. Get Real says:

              Yeah, just ask MB as the Model S destroys their S Class market share.

            2. super390 says:

              You don’t understand how luxury cars work. You’re like the Big 3-loving yokels who bought into Ford’s 1975 advertising campaign comparing their new crypto-luxury Granada with the Mercedes C-Class of that era based on “features” and the Mercedes being triple the price.

              No one even remembers the Granada today. It was simply a boring intermediate American car meant for a completely different owner than the Mercedes.

              I’m getting sick of EV sites drowning in brain-dead commentary by treehuggers and right-wing trolls who have no real interest in the evolution of the automobile or the auto industry. For EVs to matter, there can’t be a single EV market, there must be many EV markets and the Bolt and Model 3 are just trying to serve two of the ones we hope will be huge.

        2. ClarksonCote says:

          Jay’s writeup says the Bolt EV has a 60kWh battery.

        3. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          “Model S steats confortably 5 adults and have best safty ratings ever.”

          It doesn’t seat comfortable more than 2, and even these 2 should take rather low seating position, which may be uncomfortable for older age people. Seating in the back of Model S is not comfortable, your head is too close to roof unless your height is below average. And yes, you can add 2 more child seats in luggage compartment – but I would not want to risk my child lives placing them there.

          Bolt on the other side didn’t compromise head space for marginal aerodynamic improvement, and as EPA rage and mpge shows, the outcome is significantly better than Model S anyway.

          1. ffbj says:

            Your views are prejudicial, and though I think there is less head space than there might be too, your continued unabated, slanted, and wholly unfavorable view of Tesla, the premier ev car company in the world, is unwarranted.
            Personally I find most of your comments to be so, funnily excluding this one.

    2. R.S says:

      Drag doesn’t have such a big influence on driving cycles. City driving is more valued than highway and at low speeds aerodynamic drag is neglegable.

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Looks to me like GM lowered the rear roofline of the Bolt. That would improve streamlining, which would enable improved range. No increase in battery pack capacity necessary.

      Here’s what the concept car looked like:

      And the production version:

  9. Charles says:

    Is there any news as to whether it will be available in Australia?

    1. Just_Chris says:

      No rhd version, the only bolts in Australia are the early design prototypes in port Melbourne.

      1. Jason says:

        You would expect they will bring one out eventually, otherwise they miss a huge market of lease vehicles coming off lease on the UK soon.

        1. wavelet says:

          That number isn’t huge by GM standards (-:
          Anyway, I’m sure they’ll wait to see how sales go for the first year, in additional to fixing any engineering issues, before they go to the additional expense of a RHD version.

          Recall, the majority of the worldwide RHD market for cars in general is in Japan & India; both aren’t relevant for the Bolt, Japan because it’s not a Japanese car (and Japanese basically don’t buy non-Japanese cars, except for a few luxury models) India because the Bolt is too expensive.

    2. aidan says:

      What about the Opel Ampera-e? I would imagine that’s right hand drive since it’s destined for Europe?

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        No, GM has clearly stated that there will be no RHD (Right-Hand Drive) version of the Bolt, nor its European version, the Ampera-e.

        Is there any country in Europe other than the UK (and I suppose Ireland) that uses RHD?

        My sympathies to EV enthusiasts in the UK, Australia, Hong Kong, and other current and former British Commonwealth countries which will not be among the countries where the Bolt (or Ampera-e) will be available. Hopefully in future years GM will choose to expand production of the car, despite the clear signs that they have no intention of doing so in the first year or two.

  10. James says:

    Nice job, Chevy. It’s cute, not sexy, but super-practical. Can’t wait to test one. I’d love to have both it and a Model 3. Would love to see a performance version with lower efficiency but blazing fast speed.

  11. Bill Howland says:

    I used to think there would be room for several manufacturers, but 238 miles in a very practical (supposedly larger than a Model S) family hauler that is comfortable for driver and passengers alike, is probably going to mean EVERYONE is going to go after this vehicle and the other EV makers (except Tesla, who still wins the range game with its new 100 kwh products) are going to be left ‘holding the bag’.

    As long as cars only went 80 miles, this would discourage whole numbers of people away from them, calling them ‘golf carts’ or ‘toys’.

    But now, 238 miles – you can really go somewhere.

    So why in the world would someone buy a competitor’s 80 mile range product?

    I think GM just raised the bar for the industry – after all if naysayers say desparigingly that even a lousy chevy will go 238 miles, any pricier vehicle will have to go at least as far, or farther.

    So if people decide they ONLY want GM electrics, it will be an earthquake under the other companies – they’ll have to scramble or make deals with LG or others to get a semi-competitive product going, or else they’ll have egg on their faces.

    Or else, they’ll have to slash prices drastically to get people to even consider their inferior products.

    So what say you, Carlos Ghosn?

    I suddenly think also that those 20 mile range Mercedes-Benz’s are much less appealing, even for a PHEV.

    1. John F says:

      This GM offering really demands a response from all the other EV makers. Its just a question of when and how they respond. GM can enjoy getting back some of the market share they have been loosing.

      There does not seem to be any unique GM tech breakthrough in the Bolt. So, there are going to be fast followers in the affordable 200 plus mile range. Its going to be great for EVs. The only limits will be in the charging networks.

    2. ClarksonCote says:

      Remember Bill, dealers will still need to want to sell them for this to be successful, haha.

      With the new Chevy website (referenced above in Jay’s article) dedicated to describing various hybrid and electric options, I hope they have a similar brochure available at all dealers that succinctly describes the benefits of each offering: Bolt EV, Volt, and to a lesser extent, the Malibu hybrid, etc.

      PS – Good to see you at the NDEW event this past weekend! Your ELR got some “camera time” on the Time Warner news story.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        Good seeing you too.

        As far as dealers go, a minority of Cadillac dealers in my area sold the ELR. So be it.

        Chevrolet dealers in my area will gladly sell you a VOLT, and assuredly, a BOLT.


        They oscillate between being the largest and second largest chevy dealer in the country.

        So much for them not wanting to sell electrics.

        They will give inaccurate information (unknowingly) about how the VOLT really works, but I can’t blame any dealership that was lied to by GM for 18 months straight, even to their service managers.

        I can’t blame them that they Memorized deliberately deceptive information from the corporation.

    3. Kdawg says:

      “I think GM just raised the bar for the industry – after all if naysayers say desparigingly that even a lousy chevy will go 238 miles, any pricier vehicle will have to go at least as far, or farther.”

      GM set the bar for PHEVs too, with 38 miles, and then 53 miles of EV range, but the naysayers didn’t stop chirping. There still isn’t any other PHEV even close to the Volt. (not counting the oddball i3)

  12. arne-nl says:

    238 is impressive. Good to see GM raising the bar.

    However. The range is based on 50/50 highway/city.

    You need the range for longer trips which are usually 90% highway and then the range 238 will be harder to achieve. Highway consumption of the Bolt is ~15% higher than city consumption. In the inevitable comparison to the Model 3, that will be a different story since it has much better aerodynamics and thus will perform relatively better on the highway. The Model S has lower highway energy consumption than city, and I expect the Model 3 to be the same.

    1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      Standard EPA efficiency is 55% city, 45% highway.

      1. arne-nl says:

        Ok, thanks for the exact numbers.

    2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      That explains the 55%/45% split on fuel economy and from the range description it suggests that they do the same.

    3. Neromanceres says:

      Bolt EV numbers work out to ~256 City and 220 Highway.

    4. SparkEV says:

      You can guesstimate hwy range based on MPGe. 238 miles is based on combined (119 MPGe). Hwy is 110, so it would be

      238 / 119 * 110 = 220 miles hwy

      Doing similar for city (128 MPGe),

      238 / 119 * 128 = 256 miles city

      1. Kirk says:

        238 miles must be the city range.
        238 mi / 128 mpge x 33.7 kwh / ge = 62.66 kwh drawn from outlet.

        Assuming 90% charging efficiency yields battery capacity of 56.4 kwh

  13. Tom says:

    238 miles of range is indeed impressive. However, I still think the Volt is a more practical electric car. We still lack a national charging infrastructure for anything not named Tesla and without it the Bolt will not be a functional long distance vehicle. If all you want is a city car, then 238 miles just isn’t necessary.

    The Volt offers long distance travel plus all electric driving 99% of the remaining trips. The only downside of the Volt is that it is a little small for some of us, but the Voltec technology is, I think, brilliant.

    1. ClarksonCote says:

      I think you may find it’s not as small as you thinkg, given how they re-imagined and designed the car. It is rumored to have more space than a Model S, which is certainly enough to give me pause and go look at one.

      1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

        Bolt has about the same passenger space volume as Model S or Leaf, it was already announced. Model S however is lower and wider.
        Cargo volume (cu ft / L):
        16.9 cu-ft / 478 L
        Passenger volume (cu ft / L):
        PV1 52.2 cu-ft / 1478 L 1st row
        PV2 42.2 cu-ft / 1195 L 2nd row

      2. Tom says:

        I am a 2016 Volt owner and it is a little small for me. I actually found the Leaf more spacious, though the Volt is a much better car in just about every other respect.

        1. ClarksonCote says:

          Hi Tom, my bad.. I was referring to and was thinking of the Bolt, though he was discussing the Volt.

          The pains of having similarly named vehicles, my brain didn’t process the right model. 😉

    2. Kdawg says:

      “If all you want is a city car, then 238 miles just isn’t necessary.”

      I need a “regional” car. Meaning, I need to be able to go on ~200 mile round trips every so often. This is usually to a town that is about an hour away, then back home. With 238 miles, this is possible without having to concern myself with destination charging.

      1. Rick Danger says:

        Also, if you live somewhere where you can’t charge at home, you might be able to drive for a week or more on the Bolt’s city range.

        1. Tom says:

          This is a point that does not get enough attention. The Bolt is a GREAT city car for apartment dwellers who lack charging at home and whose city includes a DC quick charger.

          With 238 miles of range you could go to the quick charger once or twice a week and wouldn’t have to worry about charging at home.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            Tom said:

            “The Bolt is a GREAT city car for apartment dwellers who lack charging at home and whose city includes a DC quick charger.”

            This is absurd. This is precisely the sort of magical thinking, firmly ignoring reality, that true EV advocates should avoid like the plague.

            No PEV (Plug-in EV) is “great” for anyone who can’t charge up at home, period. Those who can charge up at work but not at home might be able to struggle through, altho obviously they’d have to put up with some inconvenience unless the PEV is a second or third car.

            The proper way to address the problem of people not being able to plug their car in at home is to advocate with your local and State elected officials to revise building codes to require landlords installing, or at least allowing to be installed, L2 charge points in their parking lots, and to get municipal governments to start installing curbside L2 chargers in areas where offstreet parking isn’t available.

            1. Tom says:

              Despite labeling my conclusion “absurd”, you fail to even attempt a demonstration of any absurdity, substituting mere assertion for argument. I think you confuse that which is absurd with that with which you simply disagree. Using exaggerated, overheated rhetoric such as “absurd”, “magical thinking”, and “ignoring reality” advances no identifiable agenda beyond the eagerness to sound obnoxious.

              With 238 miles of range and access to a public DC charger, one or two lunch breaks a week is all you would need to keep the car charged.

              Yes, government-required level 2 chargers would be a better solution for EV users. It is also a very unlikely one, at least until EVs achieve a significantly larger market share. Until then, it is useful to discuss reasonable alternatives, and using public DC chargers once or twice a week sounds reasonable to me, at least as reasonable as using DC chargers for long-distance trips, which can add hours to the travel time compared to an ICE alternative.

    3. Brandon says:

      Tom, keep in mind too that the Bolt is being marketed (and with its range is well suited) for ride sharing and taxi service.
      But yes, it’s not suitable as a long range travel car yet. Not until 2023 possibly. Then next gen reliable comprehensive fast charge network should exist to enable long distance travel.

  14. Alex says:

    Range is just ridiculous, no insane!

    1. bro1999 says:

      Ludicrous even. 😉

      1. How ‘Plaid’ of them to Go So Far!
        Do the not think King Elon Just noticed that Number?

        Even if the Model 3 Base does not go as far, it might just have a (Secretly) Bigger Battery, that is initially software limited, then they offer buyers an extra 5-10 kWh, for an over the phone upgrade!

        They will also be offering a further battery selection, Supercharging (If not included, likely for cheap, as credits!), and a Country Wide Network, in USA, Canada, many European Countries, China, Japan, and so on!

        Tesla is already testing the structure of their new cooling system in the battery of the new P100DL! If they ended up with a 65 kWh pack as base Model 3, they would likely drop a Highway Range on us of 265-275 miles! The could software limit that to give just 240 miles, and later open it up for the longer range, if needed!

        GM could gave delivered just 220 miles for now, and later offered an upgrade of the extra 18 miles, for something like $500! That would have shown they learned something from breaking down the Tesla’s they bought!

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Robert Weekley said:

          “GM… would have shown they learned something from breaking down the Tesla’s they bought!”

