Chevrolet Bolt Versus Tesla Model S 60 – Comparison Test

NOV 1 2016 BY MARK KANE 104

Motor Trend recently picked up the two major electric cars on the road today with 60 kWh batteries (kinda*) for testing – the Chevrolet Bolt EV and Tesla Model S for comparison reviews.

Tesla Model S

Tesla Model S

Both are made in U.S., and both offer more than 200 miles range (238 miles in the Bolt EV, 210 miles in the base Model S).

On the pricing side, the Chevrolet Bolt EV costs just under $30,000 (after $7,500 tax credit), while the 60 kWh Tesla starts from $59,700 –  so the Tesla is nearly twice as expensive.

Given the pricing, we think a more appropriate choice for comparison against the Bolt would have obviously been a Tesla Model 3; but as entry level 3’s won’t likely be available for a couple years, Motor Trend went with what they could.

Moving on…

The Tesla is rear wheel-drive, while the Bolt EV is front wheel-drive. Acceleration from 0-60 mph actually doesn’t differ that much: 5.0 seconds for Tesla and 6.3 seconds for the Bolt EV according to Motor Trend (although we should note, this is the first time we have seen the Bolt EV tested lower than 6.5 seconds to date).

Interestingly, the difference is (relatively speaking) even smaller on a quarter mile:

  • Tesla: 13.6 seconds at 103.5 mph
  • Bolt EV: 14.9 seconds at 93.1 mph

*- Of note on the Tesla used in this test: – the 60 kWh “battery” in the base Model S is now actually a 75 kWh battery limited to 60 kWh (instead of an actual 60 kWh battery).  After purchase, the owner can optionally upgrade, or unlock if you will, the last 15 kWh – for $9,000, which ups the range to ~234 miles.

Chevrolet Bolt EV w/Optional CCS Combo

Chevrolet Bolt EV w/Optional CCS Combo

Where this is an important difference is in the charging – the Tesla Model S can use the company’s proprietary Supercharging network – which features multiple charge points per location, or the existing CHAdeMO fast charging infrastructure (with adapter); the Model S is also capable at charging at up to more than 2x faster than the Chevy.

Tesla Model S (and friends) at a Supercharging stop

Tesla Model S (and friends) at a Supercharging stop

As for the Chevrolet Bolt EV, it uses a J1772 Combo inlet (not a standard option). A typical Combo charge these days is mostly limited to 50 kW (but also often @20 kW),  and the network is clearly not ready for long journeys at this point, certainly not in relation to the Tesla/CHAdoMO grid.

While the extensive Motor Trend article offers detailed insights about the driving experience that one should also check out, here is the summary:

“Ultimately the Bolt and Model S 60 quite close in performance and function. The Model S remains a technical tour de force three years after its release, with Tesla appearing to have no intention of letting its flagship car wither on the vine. If semi-self-driving technology and a proven quick-charging capability with worldwide infrastructure for long-distance travel is what you’re after, there’s really no choice but the Tesla.

Is that capability worth the $30,000 premium over the Bolt? Well, if you have to travel long distances regularly, then possibly. But if simple fuel-free driving is what you’re after, the Bolt’s stellar real-world range can cover a week’s worth of commuting plus errands for the average American without charging. Its 238 miles of range also easily enable intercity—but not interstate—travel. Toss the Bolt’s puppy-dog driving dynamics into the mix with its stellar efficiency and family-friendly packaging, and the choice becomes pretty clear: the Chevrolet Bolt EV wins. More than any EV that’s come before it, the Bolt makes emissions-free, environmentally friendly transportation a realistic proposition for millions of Americans. It has made the current crop of pricey, short-range electric cars from BMW, Nissan, and others utterly irrelevant.”

Categories: Chevrolet, Tesla

Tags: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

104 Comments on "Chevrolet Bolt Versus Tesla Model S 60 – Comparison Test"

newest oldest most voted

“the Model S is also capable at charging at up to more than 2x faster than the Chevy”
————

Note, that was a Model S with a software limited 75kWh battery. I doubt the base model 3 will come with a 75kWh battery.