          Looks to me like GM already did. At least according to what I’ve read, the Volt 2.0 battery pack’s TMS (Thermal Management System) seems to operate more like the Tesla S/X than the one in the Volt 1.0 did.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            You keep getting this wrong. GM has always had superior efficiency in charging to Tesla. Your electric bill will always be lower driving GM products unless as a Tesla Dude you hang out at the supercharger.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              Good grief, Bill. You’re just embarrassing yourself. You also claimed in this discussion that:

              “[GM] uses more a more efficient motor than the old fashioned induction job used in the Tesla Products.”

              Reality check: The modern, efficient integrated motor controller for AC induction motors was invented by Alan Cocconi when he worked for GM, and was first used in the 1990 Impact concept car. That car became the prototype for the GM EV-1.

              Alan Cocconi went on to help found AC Propulsion, which made the tZero EV sports car, which became the prototype for the Tesla Roadster. Tesla licensed AC Propulsion’s EV tech.

              So the EV tech from GM and Tesla came from the same source. GM has certainly demonstrated it has excellent engineering ability when it comes to PHEVs; Voltec is completely unrivaled by any other company.

              But for BEV tech, it’s quite clear that Tesla is years in advance of any other company. For example, the Bolt is going to be limited to only 50 kW charging! Tesla’s technical superiority will become even more clear when we can compare the energy efficiency of the Tesla Model ≡ to the GM Bolt. If you honestly think that the Bolt will win… well then, you’re going to be very surprised!

              Bill, you have a pretty good technical knowledge of some aspects (but only some) of EV tech. Unfortunately, you seem to be almost completely lacking in common sense, so you fail in many or most ways to understand how your technical knowledge often does not apply, at all, to the real world.

              1. Bill Howland says:

                I don’t care what wikipedia says – but you are probably taking things out of context anyway – and I say this as a wikipedia author myself.

                This stuff has been used for much longer than the car industry used it.

                As far as me stating that the Volt’s charging system is more efficient, prove me wrong.

                I’ve had a 2011 Roadster, and a 2011 volt in different stalls of the same garage. Plus I’ve read the charging specs of the newer Rav4EV, and charge times of the “S” from the calculator. So you want to say even Tesla doesn’t know how to measure their own car ??? |!!!. I’ve measured capacities, power levels, and times. I was also the first person to theorize problems with 120 volt charging the “S” in cold weather; this was then proven later by the minnesota woman that I’ve rehashed several times.

                Since you are rarely even near an EV, I doubt you have even gotten to square 1. Do you even know how to perform basic measurements?

              2. Bill Howland says:

                What supreme arrogance!!!

                How dare you critique other people’s expertise since you have none of your own?

                My response went totally over your head.

                You are like a kindergartener arguing with a teacher who obviously knows nothing since the 4 year old said so..

                Btw, you have just confused a “MOTOR” – which converts electricity to mechanical power, with a ‘controller’, which controls the electricity. So its pointless to try to even try to instruct you. The efficiency of the motor is unrelated to the efficiency of the motor’s controller, all other things being equal.

          2. HVACman says:

            Gen 2 Volt TMS is just like the Gen 1 Volt TMS, CT6 PHEV TMS and the Spark EV(2015 and newer). Active glycol cooling circulated through the pack and through channels in thermal plates between each cell.

            Not at all like Tesla’s “snake” based TMS.

            Also not like the Bolt’s TMS, which uses glycol circulated through channels in a bottom base plate and has passive aluminum plates sandwiched between each cell to conduct the heat down to the cooled bottom plate.

            The 2014 Spark EV with the A123 battery pack used a similar bottom plate cooling concept and the BMW i3 uses this concept, except the bottom plate is cooled directly by the refrigerant instead of glycol.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              HVACman said:

              “Gen 2 Volt TMS is just like the Gen 1 Volt TMS…”

              Hmmm, well I guess the bone of contention here is just how much change there was between the Volt 1.0 and the Volt 2.0.

              Quoting from “The Chevrolet Volt Cooling/Heating Systems Explained”, Dec 9th, 2010 (source 1):

              “The Chevy Volt is equipped with four fully independent cooling systems or ‘loops’ ”

              Quoting from “BMW and LG Chem Trump Tesla in Battery Thermal Management”, Dec 7, 2015 (source 2) (I quote from this article to cite details, not because I agree with their conclusion that Tesla’s cooling system is inferior):

              “We saw from a previous article that Tesla has four different cooling loops.

              “The Chevy Volt has five different cooling loops.”

              I inferred from these statements that the Volt 2.0 had a substantial change in how the battery cooling system works. However, it may be that what the second citation refers to is, in part, a heat exchange between the Volt’s glycol/water based cooling system, and the Volt’s cabin A/C, which is refrigerant-based.

              In other words, perhaps the Volt 2.0 doesn’t have an additional cooling loop; perhaps the reference to “five different cooling loops” refers to all the car’s cooling systems, not just the battery cooling system.

              At any rate, HVACman, it would be unwise of me to argue with you in your area of expertise! I would, however, like to learn more about the details of how the Volt 2.0’s cooling system operates, and how it differs from the Volt 1.0’s cooling system. Whether or not those changes are trivial or significant may be a matter of opinion rather than fact.

              There doesn’t seem to be any doubt that there were some changes, altho perhaps minor ones, in the Volt 2.0’s cooling system. Quoting from “2016 Chevy Volt: GM’s top electrification engineers on designing the all-new EREV” (source 3):

              “The first-gen Volt had… a total of 388 cells in the pack. Each cell touches a cooling fin…

              “The second gen is similar, but… only 192 cells in the pack. That means the number of cooling fins is reduced…”

              source 1:

              source 2:

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  You are splitting hairs, getting hung up on irrelevancies.

                  1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                    Some actual facts or authoritative citations to back up your assertions would help your case. As it is, it looks like you just don’t want to admit you’re wrong… and unfortunately, that’s a habit with you.

                    1. Bill Howland says:

                      Your neighbors must have all told you to dummy up since they don’t feel like responding to fights you constantly try to start with them. SO then, feeling like a brave keyboard warrior, you decide to do your childish stunt here.

                      Ever think: People here who have bachelor’s and master’s degrees in electrical engineering or mechanical enginneering rarely have any serious disagreement with what I say, and then I respond to them which seems to satisfy them.. But then you know better.

                    2. Bill Howland says:

                      Look you want detailed info on here it works. Ok – the LOOPS you are worried about in the volt are like this:

                      from the front of the car (coldest outside air), the fan-forced (2 electric fans) pull air from the outside in this order.

                      1). Electronics Loop , and paralleled battery loop, with individual surge tanks.

                      2). Air conditioning condenser.

                      3). transaxle (transmission) cooler

                      4). Engine coolant (works on the hottest air).

                      So that is 3 water loops, one oil loop, and one refrigerant loop.

                      The battery loop also has a chiller tap off the air conditioner, and a roughly 2000 watt electric heater, with a 12 volt circulator pump. A 3 way valve controls whether the battery is cooled or heated. The chiller tap also has a refrigerant 3 way valve to chill the water should the fans not be enough, say on a superhot day.

                      The heater loop has a small additional 12 volt pump to force water through the 6 kw heater when the engine isn’t on. When the engine is on, a belt driven water pump provides the circulation.

                      The transaxle has an electric pump in it to provide cooling for the 2 motors and also motive power for the clutches, if the engine is off. An engine driven pump replaces the electric pump if the engine is running, sending a portion of the fluid through the transaxle cooler mentioned before.

                    3. Bill Howland says:

                      The electronics loop is the simplest. It is merely the water flowing through the inverter then to the plug-in charger then back through the radiator, run by a small 12 volt pump.

                      One correction: the Tesla had the 3 way expansion valve; the volt has 2 paralleled expansion valves so that cooling of the battery and cabin can happen simultaneously.

                    4. Bill Howland says:

                      Ok you want specifically why the volt is more efficient than say, a Tesla Roadster when charging?

                      There are others, but here is a big one:

                      With the roadster, to cool the battery when charging the air conditioner HAD to run.

                      In the volt there are 3 ways to change the temperature of the battery since it is done with either electrically heated water, radiator cooled water (the coldest air), or refrigerated water.

                      So while the roadster had to use the air conditioner, the volt could do it with a tiny pump and fans.

        2. Doggydogworld says:

          They learned to put batteries in the floor from Tesla.

          1. Kdawg says:

            Who learned it from GM.

            1. HN says:

              Where is the battery in the 2006 Tesla Roaster ?

              1. arne-nl says:

                Behind the seats

  15. Bill Howland says:

    Regarding the lack of a supercharger network, in my area of the country its not so much of a disadvantage.

    Once the novelty is gone, how often is someone going to want to drive way out of their way to use the SC’s when the route you would normally drive is hundreds of miles more direct?

    And in some areas of the country, CCS stations are at least starting to be installed – which can obviously be made much cheaper than a Supercharger Complex.

    I seriously suspect there will be much more drive for more CCS chargers, once the Bolt really starts appearing in numbers.

    1. floydboy says:

      I’m fairly certain that no one drives hundreds of miles off their route to use super chargers, especially considering how ubiquitous they’re becoming on most of the major routes. But, the more charging options out there, the better.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        All you have to do is look at a map. I live in the second biggest city in the third biggest state, and most of the places I want to go are SC-less.

        1. Anon says:

          Will that still be true, two years from now?

          Probably not.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            Well, forget about any direct route from my joint to friends in the capital of Pennsylvania, normally around 300 miles.

            Other trips are out of the question, as there are some entire states and provinces without any supercharger facilities.

            I would guess two years from now there will be more ccs facilities.

            Winnipeg is out of the question.

            1. Tom says:

              Buffalo – Erie – Cranberry – Somerset – Harrisburg is 327 miles, which is only 45 miles further than the most direct route and it is Interstate the entire way.

              To get to Winnipeg from Buffalo requires driving through some very lightly traveled and sparsely populated areas. You can get to Minneapolis easily enough, but from there you have to go via North Dakota for 456 miles.

              You might want to consider a Volt.

              1. Brian says:

                I agree with Tom, Bill. You should consider a Volt. If you want something a bit nicer, maybe an ELR will do? 😉

                1. sven says:

                  Bill should also consider a pre-owned Tesla Roadster with the new extended battery pack. With 330 miles of AER, he should be able to make that 300-mile trip from Buffalo, NY to Harrisburg, Pa without having to charge along the way. But he should probably research the Roadster’s reliability before buying one. 😉

                  1. Bill Howland says:

                    What do I do if perhaps I want to get back home? Hang my TSL-01 connector out with maybe 30 miles range left and hope a tow truck will stop by that has one – Or maybe I can phone the president of AAA and get one of their generator trucks to stop by for a day? Or get an apartment for 3 days to recharge the thing to get back home?

                    Humm, people are all suggesting I buy a VOlt and ELR? What do I do with the ones I’ve Got?

                    1. sven says:

                      Oops. Sorry Bill, that was meant as humor/sarcasm (and I assume upstate Brian was also joking) in response to the “You might want to consider a Volt” comment above by someone unaware of the EVs you currently own and previously owned. No offense intended. 🙂

                    2. Bill Howland says:

                      Maybe I should buy what now?

                      1). A Tesler Ridester?
                      2). Cheby Voltage?
                      3). Elr – ok that means Electricical reborn?

                      ummmmm — I got the joke already – the funny part is that you thought I didn’t. Love your green eye shade analysis of things, btw.

        2. Tom says:

          Buffalo, NY?

    2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      Tesla tries to put the Superchargers in locations that provide the fastest routes. Whether they can agree a location is a different matter.

    3. Bill Howland says:

      Well let us see:

      1). You’ve proven you have zero familiarity with charging and discharging ev’s. You certainly aren’t aware of ANY of the nuances EV drivers encounter all the time. You don’t know how EV air conditioning systems begin to work, or even which cars have what types of systems in them. The system in the GEN 1 VOLT is plenty good enough since there have been no batteries dying in them, EVER.

      2). You have proven you have problems with ‘Reading Comprehension’, otherwise known as ‘Reading for Meaning’.

      My “Novelty” comment was referring to those Tesla drivers such as the ‘black hat’ guy going from supercharger to supercharger. This will tend to decrease in time, unless the SC is on the route they’d go anyway.

      Most people, eventually will want to pick the route they’d take with an ICE vehicle.

      OF COURSE Supercharger use will increase.

      You always try to shoot down the person, instead of talk about characteristics of the car. You must be a really spiteful person.

  16. Bob says:

    🙂 Now all they need is an agreement on charging, to make it not-a-pain to pay for charging en route.
    And when the Tesla 3 comes, they can drop the price on the Bolt by 10,000,- and still have good sales.

  17. floydboy says:

    Good job GM! Welcome to the 200+ mile club! Ok Nissan, your turn!?

    1. Brandon says:

      Yes, true in regards to range, but GM is the first in regards to range and “affordable”.

  18. JoeBob says:

    I placed a deposit today!

  19. DavidSmith says:

    Amazing work from a real American car company, not just a Silcon Valley arrogant startup that loses money and lies constantly.

    Well done GM.

    Tesla you accelerated the move toward vehicle electrification. Now declare bankruptcy since you are the least efficient auto manufacturer on the planet.

    1. floydboy says:

      Didn’t Sarah Palin say some stuff about “Real America”?
      Your ranting reminds me of hers, complete BS.?