This is the Most “ABSURD” comparison ever. The Tesla Is 2X The Price BUT 4X The Car, How Can These JOKERS Make such A Comparison . They shouldn’t even use The word Bolt In The same sentence as Tesla, Let alone Compare them. I had respect for CR, Now I’m wondering if they’re not Bought & Sold Like everything else

It’s a stretch to compare the Bolt and Model S, but since they will be the only 2 plugins with 200+ miles of range on the market for the next year, what else can you compare the Bolt to? Until the Model 3 EPA ratings come through (along with whenever unveil parts 3/4/5/? are done), the 60 kWh S is the only car you can reasonably compare the Bolt against.

So for roughly double the price, you get a Tesla badge, Tesla styling, physically bigger car, and the SC network. Otherwise, most of the other numbers are either a wash or close to it.

Only Problem ., That Bolt is pretty Hard on the Eyes..

One could also argue Tesla S is way too big to find easy parking in the city. Bigger isn’t always better.

He will not get it …

Yep, I know a few model 3 reservation holders that could get an S, but think it’s too big.

Some also prefer hatchback’s to sedans. I do, but since the CCS network near me does not allow for travel, which I need, I’ll stick with my model 3 res for now.

Regardless, I think the Bolt would make a great option for many people.

Yes Tesla is sexy and fast. I have been following after mustering lot of courage,@price, i went to test drive, with intent of buying it.
I had leaf, limited in range, frustrated some times i canot go fast because of range.
it should be fair pick for tesla model s.

Wait, i didn’t like the test drive, tesla is half the car inside to what it looks out side.

bottom line, not every body looks for Just speed, and style, we need comfort too

You do realize that the article in question comes from Motor Trend not Consumer Reports, right? Not sure why you’re complaining about CR.

Comparing the Bolt EV to a Model S should be absurd. I think the article’s point was that it wasn’t, which was indeed surprising.

FWIW the Car and Driver review was similar to Motor Trend’s.

Thx for Clarifying ,Sorry, My mistake , I meant to say MT

Perhaps you were distracted by randomly hitting the Caps Lock key.

Sven

“The Tesla Is 2X The Price [FACT] BUT 4X The Car [NOT A FACT]…”.

Carry on.

Wrong! $37500 X 2 = $ 75,000..The Base Tesla Is $59,700… So We are Both Wrong!..

BTW, I know For sure that Tesla Is MORE Than 2X The Bolt In Size Alone..Not to mention the rest of it..

“Despite its subcompact size (it’s about the size of a Honda Fit), putting the battery beneath the floor and pushing out the wheels to all four corners have allowed Chevy engineers to build a small hatchback with an impressive 95 cubic feet of passenger volume, 1 cubic foot more than the two-row Tesla, which is 32 inches longer.”

Nope, you were half right the first time. The base Bolt is $37,495 including destination fee, while the base Model S is $67,200 including destination. Factoring in the full $7,500 federal tax credit brings the Bolt down to $29,995 and the Model S down to $59,700. Two Bolts are $29,995 x 2 = $59,990, which makes the base $59,700 Model S almost twice the price of the base Bolt, and more than twice the price if you add in sales tax and/or any state rebates or credits.

It’s no more absurd than subjectively claiming that the Tesla S is “four times better”, or questioning CR’s ethics when discussing a comparison made by Motor Trend.

This comparison was long overdue. Sometimes, a car can be too much for someone. Ask Steve Wozniak. He is returning his Model S to switch to a Bolt EV.

Model S 60 is actually much lower range (208 miles) compared to Bolt’s 239 miles. That’s the most important factor for most EV drivers, besides price of course.

ABSURD indeed! Next they would say a Mercedes S class is the same as a Ford because it has similar range and seats the same amount of people.

For the record, 1.3 seconds quicker to 60 is huge. Don’t believe me, just look at their reviews on gas cars. They get excited about a fraction a second. The difference between the two is at least for car lengths. The Tesla by and you have enough time to ask yourself when the Bolt will be crossing line.

They said Model 3 will be a better comparison. But they don’t have years to wait. Lol.

Advertising dollars pay off in positive content! GM pays good money for car ads and gets good reviews. Tesla does not advertise. What would you expect?

Not everything is a conspiracy. Motor Trend and Car & Driver have been editorializing about cars for decades. In the twenty years I have been reading, they are fair, subjective and unbiased. Obviously you’ve read neither as GM cars have been roundly criticized for the last twenty five years, and even their excellent new car reviews are still haunted by poor GM products from the 80’s and 90’s.

Agreed. Why is it a conspiracy when one doesn’t like the story? Sheesh.

Instead, we should all be celebrating that mainstream automotive publications are now treating EV’s with real respect and writing “regular” articles about them.