      1. Rightofthepeople says:

        Hey, at least Sarah Palin has other talents. For instance, she can shoot the nuts off a Russian moose at a thousand yards! 🙂
        But your point about David Smith’s rant is fair. I am proud of GM for this, and I am also proud of Tesla for what it has accomplished. Both very American car companies.

    2. Jason says:

      Didn’t GM almost go out of business and require a federal bailout?

      1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

        Yes, GM was bankrupt during last financial crisis, automanufacturing is cyclical business. It went back to business afterwards. For Tesla “almost go out of business” is permanent condition though, they require financial injection of billions / share sale every year to cover losses and prevent bankruptcy. This year it will be 7th, or 2nd time over the same year! Ludicrous mode indeed.

        1. Get Real says:

          The only one bankrupt here is your anti-Tesla FUD zzzzzzzz.

          In about 2 plus years Tesla will be making more BEVs then the rest of the western OEMs combined.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Jason said:

        “Didn’t GM almost go out of business and require a federal bailout?”

        SHHH! Don’t disturb DavidSmith’s fact-free bubble-world thinking. Help make America great again by trashing all-American auto maker Tesla, in favor of a company which has been repeatedly bailed out using taxpayer dollars, and “thanked” us by outsourcing much of its auto assembly work to China and S. Korea!

        (WARNING: The above post may contain traces of sarcasm.)

        1. Kdawg says:

          (WARNING: The above post may contain traces of sarcasm.)

          And falsehoods

          1. super390 says:

            I was willing to let my tax money be used to bail out your favorite car company. Remember that when you bash “Tesla fanboys” and “subsidies.”

            I want both these cars to succeed, and many others besides.

            1. ClarksonCote says:

              Complaining about the auto bailout, in the context of the related banking bailout, is like complaining about a guy that stole your bicycle while another guy drives away with your car.

            2. Kdawg says:

              I want both cars to succeed too, but when I see false information, I’m going to point it out.

              1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                Just out of curiosity, exactly what in my post do you regard as a falsehood? ‘Cuz I don’t see any there.

                1. Kdawg says:

                  “repeatedly bailed out”
                  It was just the one Government sponsored bankruptcy when Wall Street destroyed the economy and we didn’t want US jobs to go into a death spiral.

                  “outsourcing much of its auto assembly work to China and S. Korea!”
                  GM has had a large presence in China & S. Korea well before any bankruptcy. I’m not sure what you are referring to here specifically, unless it’s the PHEV CT6 which is being made in China mostly for the Chinese market. Only small numbers MAY be imported into the US, maybe in the future.

    3. Anon says:

      Yeah, that American Car Company was pretty smart to get South Korean help with the Bolt’s electric drivetrain, batteries and control systems.

      Think of all that money they saved, outsourcing American Jobs!!!

      1. bro1999 says:

        I assume you have equal disdain for Apple, since iphones are made in China.

        1. ClarksonCote says:

          Hey now, don’t go shooting his biases down with that silly thing called “logic”… 😉

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            Hmmm, no, that was in fact exactly the opposite of logic; it was a logical fallacy. Specifically, that is an example of the “Two wrongs make a right” fallacy.

            What Apple does or doesn’t do is not even slightly relevant to GM’s actions in outsourcing much of its auto assembly jobs overseas. That was merely an attempt to change the subject by someone who’s lost an argument.


            1. ClarksonCote says:

              You are correct, but bro’s comment still has a lot of merit. Tesla’s cars are not 100% American sourced either. Both the Teslas and the Volt/Bolt EV are manufactured stateside.

              GM seems to get all the flack while other companies are forgiven.

              To bro’s point, I’m certain Anon has several pieces of technology made in other countries. Since Tesla also has parts content from overseas, why single out GM?

              I have the answer: Bias.

    4. Sean Wagner says:

      Quote from Tesla’s latest Quarterly filing with the SEC:

      “Gross margin for the quarter ended June 30, 2016 was 21.6%”


      Tesla accesses the world’s deepest and most liquid capital markets – they enable the US to give rise to more than inconsequential boutique firms.

      The mainly Lucky Goldstar built Bolt is wrapped and sold by GM, but all the main drive components and many ancillary parts like the battery cells and pack, motor, power inverter and distribution modules, onboard charger, climate control and instrument/infotainment are built in South Korea.


      1. ClarksonCote says:

        A whole bunch of Tesla’s parts are also not made in America. Just sayin, global economy and all that.

        I love to buy American, but don’t fool yourself. Tesla buys a lot of parts from overseas too…

        1. Kdawg says:

          I care most about the engineering and the final assembly of cars. Where a piece of plastic is fabricated…. not so much.

          Although I am glad LG opened a large plant in Michigan, since that is a large portion of EVs.

          1. ClarksonCote says:

            I agree on all points Kdawg. It would be great to see more battery manufacturing stateside as well, I hope that landscape continues to evolve beyond the LG plant in Michigan and the Gigafactory.

            1. Kdawg says:

              At least Nissan is making their batteries locally too. For some reason though, I feel China will become battery central. They will need more of them sooner, and we all know how cheap China can make things.

    5. super390 says:

      GM has a fantastic history of lies, and worse, the use of the mass media to manipulate styling fads and class envy (the entire basis of GM’s divisional pyramid under master manipulator Al Sloan) at the expense of actually sticking with new technology until it works properly. Which is why GM’s US auto market share is a fraction of what it once was.

      But all this has therefore become the norm in the auto industry, so I was willing to forgive and gamble my tax money on the New GM.

      What’s very revealing is your attitude that “Silicon Valley” isn’t American. When corporations don’t fit the Brooks Brothers-uniformed class pyramid mold, they’re seen as alien. The only thing about GM that’s all-American now is the portfolio of Congressmen and Washington lobbyists it maintains. Otherwise it’s just another multinational with no loyalty to anyone. GM President in 1940 (when asked about WW2 while his German division was being cynically passed off to Nazi-approved front men while making vehicles for the Wehrmacht): “When a company is our size, it’s not really affected by such matters.”

      1. MTN Ranger says:

        It was only a matter of time.

        Godwin’s law:

      2. Kdawg says:

        Or maybe they’re just a car company.

    6. HN says:

      Without $50 Billion bailed out money in 2008 by Federal Government could GM stand on its feet today ?

      How much did GM paid back ? The full amount or only $40 Billion, American Taxpayers lost $10 Billion bailing out GM 8 years ago. American Taxpayers made some profit for making a loan of $400 Million to Tesla in 2011.

      Do your research before posting false info.

  20. Kevin says:

    Time to trade in my i3 REX

    1. On this? Exactly! This is why BMW is skipping the Paris Auto Show! They need to get out their Big Boy Pants, and get with the EV Future!

      The Bolt EV gives you a Real 4-Doors, that don’t trap back seat Pax, behind front seat drivers and Pax! This range, is about 50+ miles more than a New 33 kWh BMW i3 Rex, AER Plus Gas!

      It is 2016, and this is pretty much what the President of the Electric Vehicle Society of Canada said, was ,The Future’, even while driving the little Geo Metro EV Conversion, built by High School Students back in 1994, before I bought it from him in 2006, when he was being interviewed on TV! This car has more than 10X the AER of that little EV Conversation, and it just might make Tesla even more serious and committed to getting production actually started by July 1st, 2017! Here is hoping so!

  21. Martin Welzl says:

    So that gives us 220 highway miles and 256 city miles. Definitly more than enough to play with.

    1. Martin Welzl says:

      So 3h of driving at 70mph and then 1h of charging for the next 3h. Definitly road trip worthy, especially considering you’re heading off with a full battery.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        You’re certainly not going to get three hours of driving at 70 MPH, even when the car starts out fully charged. More like two hours, or even less. If you want to go three hours on a single hour’s charge, you’d better drive at 45 MPH, or even less if you want to run the A/C or the heater.

        Even a Tesla Model S won’t go three hours at 70 MPH, and this car’s range is less than that.

      2. Priusmaniac says:

        If you drive at 70 mph on a European freeway or the autobahn, you are going to have a lot of semi-trucks passing by and almost all the other cars. 75 mph or 80 mph is much more the norm. So it would also be interesting to know the range of the e-Ampera at 80 mph.

    2. wavelet says:

      Where are you seeing the separate City & Highway numbers?
      They should be available, given the overall number has been published, but I can’t find them anywhere.

      1. bro1999 says:

        Simple math.

        overall EPA range = 238
        MPGe combined: 119
        MPGe city: 128
        MPGe highway: 110

        EPA city range = (128/119) * 238 = 256
        EPA highway range = (110/119) * 238 = 220

        1. Martin Welzl says:

          Yep, that’s what i did. Think it’s pretty spot on.

        2. leafowner says:

          At speeds greater than 65 MPH range (70+) will likely dip below 200. Still very decent – able to get from one side of ATL to the other and back easily on a charge.

          1. ClarksonCote says:

            The results may be more impressive than you think, at least in temperate weather.

            This reviewer got 240 miles of range with many highway miles:


            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              The article you linked to says, in part: “Our six-hour drive route took us 235 miles…”

              That averages 39.2 MPH. Not exactly something to write home about. We all know that EVs will perform quite well, much better than gasmobiles, at speeds of 45 MPH and under, especially in stop-and-go driving. I’d be far more interested in a report on steady, non-stop driving on a level highway at 60 MPH, and at 70 MPH. That’s where the differences in BEVs’ energy efficiency and range will show most clearly.

              Altho to be fair, the trip described in that article included an ascent to 2000 feet, and a significant climb in altitude change does cut into the range somewhat.

              1. ClarksonCote says:

                I suppose if you assume that they didn’t stop anywhere and that they didn’t hit any traffic, then your simple average could be accurate.

                However, if they stop for 30 minutes, that increases the average to 42 mph, and stopping for 60 minutes increases it to 47 mph. And that’s still just average speed. I would keep that in mind, as a 6 hour drive nonstop seems unlikely.

        3. vdiv says:

          Assuming the 238 miles are combined, not city 🙂

          Otherwise it is 220 miles combined and 204 highway. Warm weather.

          1. bro1999 says:

            Of course it’s combined. GM doesn’t do like Tesla does by publicizing the best EPA figures first.

            Accept it and move on.

            1. fotomoto says:

              ” GM doesn’t do like Tesla does by publicizing the best EPA figures first.”

              Actually they are quite well known for doing that. See the Malibu & malibu hybrid figures posted for a recent example:

            2. HN says:

              Do you have proof ?

        4. wavelet says:

          bro1999 & Martin, thanks! I always ignore the MPGe numbers because I think the concept is stupid (and of course ignores the rather large efficiency idfferences).
          I think doing this reverse-calc of the EPA AERs is the first valid use of MPGe I’ve seen (-;

  22. midimal says:

    How fast can be loaded via Type2(Europe) or Type1(USA) 11kW?

    1. Viggo says:

      50 KWh is (until further) standard in Europe. This will be upgraded to 150.

      1. Knut Erik Ballestad says:

        50kW is CCS (*not* Type2), and the faster, upcoming versions of CCS does not apply to the Bolt/Ampera-e, they will be stuck on a max 50kW charging rate.

        1. Paul Stoller says:

          How do you know this, has GM stated the Bolt will not be compatable with future CCS revisions?

      2. Bjorn says:

        He’s asking about AC Level 2 charging, not DC fast charging. Not sure if there will be an 11kW on board charger option, AFAIK it accepts up to 32A at 240V; so it would be up to 7.68kW. 60kWh/7.7kW = 8h for a complete charge.

    2. Knut Erik Ballestad says:

      Their web site states 240V, 32A, whick should translate to 7.2kW and a empty-to-full charging time of ~10 hours at home!


      1. Knut Erik Ballestad says:

        – which again implies a max charging rate of 3.6kW at 11kW Type 2 AC charging stations, and a max charging rate of 7.2kW at 22kW Type 2 AC charging stations.

        1. Bill Howland says:

          Its very apparent that the Ampera-E will have a different arrangement since some Euro countries have 15-16-20 amp single phase limitations, which the 32 amp BOLT would violate if more than 3.6 kw charging rate was desired.

          Just as Tesla provided 3 phase charging for the “S”, it is more than likely that arrangements will be made in countries where 32 ampere single-phase charging is disallowed.

    3. pjwood1 says:

      By virtue of being more efficient, Bolt will “load” more miles per hour, but Tesla owners are apt to be confused if GM retains its predictive range algorithm, as used in the Volt.

      Tesla range has always been an inaccurate proxy for a state of charge meter. You, or your spouse (!!), never realize the indicated range if you go 70mph, or use heat or a/c. It will be interesting, for long trip use, how people will gauge SOC in the Bolt. In winter, the dash will heavily understate available long trip range, unless they’ve approached things differently.

      I appreciate GM using the last several trips to predict available range. Tesla’s method earned them the “Broder” criticism, and the only material change since has been more superchargers. 60kwh and their SC network are far superior to Bolt, but then there’s the price.

      1. pjwood1 says:

        …meant to say Tesla range IS effectively an SOC meter.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        pjwood1 said:

        “It will be interesting, for long trip use, how people will gauge SOC in the Bolt. In winter, the dash will heavily understate available long trip range, unless they’ve approached things differently.”

        I certainly hope that will be true. Are you just speculating here, or citing direct statements from GM reps, or something in between?