…and who paid for this post I wonder?

Obviously Motor Trend is shorting Tesla stock…

Motor Trend mentions that the model s was their Car of the Year in 2013. They’ve gushed about it for years now. I think you are a little off base here.

Pinewold said:

“Advertising dollars pay off in positive content! GM pays good money for car ads and gets good reviews. Tesla does not advertise. What would you expect?”

While there certainly seems to be a consensus that car review magazines (not including Consumer Reports) are too influenced by advertising dollars, and that they are rarely willing to give a really bad review to any car, no how badly it compares to others; at the same time let’s take notice of the fact that the Tesla Model S received more “Best Car of the Year” reviews and awards, from professional reviewers, than any other car in history. Let us also take note of the fact that some reviewers even called the Model S the “best car ever made”.

I don’t think it’s fair to castigate any auto review magazine or website* for its coverage of Tesla.

*Well, I see BBC’s “Top Gear” TV show does have a website. That’s certainly an exception to the rule of fair play in covering Tesla Motors’ cars!

So the Bolt has even more EPA-rated range than a 75 kWh Model S! Impressive for an “aero brick”. 😉

The 1/4 mile times are also interesting. The S had a 1.3 second advantage through 60 mph (5.0 vs 6.3), but the overall 1/4 mile time difference ended up being 1.3 seconds as well (13.6 for S vs 14.9 for the Bolt). And that was despite the Bolt hitting its 93 mph cap before the run ended.

So the aero-brick Bolt was basically even with the S 60 after both hit 60 mph. That can’t make Tesla fanbois very happy….the fact the $30k cheaper “dork-mobile” Bolt comes very close to matching the S’s performance numbers. 😉

6.3 sec doesn’t suck as badly as I thought it would. Still, 1.3 sec is 26% of 5 or 21% of 6.3. Granted, $30K is way too much for account for the difference.

However, if 1/4 mile times are true, Tesla sucks really badly. In other words, it’s more proof that GM engineers are the best in the world. I wonder if they’ll come up with P100DL competitor.

“GM engineers are the best in the world.”

You mean LG Chem.

The LG Chem engineers that received the specs and designs from the GM engineers?

No, I mean GM. LG Chem is decent manufacturing firm, but Tesla and Chinese are better. Meanwhile, designing EV is far better by GM than anyone with Tesla close behind.

> “but Tesla and Chinese are better.”

Wut? Why are the Chinese mentioned here?

No. Engineered by GM. Manufactured by LG.

SparkEV said:

“However, if 1/4 mile times are true, Tesla sucks really badly.”

Seriously, you’re really gonna go there?

Weigh down the Bolt with weight equal to what the significantly larger and heavier Model S carries, and then see how well it accelerates.

Talk about an apples-to-oranges comparison!

Sparky, I knew you were a GM advocate, but I had no idea you were this biased. We expect better from someone who actually publishes graphs to back up his assertions on his website.

Hoping this is just an aberration on your part.

Pu-pu said:
“Weigh down the Bolt with weight equal to what the significantly larger and heavier Model S carries, and then see how well it accelerates. Talk about an apples-to-oranges comparison!”

Good grief. You’re saying we should weigh down the SparkEV so it weighs as much as a Model S, so that we can get a fair apples-to-apples comparison of 1/4 mile race times? Double facepalm. That’s probably the dumbest Tesla fanboi apologist excuse that these jaded ears have ever heard.

The additional battery capacity of the Model S, which accounts for much of its extra weight over the Spark EV, is what gives the Model S its power and fast acceleration. The larger the battery, the more juice that you can sent to the motors. Instead why don’t we remove part of the Model S battery so that its battery capacity is equal to the Spark EV for an apples-to-apples comparison of 1/4 mile times. Oh that’s right, with a smaller battery the Model S would accelerate slower.

1/4 mile times comparisons should be based on unmodified/stock cars as they came from the factory. Their power to weigh ratios should NOT be altered.

sven

Sven did lot of explaining, but it boils down to this. Beyond 60 MPH, Bolt and Tesla S that cost double have exactly the same acceleration. If you’re driving on highway and you see a big-rig you want to pass, Bolt that cost half has exactly the same “passing power”. I don’t know about you, but for $30K extra, I’d want some more oomph.