        If the Bolt’s onboard range estimator actually takes external temperature into account, that will be a vast improvement. One of the few places where I’d “ding” Tesla’s cars is in not taking that important factor into account for the onboard range estimator. (But Tesla’s estimator is still better than Nissan’s “Guess-o-meter”!)

        1. pjwood1 says:

          In fairness, Tesla has a ‘Projected’ range option, and if you really have to hyper-mile your past ~30 miles efficiency is used in a number you would keep above navigation’s “miles left”. That’s the game that has had me drive ~58mph on 70+ highways. Otherwise, Tesla’s main display consistently over-states what you’ll see in normal use.

          I have no basis on how Bolt will represent range, beyond how the Volt does it. There, the main display, without having to look more closely at Trip and Energy displays, simply shows about how many miles you’ll get. It knows the battery is cold. It knows temps are apt to be near where they’ve been (Fall/Winter), etc.

          I’ve had the Tesla come back to the garage at ‘0’ range. Not every EV driver is a graduate of “Hypermile Univ”. Tesla’s over-stating range almost invites the stranded “Broder”.

  23. Joe says:

    Charging speed at 90mi per 30 min is not adequate for longer – distance travelling. Hold your horses with those preorders, I say. Seems like the Bolt ends up being a city car with longer range to combat range anxiety, as in competition for the nextGen Nissan Leaf, but no long-distance competitor to a Tesla…

    1. Z says:

      Joe, 120 miles in 40 minutes is good enough considering how rarely you would take the car on a long distance roadtrip. Drive for 2.5 hours, stop for a sandwich and charge. Drive away 40 minutes later and go for another 2 hours. Repeat as needed.
      Not a bad road trip car unless you want to punish yourself and drive all day instead of just flying to your destination.
      Probably 220 miles of hwy AER, that is good enough for most drivers.

    2. Ziv says:

      Joe, 120 miles in 40 minutes is good enough considering how rarely you would take the car on a long distance roadtrip. Drive for 2.5 hours, stop for a sandwich and charge. Drive away 40 minutes later and go for another 2 hours. Repeat as needed.
      Not a bad road trip car unless you want to punish yourself and drive all day instead of just flying to your destination.
      Probably 220 miles of hwy AER, that is good enough for most drivers.
      Can’t wait to see the next 200+ mile BEV under $40k!

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        Here is that “good enough” on range and charging speed again, while they are essential parameters.

        Why can’t we have a “good enough” discussion on cruise control and tissue seats?

  24. cylindrical says:

    Thank you for the timely news, Mr. Cole. Here at work overnight as I am, I’ve been watching the Internet for the big announcement. And like everyone else visiting this website this morning, I am overwhelmed and overjoyed to read your words.

    1. Jay Cole says:

      No problemo…late night/all night FTW, (=

  25. niklas says:

    Does this mean that the usable capacity is 60 kwh? I mean it sort of have to otherwise it doesn’t make sense to me. Or are they being overly optimistic. The leaf seem so comparable in every metric but it only gets 107 with half the capacity. Don´t get me wrong if true its great news but what am i missing? 🙂

    1. Knut Erik Ballestad says:

      The most probable answer to that question is that the Bolt’s battery chemistry allows for a deeper charging cycle (you can discharge to a lower level and charge to a higher level) than on Nissan’s Leaf battery chemistry.

      The upcoming ‘Leaf 2.0’ has been announced to be on the same battery chemistry as LG uses for the Bolt (at least Nissan licenced this chemistry from LG).
      With the same 60kW battery on the same battery chemistry, the new Leaf should have similar range.
      – although Nissan’s IDS concept vehicle had a much lower drag coefficient, so if this applies to also the production cars, Nissan should get even better range than the Bolt.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      niklas said:

      “The leaf seem so comparable in every metric but it only gets 107 with half the capacity. Don´t get me wrong if true its great news but what am i missing?”

      One thing you’re missing is that the Leaf has a large frontal area and only moderately good streamlining, which means the drag is terrible, and that really cuts into the Leaf’s range.

      In fact, in years when the Leaf and the Model S85 were tested on the same testing cycle, their miles per kWh rating (based on range vs. battery pack capacity) were almost precisely the same, despite the fact that the Model S is a slightly larger and much heavier car.

      As Knut Erik Ballestad already noted, it’s also possible, and perhaps likely, that the Bolt is making more of its battery pack’s full capacity available as usable capacity. Deeper cycling is supposed to be one of the advantages of LG Chem’s new cell chemistry, which I guess means more use of NMC in the mix.

  26. One says:

    Impressive. And I’m really glad. But I still want to know this. Range at 120/130 kph (75/80 mph), fully loaded (cat, luggage, dog, kids, pet food etc.) and air conditioning on.

    1. Knut Erik Ballestad says:

      Air resistance increases with the velocity squared, so range will decrease rapidly when increasing speed – this will be especially so on a vehicle like the Bolt, since it is not very aerodynamic in shape.

      1. SparkEV says:

        Air resistance force is proportional to square of speed. But when you’re talking about range, you need to consider power, which is cube of speed.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      It would be wonderful if the EV industry moved to the various EV makers publishing a table of their PEVs’ (Plug-in EVs) ranges at intervals of 10 MPH of speed, instead of just a single number (or two, for nominal city & highway ranges). That would be much more informative.

      Unfortunately, I doubt they’ll do that unless the guvmints force them to, as it would really emphasize just how much range all cars (including gasmobiles) lose at higher speeds.

      Drag increases as the cube of the speed! That’s quite a hit to range at speeds above 55 MPH.

      1. SparkEV says:

        Given that MPGe ratings are almost the same as SparkEV, the “hit” can be extrapolated from SparkEV test. 19 kWh, 62 MPH (100 kph) = 98 miles in temperate San Diego. You can see what happens at higher speed and AC/heat scenarios in my “range polynomial” blog post.

    3. Priusmaniac says:

      Taking the 70 mph range and dividing it by the square speed ratio (70²/80²=0,7656) will give a good approximation of the 80 mph range.

      If 70 mph range is 210 miles than the 80 mph range would be 160 miles. The return range is 80 miles.

  27. Absidu says:

    Seems i’m the only person who cares about efficiency 🙂 For me 119MPGe seems very nice since 60kwh battery should be havier than Leaf battery and others.
    For current technology it’s an ideal balance between range and efficiency.

  28. Rick says:

    I’d like to know where people get the 55 kWh figure for the Model 3.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      It’s an estimate. Elon said the Model ≡ will have a pack size smaller than 60 kWh, but real-world constraints and engineering principles mandate that, presuming the Model ≡ really does have more than 200 miles of EPA rated range, then battery capacity can’t be all that much less than 60 kWh.

      However, with this announcement, it wouldn’t surprise me if Tesla inches up the Model ≡’s pack size to something closer to 60 kWh than 55 kWh. It depends on whether or not the M≡’s pack capacity is fully locked in or not. Did Tesla “bake” some wiggle room into the pack design, or is it fully finalized at this time?

  29. ericonline says:

    Impressive, 238 miles from a 60 kwh battery. Good work GM. I think OPEC members waking up feeling a little ill this morning.

  30. Just_Chris says:

    Can’t wait for Paris, Zoe 2 and leaf 2 (I assume will come in Tokyo) should rock.

    I am so disappointed that GM are not taking this car global. Really shows a lack of ambition. They should fit this with a chademo and take it to Japan. They should also try and dominate the uk market.

    1. Knut Erik Ballestad says:

      They *do* take it to Europe at least!
      – with a different grille though, and badged as an Opel Ampera-e instead of as a Chevy Volt.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Probably only in token numbers, though. Only 25k-30k annual production isn’t going to go far, considering how much demand there will be in the USA and Canada alone for compelling 200+ mile BEVs.

    2. Someone out there says:

      They won’t be able to cover demand as is so there’s no use opening more markets.

    3. Spider-Dan says:

      Sadly, it looks like GM learned their lesson with the Volt. The public said they wanted EVs, GM made the best car they’ve ever produced and the most awarded American car in history, predicted big sales… and fell far short of sales goals. Meanwhile, Tesla – a company that doesn’t even run ads – gets 400 million in donations for a car that doesn’t even exist yet.

      So GM is going to err on the side of low demand until the demand shows otherwise.

  31. Allies of Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    Great job GM! This is my sort of future car. And the range is really impressive!

  32. leafowner says:

    Nicely done GM — I wish I could get one before my lease expires in December on my Leaf…..

  33. JeremyK says:

    If July was truly “pencils down” for Tesla, this news comes too late for them to increase their range significantly. If they’re sticking to a 50-55 kWh battery, should be interesting…

    1. Knut Erik Ballestad says:

      The “pencils down” would probably not affect the internals of the battery pack. If this is designed in a way like on the Model S/X vehicles, Tesla most probably can support a wide range of battery sizes inside the battery compartment.

      So the decision of battery size can most likely be deferred to very close to production start on the cars.

      1. Pencils down, is likely a reference to physical design, for internal, and external, parts design, since they likely have no copies if the actual 21-70 cells yet, I would guess the computers are still crunching the CAD on that, with no physical copies to test, until about October or November!

        Also, Tesla has multiple copies if experience in putting in bigger batteries and offering less capacity by software limit, gaining bigger buffers on range options, and multiple battery size/range choices for customers! GM seemed to have missed this potential!

        It is definitely an interesting time to live in!

        1. Nix says:

          I’m sure they have 21-70 cells to play with already, even if they aren’t the final production version.

          They are just a new format using the same old materials, not a new chemistry or new breakthrough technology being developed.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Knut Erik Ballestad said:

        “the decision of battery size can most likely be deferred to very close to production start on the cars.”

        Well, yes and no. For BEVs, to some extent the entire car has to be designed around the battery pack. The energy and power available from the pack limits acceleration and top speed; it indicates how powerful an electric motor it needs, and that in turn dictates how robust the drivetrain needs to be. Physical pack size and shape is also very important in Tesla cars, where it provides part of the car’s structural support and stiffening.

        On the other hand, if Tesla is as smart as they appear, then perhaps their car designers left a bit of wiggle room to put in a few percent more or less batteries, to accommodate late design changes. Note Tesla has not specified the exact capacity of the Model ≡’s battery pack; just that it will be less than 60 kWh (for the base model). Maybe Tesla was just being coy about the exact pack size, to keep competitors guessing… and maybe they did allow themselves a bit of wiggle room there.

      3. Nix says:

        Since there is already talk of Tesla offering different range battery packs, upsizing the smallest of their planned battery pack sizes is probably the easiest change they could do. Even if they are already “pencil’s down” on design.

        “pencil’s down” on design doesn’t mean everything is set in stone. There is always still time for re-engineering to resolve critical bugs. That’s what the entire QE cycle is there to catch. Catch what needs to be fixed and re-engineer the fixes.

        Growing a battery pack into space that has already been set aside to fit a larger battery pack is entirely doable even after pencil down has passed.

        If they were already completing Validation Prototype testing, it would be too late. But I haven’t heard of VP units being spotted yet, much less completing Validation Prototype testing.

    2. Nix says:

      I see no problem with Tesla book-ending the Bolt by offering multiple ranges, with one less than 238 miles and one or more with more than 238 miles.

      Especially if Tesla book-ends the Bolt price, with the base M3 price slightly below the Bolt, and the optional version above the Bolt.

      The more choices the better. Because when it comes to EV’s, the “best” EV is the one that suits each person’s own personal driving patterns.

      1. Ziv says:

        I know that Tesla has never wavered from their stated $35k price for the III. But I just don’t see how they are going to do it. I know they will have the cheapest battery pack in the west, but the rest of the car has to be pretty high quality for Tesla to consider delivering it…
        Even if they get the cells down to $5000 that leaves just $30,000 for the rest of the car and a little profit. I imagine they will want a profit even on the base model. $30k isn’t a lot of money for a Tesla quality car, sans pack.
        Tesla has usually delivered the goods, a bit late, but they deliver the goods. So I won’t be totally shocked if they pull this off, but it will be a bit of a surprise.
        My guess is that the base III will be around $39k.

  34. CDAVIS says:

    +1 for GM on Bolt 238 AER-EPA!

    I hope they sell sell a bunch of them.

    … I do believe though that GM is big-time underestimating the leg-up that Tesla has smartly created for itself by building out a robust and reliable supercharger network. Having spent considerable time with both Chevy Volt & Tesla Model S I’d choose the Volt over the Bolt (as my primary driver) until such time the Bolt has better supercharging access. Owning a car is about having access to freedom…the freedom to go where you want to go when you want to go…with minimal hassle. The EV car maker that best delivers that freedom with a good car at a good price wins. It’s that simple.

  35. Jeroen Stuyts says:

    Whoa, that’s going to be like 1000km in Europe!

    1. Knut Erik Ballestad says:

      The European range (NEDC) in most cases equal 1.45 times the US range.
      – Meaning that the Ampera-e most probably will get ~550 km range according to NEDC.

  36. Brian says:

    Color me impressed! So if this math is right, the highway range is 110/119 * 238 = 220 miles. I was sure that the Bolt’s highway range would be under 200 miles. I’m glad to see I’m wrong, and by a good margin! Looks like this car could be a decent road trip car. Now let’s see if they up their game with respect to DCQC rates…

    1. Bill Howland says:

      Hi Brian, check out the related stories on the other articles. One reporter (in a group) got effectly 290 miles range, and it was rumored (I forget by who) during testing they showed over 300 miles.

      So my rather ‘tongue in cheek’ guestimate of 324 miles (based on my ELR) isn’t so bad after all – the caveat being that is only East to West travel. Its usually about twice as hard getting back home, but then I’m driving faster since I wont to get back home from a trip worse than I want to get TO some place, hehe.

  37. Chris says:

    Just cannot wait until Bolt and M3 are side by side testing the real life range! To be honest, this is a really big step in whole car industry.

  38. Kdawg says:

    Mary Barra be like..

  39. Mister G says:

    Very nice, but I’m not cancelling my Tesla model 3 deposit.

    1. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

      How about ADDING to it? Different vehicles with different missions. M3 is pending to replace our G37+Fiat 500e if all goes as planned.

      Bolt is the same for our CR-V+Spark EV if it hauls enough.

    2. Nix says:

      How soon did you get your deposit in, and how far do you live from California? If you are a ways down the M3 wait list, you could do a 2 year lease on a Bolt and then get your M3 once your lease is over.

    3. TomArt says:

      Same here!

    4. pjwood1 says:

      Neither am I:
      -It’s parking only $1,000
      -I’d guess resale on a new Bolt/M3, after credits, wouldn’t be a big loss.

  40. Mark C says:

    I hope the Bolt sells like the latest Apple i-Phone. And I hope every single one takes over the driving chores of a Tahoe, Suburban, Silveradao, F150, Ram….. While I’m at it, I hope the new owners put in a solar array to charge them as well.

    As the Air Force commercials said, “Aim High!”

    1. ClarksonCote says:

      I really hope fleets jump on this too. The Bolt EV would make a great taxi, mail delivery vehicle, etc.

      1. Airport Green Shuttle/Limo Service Businesses could work this in, in many Cities!

        Great Car Pool Commuter, as well! Fill it with 4 people going to work at the same place, and you get over 400 SMPG! (Seat Mikes Per Gallon, a number airlines use!)

        With access to 25-30 Amp x 240 Volt EVSE’s at workplace charging, this car could handle commutes of 80-100 miles, each way, all year round! Maybe even with 20 Amp service, in less cold climates!

        1. Kdawg says:

          I could see a lot of Uber drivers going with Bolt EVs.

          (and Lyft now that GM invested)

  41. Nelson says:

    Bravo GM! Well done.

    NPNS! SBF!

  42. Ian says:

    Will be sold out 2017..

    1. William says:

      GM Bolt, currently Sold Out in 2017. But, just wait, you will be able to get a 2018 this time next year, if you get on the waiting list!

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      …and sold out 2018, too, unless GM makes some drastic changes in production.

      1. pjwood1 says:

        Hoping it isn’t months before states away from California see this thing, like Q1/Q2 2017 and no discounting. Compared to discounts currently available on the Volt, Bolt could be up to $10k more expensive pretty easily.

  43. David Murray says:

    What remains to be seen is how much consumer demand there will be. It seems like no matter how many of the naysayer’s problems are overcome, they still always have a new excuse why electric vehicles won’t work.

    So now range is solved, for the most part. Charging infrastructure is still a big question mark. I am hoping that with the Bolt and Tesla coming onto the market, that maybe some 3rd parties will finally build some fast charging infrastructure along the interstate routes. I would love to be able to drive between Dallas, Houston, and Austin. But right now, Tesla is the only one that can do it.

    1. Nix says:


      Yes, breaking into the mainstream market is more of peeling an onion than taking a big bite out of an apple. Each generation of EV’s will suit the needs of more people.

      This range and charging capability will “only” work for millions of drivers around the world, while other drivers will still need something more like a Volt with a PHEV drivetrain.

      But GM can’t make millions of Bolt right away, so the technical numbers aren’t the main choke point anymore. And the Bolt doesn’t need to suit everybody’s needs in order to still be wildly successful.

  44. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    If GM can actually deliver 238 miles of EPA rated range for the Bolt, then that will establish a very strong position in the field. Of course, that’s only “if”. We’ll have to wait to see what range rating the EPA actually gives the car.

    And again, it’s sad (and, as an EV advocate, frustrating) that GM has locked in choices that will severely limit how much production can be increased, at least for the first year or two. As I’ve said, I hope that GM moves in future years to enable significant increases on yearly production of what looks very much like it’s going to be a compelling BEV.

    It’s too bad GM’s commitment to quantity doesn’t match their commitment to quality on this car. 😐

    1. bro1999 says:

      238 IS the official EPA range. Even final, certified EPA figures are listed as “EPA estimated”.

      Look at Every range number has “EPA estimated” verbage next to it.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        You’re pretty firmly ignoring the fact that the usual trend for EVs is for estimated range to shrink and estimated price to increase, as the cars get closer to actually going on sale.

        GM has given people sudden hope that they’re bucking the trend, with the Volt 2.0 actually exceeding predictions on range. But so far that’s just an anomaly, and no rational reason to believe what GM is currently touting as the Bolt’s estimated EPA range will be the actual, final one.

        And another point: The EPA keeps fiddling with their test cycles. So what GM currently reports may be outdated by the time the Bolt actually goes on sale in a few months.

          1. ClarksonCote says:

            The big asterisk though, is like with every vehicle, range will be less in the cold winter months.

            So what happened with the Volt could happen with the Bolt EV too… People buy it in December and January, and then complain to no end that they aren’t getting the advertised range.

            Hopefully GM has been conservative, as you say they have, so that this “winter effect” is muted.

        1. Nix says:

          Actually, at this point, these EPA numbers can be considered locked in stone for the next 2 model years.

          While each company does their own testing, they still have to get reviewed and approved by the EPA. Once they get that EPA release, the numbers for that Model Year are what they are, even if the test cycle changes over the next year.

          And then for the next model year, GM isn’t even required to retest. Even if the test changes. They are allowed to re-use the previous model year’s test numbers, as long as there are no significant changes to the drivetrain.

          The window for the phenomena I talked about in the last story is now closed until the 2019 Bolt.

    2. Four Electrics says:

      GM has only commented on first year numbers: up to 50K. However I find it hard to believe that GM won’t be able to scale this up if demand is strong. That’s just a matter of money. Remember, GM doesn’t want lose two billion on this car. It’s foolish to build out capacity when demand is unknown.

      1. ffbj says:

        While not fully known it’s obvious there is tremendous demand. GM will build nowhere near 50k Bolts next year regardless of what demand is.

        1. Rick Danger says:

          Which may actually get more dealers to want to sell it… with that ultra-attractive $5000 dealer markup added on top of it.

          1. ffbj says:

            Yes, if they have a hit on their hands the dealers are not going to sit on theirs when it comes to marking up the price.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Four Electrics said:

        “However I find it hard to believe that GM won’t be able to scale this up if demand is strong. That’s just a matter of money.”

        Well, if by that you mean that GM doesn’t care how much money it loses on the model line, then yes it’s “just a matter of money”.

        But if you think GM doesn’t care if battery makers other than LG Chem won’t give them that low, low price of $145/kWh… and if you think GM doesn’t care that in order to quickly ramp up production of the EV powertrain, they’ll have to take it out of the hands of a new, untried company like LG Electronics’ new automotive division… then you’re engaging in wishful thinking; wishful thinking nearly as unrealistic as your incessant “fool cell” fanboy posts.

    3. ModernMarvelFan says:

      Read the Green Car Report’s real world drive and they got more than 240 miles…

  45. MDEV says:

    Nice well done GM, this is the beginning of the end of ICE cars if:
    1- GM is seriously producing and selling this car all over US not for compliance.
    2- GM change the dealership strategy for sale the Bolt

    And last but not least Bolt is not mode 3 competition, the problem is for BMW i3, I only can see been fan of BMW to buy one i3 after Bolt release. Now I would take a Model 3 basic 35K than a Bolt, due design and knowing Tesla performance history with their cars.

  46. Coulombic says:

    For those lamenting the lack of Supercharging network consider this. In the two (or more) years that it will take the M3 to come out how many CCS chargers could Chevy install? Go to Google maps for your state and type in “Chevrolet Dealer” and there you have your network. In my state there are Chevy dealers along all Interstates with easy off-on access and in a lot of small towns on smaller routes. It would make a better network than Tesla SC!

    1. Kdawg says:

      You can use and filter for CCS chargers. There’s quite a few, nationwide.

      1. pjwood1 says:

        Read the comments on PlugShare, too. Those CCS chargers, like CHAdeMO, get some pretty poor reliability ratings. They rarely show up in more than 2-stall configurations, as well. Tesla’s are integrated into their map, but show up better at

        Personally, I think CCS’s availability problems hide what will also be greater, per capita, reliability problems which are yet to come.

        In my experience, when a Tesla SuperCharger “breaks”, it still puts out 50-70kw. They sell too many Model 3’s, it immediately falls on them to build more. The democracy of long-range BEV infrastructure, for all the others car makers has the makings of chaos, if long range driving is significantly in your plans.

        1. Kdawg says:

          Yes, the CCS network has a LONG way to go, but just pointing out that it’s not non-existent.

          I wish we had a company like Europe’s Fastned here in the US. Maybe someone will take up the reigns now that affordable 200 mile EVs are starting to show up.

    2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      You really want to hang around for half an hour at a dealership every 90 miles?

      The current dealership model isn’t suited to fast charging for anything except emergencies.

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Coulombic said:

      “In my state there are Chevy dealers along all Interstates with easy off-on access and in a lot of small towns on smaller routes. It would make a better network than Tesla SC!”

      People who claim that dealerships are conveniently located for supporting long-distance BEV travel, are ignoring reality pretty firmly.

      A reality check:

      1. Dealerships are not, in general, conveniently located right beside major highway corridors, and spaced a maximum of 120-150 miles apart.

      2. Dealerships often (usually?) have their EV chargers behind closed gates at night; and during the day, they may be blocked by parked gasmobiles.

      3. How many EV chargers does the average dealership make available to customers? One or two? The average number of stalls at a Supercharger station was five when the network was new, and I think by now it’s more like 6 or 7.

      But go ahead, Coulombic, prove me wrong: Post a link to just one road trip diary from someone who took a long trip in a BEV and relied exclusively, or even mainly, on EV chargers located at dealerships.

      Just one.

    4. QCO says:

      A more interesting point is that unlike Superchargers which can only be installed by Tesla, anybody could install a CCS unit anywhere.

      It is quite conceivable we get to a critical mass point where they start popping up everywhere, even if it was not on a network and you had to pay a couple of bucks to use one in those cases.

    5. TomArt says:

      current CCS charges up to 50kW (180mi/hr)
      current SC charges at 120kW to 135kW (340 mi/hr)

      which one do you want to sit at?

  47. James says:

    Why did you make it so UGLY?!?! The second generation volt is beautiful and selling like hot cakes! Then you make this??? Come on Chevrolet! I just want a BEV Volt with this type of range! #Disappointed

    1. Rick Danger says:

      I know, I much preferred the concept Bolt; it lost most of it’s looks in the production version.

  48. Rick says:

    I still prefer the look of the model 3, the hatch doesn’t mean much to me, whereas the supercharger network does. BUT I will say, I think they did a great job on the tech aspect and I’m very happy to see that they are playing the game and lowering the price. This car will make sense for many.

    1. TomArt says:

      +1 That says it all.

      1. TomArt says:

        …as in ALL WHEEL DRIVE

        Can’t wait for my ≡65D, or whatever the kWh will be.

  49. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

    Driver Confidence Package II : No auto park 🙁

    This is one feature I’d really like to see and find very useful for my dear wife and parents.

    Shouldn’t be hard with all the sensors — just a matter of programming.

    1. Kdawg says:

      First OTA update 🙂

    2. fotomoto says:

      I have autopark but only use it a few times a year. I’d MUCH rather see ACC availability. I think that is WAY more useful and valuable.

  50. Taser54 says:

    Fantastic Job by GM. They are not only pushing the design envelope of affordable EVs; they are also providing a real reason for private companies to seriously establish CCS charging station network nationwide.

    It’s a great time for all EV proponents.

  51. bennyd says:

    Incredible! Any inside news about their leasing program?

  52. Four Electrics says:

    I can’t wait to see what GM refreshes for version two. Good job, GM! You may well beat Tesla at their own game–or at least get me my Model 3 faster.

    1. Someone out there says:

      My guess is a 150 kW charging capability, primarily.

  53. georgeS says:

    So just read the comments and couldn’t find an answer.

    Premier version has an optional package “driver confidence 2” with “lane keep assist”- do we know what that is? Does it steer the car?

    Looks like DCFC is an additional charge on both LT AND premier. Is that true?

    The EVSE that comes with the car is only 120V. Is that true?

    What wheels come standard on the LT?

    1. bro1999 says:

      Lane Keep Assist – probably works the same way it does in the Volt (nudges you to the middle of the lane if you drift over too much)

      DCFC likely a $750 option on all trims (Spark EV has it as a $750 option)

      120v charging cord will come standard. Wondering if there will be some promotion for money towards a L2 unit. The Spark EV comes with a $500 offer than can be used on a Bosch EVSE.