As for graphs in my blog, I also have tables. In some of the tables in old blog post, I show why SparkEV is like Tesla P90DL when taking performance and money into consideration. Using those metric, SparkEV came out ahead of all Tesla except P90DL, and Bolt comes out even better than P90DL. Money should be included in all measurement aspects.

http://sparkev.blogspot.com/2015/09/ev-ranking.html

You’re comparing a time differential to a speed (60mph) to a time differential to a distance (1/4 mile). As the cars move faster, the same time difference in time means a bigger distance difference.

We can figure out exactly how far behind the Bolt is when the Tesla crosses the 1/4 mile because the Bolt has likely hit it’s limiter at that point. (1.3s * 1/3600 hr/s) * (93.1miles/hr) * (1760 yards/mile) = ~59 yards

So about half a football field behind. This is not a close race.

Depends how far the red lights are spaced.

No question Tesla is quicker by small but comfortable margin. But is that worth $30K? Tesla being “luxury car” save it a bit, but still, $30K could buy a minivan in addition to Bolt.

As I wrote in my blog, only Tesla worth it are P85DL and up. With Bolt, that rings even more true until Tesla 3 comes out.

First off, like everyone else has said, these cars should not be compared.
Second, I would not consider the difference between 5.0 and 6.3 0-60 small.
Simply by percentages, the difference between a 5.0 and 6.3 is the same as a 6.3 vs 8.0. Its two different classes of performance.

Thank you. Glad to see that someone other than myself can see what should be obvious to everyone.

Definitely a mistake for the article to try to dismiss this significant difference as if it is unimportant.

You are just too uptight anytime a word comes out making Tesla look like perhaps not the obvious choice under all circumstances …

It should be obvious to you, that to some the higher price is a deal breaker especially when the test numbers are considered. Sure the form factors of the cars are very different, but the little GM is not so bad for 30K less …. but that would be too hard for you to admit, wouldn’t it?

Hint … it was a test to demonstrate that not all small EV’s must suck as the Leaf does. Or is that too obvious for me to mention.

“It has made the current crop of pricey, short-range electric cars from BMW, Nissan, and others utterly irrelevant”

This sums it nicely. When those are within couple of thousand, Bolt is the clear choice.

Who buys an i3 now? Except those slave to the BMW badge with wads of $$$ to waste?

And the “new and improved” Ford Focus Electric? All I can say is “LOL”.

Well it does have a range extender option for those that go that route.

If you’re counting on range extender, it’s far better to get Volt. i3REx had its day when they were the only PH with DCFC that had ~150 miles range. But with Bolt, that advantage is gone. I mean, why fuel up with messy gas every 80 miles AND pay more to buy?

And if you’re often taking longer trips, you’d get Volt (or even gasser), not i3REx.

But he was talking about people buying i3s

I’ll wait until new FFE is released before knocking them. If they price it right (~20K post subsidy) and have decent performance (about that of SparkEV) and 150 miles range at 65 MPH, it could be a hit as that would be better than all the gassers in price range. It’s a slim chance that Ford will pull it off, but you never know.

The Clear Choice would Be To WAIT for the Model 3 ,..But since the bolt Is $2,500.00 more because it’s better. LOL ..This starting to sound like the Political debates, It makes no sense at all!

I agree. Your posts never make any sense at all.

like, like, like, like,…

I think jimjonjack has got to be one of Donald Trumps aliases. He posts here in between his 3 AM twitter tirades.

Jim Jon Jack Miller maybe?

Indeed.

And isn’t it notable that we can always spot comments by “EV Nut”, no matter how many times he changes his screen name?

“Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go.” — Oscar Wilde

LOL … agreed

The most flexible thing about the Bolt is it’s price. They could very well be $10,000 cheaper than the M3 in 2019, after Telsa has met all preorders.

Unbelievable. You and Alaa are tied for Tesla’s “Most Embarrassing Fanboi”. Fortunately, the vehicles and their actual buyers are speaking intelligibly for themselves.

I undestand the Bolt is very impressive but 1,5 seconds difference on the 0-60mph is huge. I don’t consider the performance being “quite close”.

It’s completely irrelevant in daily driving situations. It’s only relevant on the drag strip but I and most car buyers have no interest in that.

It’s completely relevant when attempting to pass another car on a two-lane highway, especially when driving in the sort of rolling hill terrain we have around Kansas City.

It’s completely relevant when trying to merge onto a crowded freeway, and you spot a hole you can fit into if your car is fast enough.