      17″ wheels

      1. georgeS says:

        @Bro, thx
        “Lane Keep Assist – probably works the same way it does in the Volt (nudges you to the middle of the lane if you drift over too much)”

        interesting. so it does steer the car somewhat?

        Now I see the wheel description. painted aluminum on the LT and polished on the premier—thats’ OK.

        So just about everyone will have to pony up for the 220 wall charger and the DCFC for around 1250$.

        pretty decent offering. I’m very proud of GM. The only place they come up short is in the charging area-especially DCFC.

        The nice thing about my used S is the portable EVSE is 50 amp so no wall EVSE req’d and the SC network with free electricity all for 51k$ out the door. Still a better deal IMO.

        1. pjwood1 says:

          I (and maybe others) am a little confused on EVSE vs. charger options. I’d expect we pay extra for the 240V EVSE, but not the car’s on board charger. For the DCFC that is the on board charger, it sounds like GM will ask ~750.

          1. georgeS says:

            yes additional charge for the DC charge port and you need a wall charger. maybe 550$ for the wall charger and 750 for the DCFC port

          2. Bill Howland says:

            PJwood1 I thought you had a wallbox already.

            I have an old 30 amp wallbox I bought for the Roadster which I’ll use for the BOLT.

            If a customer wants the dealer to select a wallbox, the customer will be sent to Bosch through “”

            1. pjwood1 says:

              I’ve got the two OPENevse builds, one the 14-50 configuration. It keeps burning out its relay, and honestly the Tesla sees maybe 1 outta 10 watts from home (so, not fixed but good for ~20A). If Bolt, the 30A line will suffice.

              I wasn’t sure if Bolt was going to offer a faster A/C 240V charger option, similar to Tesla’s dual charger. Looks like one of each, on the car and only the 110V EVSE.

              ~7KW will seem plenty fast, considering what mileage each kwh is good for.

              1. Bill Howland says:

                Yeah – 30 amps will hit the 7.2 kw limitation if the voltage at your wallbox can be maintained at 240. Otherwise, to get the full capacity, you will need a 32 amp wall box and be able to maintain only 225 volts.

                My house is a crap shoot during the summer, since, as mentioned, the voltage goes down as low as 205 with nothing on in the house.

                My inverters for my solar panels were reprogramed free of charge to run down to 99 volts (198 leg-leg, essentially).

                My utility alternatively resets their regulators so that the voltage is way too low (205) or way too high (258).

                I may get a second wallbox since lately with alot more miles on both cars, there has been more and more need to ‘fast charge’ both cars simultaneously. One of those long skinny things would be great since I can let it droop in between the 2 garage doors, and not be hit by them when they operate up and down.
                I could use the outlet I originally put in for a future second Tesla, that I currently just use for my home made 230 volt snowblower.

  54. Nelson says:

    The only way this announcement could get better is if GM says the $37,500 price is for a fully loaded Premier Bolt EV and lower for LT. Instead of text that usually reads “Starting at $37,500”, I’d like to see “Max Price $37,500” (excluding Federal or State incentives).

    NPNS! SBF!

  55. Rasmus says:

    Range is fantastic. But how come safety features are still an add-on? Please take the lead and make any safety features standard. Production of one model should also be cheaper than having multiple versions…

  56. kubel says:

    Sorry Tesla, but it’s looking like I’ll be getting my reservation refunded. Even without SuperCharger, this is a more compelling car to me than the Model 3.

    The only question is whether or not GM will be hoarding part of the tax credit in the lease. I wish they did like Ford, Nissan, BMW, and everyone else and pass on lessees the full value of the tax credit in the form of a CCR.

    1. Bacardi says:

      If it only took an extra 23 miles (at most) to be a deal breaker why did you even reserve a TM3? A TM3 lease is lock to be far more expensive than a Bolt lease despite the higher MSRP…Dealer discount, factory Incentives, the money factor and residuals all pay a part in the total lease amount…Several dealerships in NorCal are consistently leasing the $34K base Volt for $1500 down and $185/mo including TTL (often with Cali’s very high 9%+ tax rate), this is despite them “hoarding some of the tax credit”…

      1. Nate says:

        Regarding your comments about leasing, there are lower deals than that on the Volt and others:

        Kubel is right regarding the tax credit. To anyone who is interested in having a realistic option to purchase at the end of the lease, how the tax credit is structured makes a difference. GM/Ally did not but others did. If structured right you it helps lower the payment without raising the residual. A good lease deal is more than the payment amount.

        1. Bacardi says:

          In regards to the Volt, Ally would not negotiate a lease buyout, however US Bank would and it’s been reported a few times they knocked $5000-$7000 off the price to meet resale value…So you are correct, there is more to a lease than the payment amount…Lease now, let it go if you experience issues or buy at turn in if they offer a discount…

  57. ffbj says:

    Good for GM, my guess was way low 210. So when they hit my area maybe next Summer I will test drive one, and maybe get one.

  58. Bacardi says:

    Kudos on the range, more than I thought! Still lots of improvements could make this thing compelling…Bring on the ACC, Supercruise and a garage door opener! Also wish they gave the thing auto-braking standard (TM3 will, ALL Toyota’s will in 2018)…

  59. Johan Qwerty says:

    No offense, but what is the point of 238 miles if you have no ability to charge quickly for long distance trips? You might as well get something 100-150 miles. Also, who in their right mind would ever buy this over a Model 3 (once it’s out).

    1. Assaf says:

      No offense, but this baby comes with a CCS quick-charge port.

      Human beings as opposed to robots, probably want to stop even before driving 238 miles, to eat something, take a leak, etc.
      By that time, a quick-charger will have nearly finished their job refueling the Bolt.

      As to Model 3, your “(once it’s out)” disclaimer is key. Right now the Model 3 is only one degree better than a rainbow-riding unicorn. Tesla has a solid track record of running behind launch schedule, sometimes by years.

      By the time Model 3 hits the market in quantities, the Bolt might already be there for 1-2 years. Which also means that drivers will have a chance to examine it on its merit. If the Bolt follow the lead of the Volt – one of the highest-quality vehicles to ever have the Chevrolet badge on them – then Tesla will be the one scrambling to compete, esp. since the Model 3’s price point will likely be a good ~$5k higher.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Johan Qwerty said:

      “…who in their right mind would ever buy this over a Model 3 (once it’s out).”

      1. Those who never drive beyond the car’s range, and thus don’t care about the advantages of Supercharging. Given the number of posts from people who say that here, I think that’s a significant percentage of potential BEV buyers.

      2. Those who prefer the convenience and utility of a hatchback to the more limited cargo carrying ability of a sedan. (That group includes me.)

      3. Those who would rather buy a car from a company with a reputation for building more reliable cars.

      I’m a Tesla fanboy, but that doesn’t mean I think it’s reasonable to suggest that everybody will, or should, prefer just one model of car. If they did, then there would only be one model of car, instead of hundreds.

      We EV advocates should embrace the advent of a growing number of compelling EVs, not react to each new one as if there is a pie getting sliced into smaller and smaller pieces. The “pie” that is going to get smaller is the gasmobile pie, while the PEV (Plug-in EV) pie is going to get much, much bigger before many more years pass.

      1. bro1999 says:

        4. Those that want a <$40k, 200+ mile BEV this year, not sometime late 2018/2019.

        1. Kdawg says:

          Bolt EV will also have higher seating, which many like. It will also have more passenger room (same as the Model S).

          It’s also nice to have several places within a stones throw to get a repair done if needed.

          1. pjwood1 says:

            6. Those who believe in dashboards, ergonomics and eyes-on-road controls.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              I agree with you about the minimalist dashboard.

              Re ergonomics: You are of course entitled to your opinion, but here’s a video review from a couple of clearly well-informed “car guys” who think Tesla does ergonomics far better than any other auto maker:


              1. pjwood1 says:

                If I were more specific, it wouldn’t be an opinion.
                -Seat memory should not mean two accurate strikes of a center mounted touch screen, doubled over your wife’s cramped position. It should be on the door.
                -To the extent keeping eyes on road is ergonomic, actions like adjusting Tesla’s sunroof, sourcing audio, or adjusting climate features do a poor job of allowing one to maintain it.

                I can cut Tesla some slack for not having the depth of parts bins, to do what other makers would with buttons, and such, but to imply “all on the touch screen” is actually better is where they begin losing me.

          2. TomArt says:

            With Ranger service, loaners and whatnot, I don’t care where the repair facility is.

            1. Kdawg says:

              Check out the Tesla Motors forum. Lots of horror stories about getting things fixed. Lack of parts, days (weeks) of keeping the car. No loaners. Also, if its something that would take an hour or 2 in the shop, and I can drop it off at my local dealer and pick it up at lunch time, that’s great. If a Tesla ranger has to take it to the nearest Tesla service center, 2 hours away, that’s going to be a pain.

              1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                And do you think that you can’t find very similar complaints about Chevrolet, or in fact every single auto maker of any significant size?

                Overall, Tesla’s customer satisfaction is 98%, and that’s higher than any other auto maker. Of course, that does mean there are 2% who are not happy. But one reason Tesla gets such high marks is the reputation they have established for superior service and repair. What you are referring to, Kdawg, is the tiny percentage of exceptions… not the general trend.

                How about Chevrolet? Do you think customers are in general as happy with the service they get? Or are customers far more likely to have a laundry list of complaints about overcharging, double-charging, unnecessary repairs, long waiting times for service or parts, and — yes — service loaners not being available?

                There’s a reason that traditional auto dealerships have a reputation for being “stealerships”, and the predatory practices of their service departments are a large part of why they have that reputation.

                Tesla? Not so much.

                1. Kdawg says:

                  The Volt has been rock solid, from user feedback and data. Tesla, not so much. Yes, people let Tesla slide, and say “98% satisfaction”, but not everyone is going to be a fanboy. Remember all the Model S issues? Now all the Model X ones? That is why I keep saying make the M3 using K.I.S.S. Forget all the cowbell, and make something that’s robust and has great fit/finish.

                  A poster over GM-Volt waited years for his Model X. Once he got it, it had several issues. Then getting it repaired the dealer had it for weeks. I don’t want to deal with this. I only plan to own 1 car, so unlike him, I can’t just drive something else. Tesla didn’t give him a loaner either.

    3. Spider-Dan says:

      While this car won’t be great for road trips (here’s a secret: every BEV is somewhere between bad and terrible for long road trips), 238 miles means that the Bolt should be good enough to do everything BUT long road trips without having to worry about range anxiety.

      1. Ziv says:

        Car & Driver had 4 Bolts loaned to them and they took them for a 240 mile drive at highway speeds. All of them made it without recharging. One of them was near the end of its charge and one of them had 40 miles left in the pack.
        GM is under-promising on range and over-delivering.

        1. Kdawg says:


          1. Kdawg says:

            NM. Someone else linked below.

    4. Taser54 says:

      You can already use CCS to drive large swaths of the east and west coast. It’s only going to get easier.

    5. Nix says:

      Johan — When you calculate all of the different car makers, models, trim levels, and drivetrain options, there are literally more possible combinations than there are car owners in the world.

      Why would somebody choose one car over another? Because they can. The same reason so many ICE car options exist.

      There is plenty of room in the EV market for both GM and Tesla, and plenty of other car makers too.

      1. Kdawg says:

        It’s sort of like asking, “Why would someone name their kid Johan, when there’s names like Mathew, David, and Blanket available.”

        1. Nix says:

          *laugh* Exactly!

  60. Assaf says:

    Note to auto (and other) companies: that’s what you get when you let women run the show!

    Here’s hoping for more – well done GM!!!

    1. georgeS says:

      Way to go Pam Fletcher!! (I like her better than Mary-Mary’s still kind of a gas head 🙂

      1. Assaf says:

        Barra’s formal training is also in EE. She’s certainly more EV-friendly than any of her predecessors, and any other Big Three CEO.

      2. no comment says:

        the bolt concept vehicle was introduced by berra herself. when the ceo is introducing a concept car, that should tell you that the car is being introduced with production intent.

    2. SparkEV says:

      I don’t know why you bring woman into this. Mary got the job, because she’s the second best for the job (Ghosn turning down the job). But as far as I’m concerned, Mary with her EE degree is an excellent choice regardless of her sex; we all know EE are the smartest and most capable people in the world. 🙂

      1. georgeS says:

        Looks like Pam is an ME. No wonder I liked her better: 🙂

    3. Nix says:

      It is also what we get when we save our domestic automobile industry from liquidation, and save decades of EV R&D from being flushed down the toilet…

  61. Warren says:

    I am thrilled that the Bolt is even more efficient, overall, than the latest i3. If the economy holds on for another year, we may actually be able to drive our own EV.

    In the grand scheme, I think it is wasting our effort trying to maintain a 19th century fantasy. Look at this very illuminating graph, if you have a hard time getting your head around numbers.

    1. Someone out there says:

      Wow, that is awesome! Puts perspective on things, doesn’t it?

    2. TomArt says:

      I saw that today on a Facebook post – excellent!!

  62. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

    Right now, there’s ONE NEW EV in 2016 that’s going to deliver with 200+ and affordable.

    Haters of all kinds will be here, but proof is there. Major US Company Big 3 got there first Amazing as it sounds, they beat all the others to this–including BMW, Nissan, Honda, and Tesla.

    Way to go GM.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Well, semi-affordable. $37,500 is still $10,000-12,500 away from a car that can reasonably be called “affordable”.

      1. Ziv says:

        Push, you are right about the price. But as long as the credit is still in place, the Volt and the Bolt MSRP are only going to drop incrementally. And as soon as the credit disappears, those MSRP’s will drop by $4k-$5k in a matter of months.
        I wish GM would drop them in advance to build sales and market share, but I doubt they will do so.

        1. pjwood1 says:

          Kitchen table mathematicians are among the best. Fuel savings, taxes, this car will move.

          ..And to think it is being aimed at where kwh rates are highest…

        2. Someone out there says:

          Yep, the incentives are certainly keeping the prices up. I guess they are needed to get car manufacturers to start producing cars but when the incentives are all used up I’m sure they will lower the EV prices to more reasonable levels.

  63. future tesla owner says:

    No matter how the Bolt looks and charges issues. I have to give GM credit to built the affordable EV with over 200 miles range.

  64. Driverguy01 says:

    Green Car Reports used 58.7kWh to go 240 miles. 58.7kWh out of a 60kWh battery!!!!
    Am i missing something or did LGChem found the hollygrail of batterys?
    I know it’s only a guessometer but still, no buffer?
    It has to be close to a 70kWh battery and GM is messin’ with us….

    1. Nix says:

      Maybe the 58.9 number includes charging losses, so they actually used less of the battery than the total amount of electricity used to charge?

      1. pjwood1 says:

        Even at 60kwh, with a 93% DOD, we’d be looking at 4.26 miles per kwh. In “Tesla speak”, that’s 234 wh/mile vs. realistic Model S numbers that are closer to ~300 wh/mile.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Driverguy01 said:

      “58.7kWh out of a 60kWh battery!!!!

      “…I know it’s only a guessometer but still, no buffer?”

      I guess you’re talking about this part of the article:

      “Over our 240 miles, we had used 58.7 kwh, or 97.8 percent of the total stated pack capacity of 60 kwh.”

      Okay, but note the disclaimer further down in the article:

      NOTE: Certain aspects and calibrations of the pre-production Botl EV that we drove may not quite correspond to the final vehicles that hit dealer floors before the end of the year. Accordingly, some of our impressions may not reflect the cars that will show up at the dealer.

      The reference to “calibration” might suggest, for instance, that the car’s odometer reading didn’t match the actual trip distance. This could be due to tire size being smaller or larger than what the odometer was calibrated for.

      At any rate, I think that’s a far more likely explanation than to think the Bolt really does use 97.8 DoD (Depth of Discharge) in cycling the batteries. Yes, the new chemistry LG Chem is using in their batteries is supposed to give a bigger DoD than the batteries which EV makers have been using, but nearly 98% DoD seems… rather improbable, to say the least, based on what I know about li-ion batteries.

      There are other possibilities, of course. For example, it’s perhaps possible (altho I think it far less likely) that this pre-production unit had a battery pack with a capacity bigger than 60 kWh.

  65. speculawyer says:


    Well done, GM!

  66. x says:

    indeed, well done so far, GM.
    Now few more questions are left unanswered and GM could easily address them :

    1. volume, i.e. are they really willing to sell and market these cars or would they end up like they did with Chevy Spark to be CARB-states only ? Will they be able to convince stealerships, sorry , I mean dealerships to sell these cars (without despicable price gouging as it was the case with the Volt initially? – 5-10k “dealer” markup. probably some people on this forum can testify about this)as these cars are more likely to see less service revenue for the salesmen? This is a real threat to any carmarker, except, maybe tesla(for now).

    2. infrastructure, i.e. are they willing to invest even 1% of their profits in DC fast-chargers so a Bolt won’t be practically only a city-car ? even now most DCFC are 1-2 charging stations per location, that is completely inadequate considering how many owners live in apartments/travel.

    1. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

      Living in a CARB state– nonissue here; enjoying the really cheap Spark EV already 🙂
      Dealerships are just that and won’t go away anytime soon. EV will push a new type and it’ll be the consumers that force the conversation now that EVs have the ability to be more mainstream with range and performance in line with cost (and cost of ownership).

      Infrastructure is take care of itself organically. Model T Ford didn’t build a gas station empire. DC chargers will appear in logical places as consumers demand it — apartment complexes, retail malls, arenas.

      Tailgating and beach activities while being Green with your EV without range anxiety — That’s going to be very nice.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      The SparkEV was merely a compliance car, which means GM didn’t intend to make it in large numbers, didn’t intend to make a profit on it, and therefore the price they gave it was rather arbitrary… perhaps not a gauge of its actual market value.

      Contrariwise, reportedly 25k-30k Bolts will be produced in the first year of production, putting this well beyond mere compliance car numbers. I seriously doubt that GM has priced this car to lose money, altho likely it won’t make any profit in its first year — that’s the general rule for all new car models, not just EVs.

      A Nissan rep said, back when the Leaf was new, that they aimed to start making an overall profit on the model only in the third year of production. (And that was before they had to build additional battery factories to supply it.) That may well be the case for the Bolt, too, given that it is GM’s first BEV. However, outsourcing the entire EV powertrain to LG Chem certainly looks like a move on GM’s part to limit their development expenses, so perhaps the Bolt will start turning a profit sooner than the third model year.

  67. Matthias says:

    It appears that in Canada, with no incentives available for where I live, the Bolt will cost over 50k. I could buy four Chevrolet Sparks for that price or a new BMW 3 series plus a Spark. Unobtainable for anyone but people working in oil and gas :).

  68. sven says:

    Great job GM! But don’t start resting on your laurels. Keep improving the Bolt, Volt, CT6, and continue electrifying the rest of the lineup.

  69. Rick (no, not that Rick) says:

    Can I get one without Apple white trim?

    1. Nix says:

      You could always get it wrapped it you don’t like the color.

      although I would stay away from the Justin Bieber Chrome wrap….

  70. asik says:

    Hopefully heated seats and even heated steering wheel will be standard in Canada. It’s really important to reduce the need for full-cabin heating and extend the vehicle’s range in our long winters.

    1. no comment says:

      so you would refuse to buy a bolt if heated seats was an option?

      1. asik says:

        The Nissan Leaf has heated front and rear seats and heated steering wheel on all trims in Canada. The Chevrolet Volt only offers heated front seats but they’re also available on the base trim. Missing such options on the base trim would be an amateur mistake to make on the Canadian market.

        That said, if you really need to know about “asik”, I would never spend that much money on any vehicle, BEV or not; but that’s just my personal spending philosophy. Someone with ~40000$ to put on a BEV and knows their stuff won’t get something that depends only on cabin heating; way too much battery drain for almost half the year.

  71. Ziv says:

    Car and Driver just drove 4 Bolts 240 miles, most of it at hwy speed and all 4 made it without recharging. Here is the C&D money quotes:
    ” During our day with the Bolt, we did not drive in an overly aggressive manner, nor did we hypermile. Most of the time, we stayed out of the standard Drive setting and kept the car in its Low mode, which increases the amount of regenerative slowdown you get when you lift off the go pedal. (More on that later.) Temperatures were in the 60s for the first half of our route, so we left the fan blowing without activating air conditioning; as we drove farther south, the temperature rose, and we set the automatic climate control to 72 degrees.

    The results speak for themselves: After driving 238 miles, we arrived at our destination with the range estimator displaying 34 miles remaining. No complicated math was required to see that the Bolt clearly can far outperform Chevy’s initial estimate. Other drivers on the same route achieved varying numbers—one vehicle finished with a range indicator simply flashing Low rather than displaying a number—but each of the four Bolts on our drive completed the tall task. “

    1. Nix says:

      Ziv — Yes, that does validate the EPA numbers, since the EPA numbers include a 10 mile air conditioning test (SFTP SC03) done at a simulated 95 degrees.

      Factoring out the worse efficiency that all vehicles get on the SFTP SC03 test, their fair weather test results appear to line up very well with the official EPA numbers.

    2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      – they drove the _Chevrolet-planned_ route on the coastal highway, which, funnily enough isn’t the fastest route from Monterrey to Santa Barbara, which would have involved more high-speed driving on US-101.
      – Temperatures were mild and they were either using fan only or gentle AC.

      Now, I’d be happy take a slower route because I _am_ a hypermiler, but nobody should kid themselves that this drive was in any way a real-world test. Green Car Reports says that it took about 6 hours. Google says that the faster route takes 3 hours and 52 minutes. When C&D says they didn’t hypermile, they didn’t have to, because Chevrolet did it for them by picking a slower route in conditions in which any EV driver would expect comfortably to hit EPA.

      We should wait until there’s a decent highway-speed test before getting excited.

      1. Nix says:

        After what Top Gear fabricated/storyboarded ahead of time about the Tesla Roadster, I wouldn’t risk an open-ended uncontrolled event at this point in the release either, if I were in charge of any EV company.

        Nor would it be normal in the industry for car makers to give unrestricted access to a high profile ICE car at this point in development either. Early access to high profile ICE cars is often limited access too.

        The fact is that even though the course was pre-selected as a best case scenario, the Bolt actually did perform better than the EPA ratings.

        The cars really did to it, showing that it is possible to beat the EPA numbers if the conditions are right. And that’s a good thing.

        Now if fanbois turn around and try to use this as evidence that the EPA ratings are wrong, and are too low, well that would be false.

        1. Ziv says:

          Nix, that is the way I see it too. Does it mean that everyone will get 240 miles at 75 mph in January? Obviously not, but it does show that at moderate hwy speeds you can exceed the combined figure.
          With the AC on Eco 2 or 3, and driving 65 mph, it sounds like you will get a bit more than 220 miles, maybe a good bit more. Speed is not your friend.

  72. Nix says:

    This is a real victory for EV cars in general, where ICE car companies can no longer claim it is impossible to build the kind of compelling range numbers that will break EV’s more into the mainstream. No more going to CARB and complaining it’s too hard. No more going to CAFE regulatory hearings and saying it is impossible to build cars like this.

    Charging rate issues are a red-herring, as long as all of us EV fans keep getting the word out that YMWV (your mileage WILL vary), and so as long as people buy cars that meet their OWN personal needs, everybody will be fine.

    There are WAY more households in the US where this rate of charging will fit their personal needs to replace a current ICE vehicle, than GM can ever build.

    Build numbers are a red herring too. GM will build what the market demands. If demand is low, they will throw incentives on the hood that they already have baked into the MSRP. If long term demand is high (1+ year), GM will hold back their incentives, and use that money to buy more batteries at a premium price, even if that means paying LG more to run more shifts and install more equipment.

    This is indeed a great day for all EV enthusiasts, no matter what your personal favorite EV may be.

    1. no comment says:

      the barrier to bev adaptation is still going to be recharge time. even with 238 miles of stated range, in colder climate areas, you are going to get a lot less than that. then, if you want to use the car 7 days a week, there is the issue of how much range you can get from recharging each day and how much you drive. you want the battery to have enough capacity so that even if there are days that you drive more than you can recover in an overnight charge, you still have enough buffer to not be limited in your driving.

      depending on driving patterns, in some circumstances, you might have to use public charging. those people might want to choose the dc fast charge option. i have come to believe that a bev might become acceptable to the general public if the need for public charging is infrequent compared to the frequency with which a person has to fill a gas tank. if you have to use public charging as often as you have to refill, the longer recharge time will make bev’s unacceptable in comparison to the ice for the general public.

      1. Nix says:

        If that is your personal needs, get a PHEV like the Volt.

        People keep talking about a barrier to the mass market as if it were a singularity. It isn’t. Like I posted above, it is more like an onion, where each new generation of EV and PHEV will suit the needs of millions of more drivers.

        This car does that. The M3 will do that. Not every car driver’s needs have to be fully satisfied with each electric car. Just like the Ford F150 (despite being the best selling vehicle in the US) still doesn’t satisfy the needs of every single driver either.

        The Bolt opens the doors to millions of drivers being able to replace one of their current ICE vehicles with an EV, with no change in what they do with that car already.

        1. no comment says:

          i definitely agree with that assessment. the bolt is a questionable choice to own as your only car, but it is a very good choice as a second car. the net effect would be a substantial reduction in gasoline usage for driving. even better would be a combination of a volt and a bolt. if i had to pick one, though, i would go with the volt: it’s more flexible and it costs less.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Nix said:

      “Build numbers are a red herring too. GM will build what the market demands. If demand is low, they will throw incentives on the hood that they already have baked into the MSRP. If long term demand is high (1+ year), GM will hold back their incentives, and use that money to buy more batteries at a premium price, even if that means paying LG more to run more shifts and install more equipment.”

      Interesting scenario you’ve painted. Obviously we can’t both be right on this point. It will be interesting to see whose prediction turns out to be correct… or if the outcome is somewhere in between.

  73. SparkEV says:

    Any word on ability to tow a light trailer?

    1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      Tow rating: what we don’t know, won’t make us deny your warranty claim.

      1. SparkEV says:

        Many small cars and EV require you to cut rear plastic to install a hitch. That could be a giveaway that hitch was installed, thus potential for warranty issues.

    2. Texas FFE says:

      I’m also really interested in the tow rating. With the Ampere-E being sold in Europe it will most likely have a tow rating, like most European compact cars. Being a CUV you would expect the Bolt to have a two rating but we might have to wait for someone to get their hands on an owners manual to find out.