While you are correct of course, I don’t remember last time I saw a car passing on two lane road (not including myself). North Americans don’t drive this way … opposing traffic gets into panic once they see lights heading their way in their own lane …. doesn’t matter how far they are.

Having said the Bolt has more than enough oomph to do it faster then most average ICE powered cars. Different question is, will the EV driver hammer the throttle in that situation as they should … my bet is they will not.

No it’s not. You can do that perfectly safely in a car with half the acceleration of the Bolt.

“It’s completely relevant when attempting to pass another car on a two-lane highway, especially when driving in the sort of rolling hill terrain we have around Kansas City.”

I agree that 1.5 seconds is a significant enough difference. But I consider anything sub 7s “sporty enough” for onroad driving.

That is V-6 Family sedan territory.. I don’t ever hear people complaining about V-6 family sedans not having enough power to pass in Kansas.

When you consider the S costs almost twice as much, that 1.3 second difference doesn’t look quite as big.

Yes. When I am heading to the big box store for a pallet of Twinkies every second counts.

LOL, and you can fit a pallet of Twinkies in a Model S more easily than in the Bolt … I’m guessing.

Rather than guess, read the the data. The Bolt has 1 cu ft. more space than the Mode S, so that pallet will fit better in the Bolt.

I agree. Also the Model S has double the cargo volume compared to the Bolt which isn’t mentioned in the comparison.

And although they have similar interior passenger volume the Bolt is narrower than the S but makes up the volume in head room. I’m 6’2″ and personally I’d rather have more hip and shoulder room than more head room. Especially if you decide to squeeze 3 people in your back seat.

I don’t think you want to be a 6’2″ person sitting in the rear of a S.

AT 73″ I simply could not sit in the back seat of the early Model S. Now it’s just torture. LOL (Haven’t actually had to do it, I’ve been able to move to the front).

Not to say the Model S doesn’t have a spacious cabin. It does. Good cargo space as well, though IMO The frunk isn’t that useful.

I’ve read the S has LESS rear headroom than a Volt…..now that’s saying something. At 6′ even, I can juuuust fit into the rear seat of a Volt (either Gen) with a sliver of headroom left.

Meanwhile, the Bolt is 6 inches taller than a Volt.

You’ve read? Thats nice

My Dad has a Model S and I have a Volt.

I am 5’11 and have slightly less headroom in the Volt’s backseats than I do in the Model S (but no one EVER sits back there, EVER)

But there is PLENTY of headroom in both vehicles so all this talk about headroom is comical.

All cars have more headroom than they should.

Model S and Volt could have a lower roofline than they already do to look even sleeker.

Headroom is not an issue, at all.

I’ve sat in the back of an S. Not a big deal. I would rather have the ceiling close to my head than have plenty of head room but with my hips pressed tightly against my fellow passenger in the middle.

“More than any EV that’s come before it, the Bolt makes emissions-free, environmentally friendly transportation a realistic proposition for millions of Americans”

That’s just it, the Bolt opens up the EV market for millions more potential buyers. Sure it’s not for everybody but it’s for a lot more people than the LEAF is. The Bolt EV is a great step forward but there will be many more steps to take.

All these comments from armchair critics make me sick. I wish the Bolt would hurry up and get on the dealer lots so can see what the real popularity of the Bolt is. Let’s let the sales numbers decide which car is better.

I’ll put real money on the Bolt EV easily outselling the Model 3 for 2016 and 2017. LOL

Once they hit the showroom floors. most of the stealership markups will hinder sales.
Only when the Model ≡ gets close to availability is when they reduce with stealership markups.

Lame Motor Trend article. Why not show us the whole charging curve. One rarely charges all the way especially on the road. You need to know how many MPH charge rate you get as a function of how full the battery is. Also as kdawg pointed out the 60 kwh battery is not really a 60 kwh battery it’s a 75 kwh battery so you don’t get the big taper at the end so it’s not a fair comparison.

The other thing that gripes me is that there is not one of these reviewers that will tell us about Nav. They had an article on this over at Hybrid Cars and there’s still big questions about it.

Does it use topo maps-Model S does- How much does it cost?
Is it only smart phone enabled? How do you order the Nav package? and most important of all:

Does it give an accurate estimation of charge remaining at your destination?

Android Auto/Apple Carplay plus GM’s hi/low/middle range estimates should be all you need.