  74. Huffster says:

    My 2 cents: Good job GM. I’m curious to see actual pricing with the different trims and options. For future models, I’d like to see adaptive cruise control. I think it’s a mistake to not make the DC fast charging hardware standard on a car that can go 238 miles. A fast charging network as reliable and convenient as Tesla’s will be a challenge. I’m happy to see manufacturers other than Tesla finally have a compelling entry. I myself will patiently wait for the Model 3, but I’d recommend the Bolt EV to friends and family if it fits their needs.

    1. no comment says:

      i think that making dc fast charging *not* standard was a good decision. the most important thing to do now is to get the price of the vehicle down. the “shopping list” of stuff that an ev enthusiast will want as “standard” is never ending. then the price of the car spirals out of control and the same ev enthusiasts will complain that the car “costs too much”. if an ev enthusiast wants dc fast charge, then he can purchase it as an option.

      1. Adam says:

        But DCFC requires virtually nothing to implement in the vehicle, so why not include it? High powered AC charging needs an expensive inverter.

        They just want to up sell DCFC.

        1. Huffster says:

          Yes, I agree. And I’m thinking longer term to when these cars hit the used market. It will be a mess having to find a used specific car with the DCFC option. Kind of like the mess Nissan Leaf used is in. But, If the DCFC option is retrofitable then I do like the idea of a lower cost car option for buyers.

    2. pjwood1 says:

      “A fast charging network as reliable and convenient as Tesla’s will be a challenge.”

      At least on the coasts, you’d probably be better off with a Bolt/DCFC today, than a Tesla even 3 years ago. It may not be fair to dial the clock back on Tesla’s SC network, but the point is they still had buyers back then. Where DCFC lacks in kw’s, it makes up in the growing number of chargers. Throw in some 6.6kw L2s and times have really changed. Less anxiety, more available “Plan B’s”. Then, comes a 238 mile car.

      238 miles means less time at chargers, when your destination is 300 miles away. In some ways, it means faster charging before you’ve even plugged in.

  75. Forever Green says:

    I am very impressed. This is a great victory for sustainable, environmentally friendly transportation.

    1. Warren says:

      Sustainable, environmentally friendly

      I don’t think any scientist would agree with your definition of those words.

      1. Warren says:

        Watching our culture deal with environmental collapse is like watching people drilling holes in the bottom of a sinking boat. Some want to continue drilling 2″ holes, while others think 1.5″ holes will solve the problem. 🙂

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        And the computer you typed those comments on? Just how environmentally friendly would it be for everyone in the world to buy a new one of those every few years?

        People who live in glass houses, Warren… and all that.

  76. underbridgetroll says:

    Not sure why quick charge seems to be an issue for the bt for many.
    Sure M3 has the optional SC but many won’t ever use it.

    As for Tesla, all they have to do is be close to the Bolts range.
    My guess is the M3 will have different battery pack sizes. Maybe even battery swapability?

    1. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

      You’re underestimating the nature of the batteries here

      Agree though, vast majority of common sense folk won’t be driving their EVs long distance. MiniVan country.

  77. Kdawg says:

    363 comments. I think this article is going to break the internet.

    1. Jay Cole says:

      …if only we could have somehow squeezed in the words “Tesla” and “hydrogen” in the tite

      1. ClarksonCote says:

        Haha! Don’t forget “crash” and “fire”

        1. Kdawg says:

          And a comment from “Lutz”

      2. TomArt says:


  78. JP DeCaen says:

    Wonder if Mary Barra shouldn’t have rolled out a black Bolt in a Vader suit with the Imperal March playing. The Empire strikes back.

  79. Ian says:

    If Nissan would announce a 238 mile Leaf i would be in the next day to trade mine in.

  80. James says:

    I believe there are more comments so far than miles of range for the Bolt EV!

    Nice job, GM. Nice job!

    Due to extreme lag I experience on this site I’ll keep my comments short.

    It’s still tough to compare a small crossover with a sports sedan. They appeal to different customers, naturally. Tesla sells on it’s speed, sportiness and versatility in a “prestige” brand. People will buy a Bolt because it’s practical and they are sold on a CUV format to meet their needs.

    I like both. It’s always entertaining to watch people fight over a “Camaro vs. Mustang”, “Camry vs. Accord”, “Odyssey vs. Sienna” or “F-150 vs. Dodge RAM” style comparisons when there just aren’t enough electric car choices today to make direct comparisons.

    1. TomArt says:


      A significant selling point for the M≡ will be the fact that the autopilot hardware is standard, so even the base model will have the warnings and adaptive cruise control, etc. The rest can be unlocked later by you or a future owner.

      The SC network is a big one for me, having family along SC routes of 230 to 400 miles one way. Along both routes, there is no convenient train service and no cost-effective air service.

      Tesla also has the ever-popular AWD option – an option that does not hammer efficiency, unlike ICEVs. And the option to buy a larger battery pack.

      Tesla offers a complete vehicle (good array of standard safety features plus a useful range of powertrain options) and a complete environment (sales, service and convenient intercity charging network).

      GM, like all legacy OEMs, have not provided a complete EV yet (with the full complement of standard and optional safety features and powertrain options that you expect in a vehicle). Hopefully, they will, and soon.

      1. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

        Model 3 “standard options’ is funny how that is done and accepted. The cost is baked in and one can unlock the service — very IT like.

        In the end, it’s equivalent to optioning out the standard car. Bolt has the ‘charger option, safety options I and II’ alike. It certainly could have AutoPilot and AutoPark installed, but GM has taken the more hands on assist model until the technology matures more.

        Even Tesla has taken a step back with its most recent OTA Update enforcing the hands-on requirement to lessen liability exposure and realizing the limits of current day tech.

        GM’s Bolt really seems like a good complete car that’s beating most existing cars in production and many still on the drawing boards.

  81. Adam says:

    Why has no one mentioned the one thing that makes the Model 3 better…..


    There is no car, under no circumstances where I would by a bum dragging front wheel drive car. And if you live in an area where there is snow etc. buy the all wheel drive version.

    1. JyKiaNiroPHEV says:

      Most EVs are sold in the Golden state. We don’t need no stinking AWD.

    2. Ambulator says:

      I prefer front wheel drive, so that’s one of the reasons I prefer a Bolt. Tastes differ on this.

    3. Rick Danger says:

      Can’t argue with you there… it’s the i3’s one ace in the hole that might let it survive until the Model ≡ gets here.

    4. Kdawg says:

      I prefer FWD. And I’m not going to pay $5000 for AWD.

      1. SparkEV says:

        After SparkEV experience, EV with any kind of power should be RWD or AWD. SparkEV slips the front tires on almost every vigorous launch, even at 40 MPH stomp-accelerator. People coming from slow cars like Leaf and Prius have no idea.

  82. Rick Bronson says:

    Soooper range, Soooper car. Bravo GM for making us all happy.
    Now the next thing is GM should stick with the $37,500 price tag.
    And even more important is raising the production as much as the demand.
    Many long distance trips can be made possible with Bolt and those who drive longer frequently will now go for it. Besides Taxis can start switching over to Bolt. Even Level-2 charging during lunch will give another 60 – 90 miles.

    If the Bolt’s range can increase from 200 to 238, then the Model-3 range can also increase from 215 to 240 range. Even a 10% improvement in battery range will help Tesla attain this.
    Of course Model-3 is much longer and overall a bigger car.

    Next interesting news could be the price of upcoming Hyundai Ioniq-Electric, but this will be only in next month.

    Ioniq-Electric sold 1000 units in just 2 months in Korea.

    1. Kdawg says:

      “Of course Model-3 is much longer and overall a bigger car.”
      Don’t let the external dimension fool you. The Bolt EV will have more passenger room. It’s slightly more than the Model S, and the Model 3 will be smaller than the Model S.

  83. George Haider says:

    It makes lot more sense to buy a Chevy Bolt and enjoy 238 miles of smooth electric drive rather than the BMW i3 with 114 miles. Smoother drive over the longer range far outweighs the luxury badge of i3.

    Now many automakers of electric vehicles have to reconsider the price and the range of their vehicles. So far they escaped from the fact that the Tesla which sold longer range electric vehicle is a small company. But now with a big company like GM selling such a vehicle will be a game changer. Some of the electric cars that are due soon are Leaf, eGolf, Focus-EV.

    1. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

      Like some Tesla owners,
      BMW owners don’t use logic 😉

      It’s eye badge candy to some.

      Model 3 is going to really hit the Sport Sedan market hard and directly targeting the BMW 3 series.

      I believe the Bolt will find a large green leaning population out there – 1million solar arrays in Cali would be an ideal target.

      1. TomArt says:

        Yep, I’d say that’s about right. The Model ≡ could very easily do to the 3-series what the Model S did to the S-Class Benz!

  84. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    395 comments! (No doubt to pass 400 very soon.)

    Is that a record for InsideEVs?

  85. Michael says:

    I think it is great that GM has built and will deliver this car. However, 37K after incentives is not affordable. In order to get the full 7,500 tax credit, one needs to report earnings well above 100K. Remember, it’s a tax credit, not a refund. I also hope that this car will spur the installation of a charging network which is actually networked. That would be a great thing, and I ultimately believe that long range EV is not what we need.

    1. Kdawg says:

      “However, 37K after incentives is not affordable.”
      It’s $37.5K BEFORE incentives. So $30K after the tax credit. And they said “below” that price. We’ll know more when the official price is announced.

      “In order to get the full 7,500 tax credit, one needs to report earnings well above 100K. Remember, it’s a tax credit, not a refund.”
      This is incorrect. You only need about $47K of taxable income.

    2. Ziv says:

      Michel, as kdawg points out, you are wrong on both your points. If you are single and make around $56k, you get the full credit back and pay no taxes instead of the $7500 you would have owed.
      If you are married, your family income has to be around $63k to get the full credit, a bit more if you have more deductions, but no where close to $100k.
      And the Bolt costs a net $30k, or less, with the credit priced in. And within a few months you will be able to make a deal and pay less than MSRP. If GM can build enough of them, that is.

    3. Forever Green says:

      Michael, you said,”I ultimately believe that long range EV is not what we need.”
      long range electric vehicles are exactly what we need. 100 miles per charge in an electric car is nonsense.

  86. HN says:

    Opinion of BGR News “Now to be fair, the Chevy Bolt isn’t the nicest looking car in the world, but it’s still a step up from previous iterations. Having said that, Tesla still boasts a number of advantages within the battle for EV supremacy. For starters, the Model 3 sports a much sleeker look than the Bolt. What’s more, Tesla’s Supercharger network and advancements in Autopilot software, taken together, tend to make the Model 3 a more compelling vehicle. Equally as important, Tesla has the brand cache that money simply can’t buy.”

    1. SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD says:

      True, Model 3 is a nice car — for 2018.

      At $100,000, yes, but with 400,0000 on the road for $35,000 — not so much anymore.

      I’m still on track for the Model 3 for what it is — a very nice Sports Sedan to replace my Infiniti G37.

      1. HN says:

        I think Model 3 is a good replacement for your G37, for me it will supplement the 2000 MB E430 for local and short distance of around 50-80 miles or less. The E430 will be used mostly for longer drives to San Fransisco, Vegas, Phoenix … I am in So Cal.

    2. TomArt says:

      Well, yes, and like I commented above, Tesla offers a complete car – great suite of active and passive safety features standard, as well as adaptive cruise control, a useful variety of powertrain options (larger pack, AWD), etc.

  87. Victor says:

    I’m happy to see another automaker joining Tesla with a long range electric vehicle. Most auto manufacturers think the public should be satisfied with 100 all-electric miles. I wonder why the same manufactures don’t build cars with a 4 gallon gas tank? The next few years the average electric car will be getting 300 to 400 miles on one charge. Until then, stories like this one will be a big deal.

  88. Bill Howland says:

    Too many of my comments were deleted here, so, bye everyone, i’ll miss most of you.

    1. Jay Cole says:

      Hey Bill,

      Please do not take the loss of any of your comments personally. This thread has been overly busy to say the least…and comments have come much faster than can be actively moderated.

      When an offending comment (not yours) is moderated, the entire sub-thread below it is unfortunately lost – including any reasonable response, or even non-reactionary ones.

      So for example if someone says. “Joe you are an idiot and ********”, then there is a sub thread of 5-6 comments that develops under that before we moderate…then those sub-comments are all lost because they no are attached to the parent. One of your comments could have highlighted the fact a parent comment went to far, which could spur not only the loss of the original comment, but your own.

      While this thread is over 500 comments, the Internet can be a fairly brutal place if left unchecked, more than 125 comments were also removed for excessive/abusive reactions, likely an equal number of “orphaned” comments were also lost.

      So again, apologies on you getting lost in the minefield…threads like this are fairly rare (high comment count on a hot topic), and extremely hard to manage. I’d ask you to rethink your decision with this explanation in mind, I know I enjoy your discussions in the community.


      1. pk says:

        A better commenting system is obviously required.

  89. Another Euro point of view says:

    I hope this under promise and over deliver trend at GM continues…

    The 500th comment…

  90. Fabian says:

    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?

  91. Tesgmappgoo says:

    Tesla = Apple
    GM = Google