In car NAV? Who uses that anymore? Except cavemen that still use a Blackberry. Lol

Didn’t Ford just sign a software contract w/BlackBerry?

Wouldn’t surprise me. Ford is still in the stone age as far as plug-ins go…..well, maybe bronze age. FCA is in the stone age.

Aha! So THAT’s why Chevy left off the GPS option which I so explicitly ordered! They were protecting my “cool” rating! Good to know. (Some day I will get over this…)

George you may find the linked article in MT’s article intersting. They mention using Mapquest in the Bolt EV, talk about charging more, and also have curves for the regen.

http://www.motortrend.com/news/chevrolet-bolt-tesla-model-s-60-range-charging-travel/

Looks like the Bolt EV regen is much more aggressive than the Tesla, which is great for one-pedal driving.

http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/10/Bolt-Tesla-One-foot-driving.jpg

I read somewhere that Tesla regen tops out at 60 kW, which is the same as SparkEV. Bolt being lighter than Tesla, same kW would result in more deceleration.

I wish these articles discuss more technical aspects of the car like kW @ MPH or kW regen. Unlike gas cars, EV are pretty simple to characterize.

@kdawg
Thx for the link.

From the article in the link,

“the CHADdeMO one was already fastened to an unkempt Leaf” … “The EVgo charger can only charge one car at a time, meaning that as I waited”

Yup. With all these Leaf clogging up DCFC and mainly by those who get free charging, using Bolt even for sporadic long distance travel will be painful. I’m so grateful GM isn’t giving out free charging, and I hope Nissan and BMW stop the practice soon.

“Would a typical car owner put up with any part of this scenario? Likely not.”

Also good assessment. With so much DCFC waiting, especially when there’s good Leaf sales, I couldn’t recommend EV to any of the people I know unless EV is to be a second car.

Thank you, no charge to charge, for ruining the EV experience!

What’s a “family-friendly packaging”?
Is that an option on either cars?????……lol

I like how some like to mention/compare the S had a software limitation from a 75 to 60 and that made it a bad comparison yet when that’s mentioned about the Volt (that uses slightly more than 50% of its pack) being compared to other PHEV’s, it’s “OK”.

The Volt uses significantly more than 50%. Going from memory the Gen2 is about 75%.

The reason the 75Kwh battery isn’t a good comparison is that the base Model 3 most likely won’t have this.

Personally, I see nothing at all wrong with comparing the Model S to the Bolt. But let’s make it a fair comparison. Mention what advantages the Model S has, such as more interior room, greater cargo space, greater comfort, and better interior appointments.

Nothing wrong with comparing them on similar characteristics. But let’s not ignore where they should be contrasted on their rather different ones.

Not just 0-60 acceleration and price.

Actually the Bolt EV has more interior room.
And I don’t think I would give the edge to the Tesla on the interior either.

From the article: “The Model S’ cabin is well appointed, although with the scratchy base black cloth seats and black wood trim, it doesn’t feel as luxurious as moderately equipped Teslas.”

Maybe if you go base S against premium Bolt … which makes no sense … otherwise the Tesla S will be always higher end interior. They pretty will equipped car, you have to give them that.

The interior space is surprising, but that is because the space under the hatch is most likely the difference.

But that’s the 2 cars they had to compare. If we wanted to make it more even, then they should have used a Model S60 that didn’t have the 75kWh battery.

Also, I think the Model S interior, at any trim level is not as good as the higher trim Bolt EV, or Volt for that matter.

The Bolt has more headroom, which is useless and stupid.

More headroom = Taller vehicle with excess.

Model S has plenty of headroom and is sleek and sexy. Bolt is not.

Model S is desirable. The Bolt is not.

Aesthetics matter. I wouldn’t care if the Bolt had longer range and better performance than the Tesla, if it looks like that is absolutely no consideration.

Make a good looking car. It’s not f**king hard.

The Volt has a very nice sculpted shape so the Bolt looking how it looks, there’s no excuse and thats disrespectful.

The Tesla Model S is the clear winner in all countries that use RHD cars.

I find the Model S boring. Looks like your typical euro-sedan-land-yacht.

I don’t like the too-spartan interior or giant screen that looks out of place.

To me form follows function, and I want function.

I have a reservation for a Model 3, but it’s all up in the air until I see the final product.

I’ll add that the Model S did win some points with me when they got rid of the horrible nose-cone.

100% agree. I’d actually prefer the Bolt over the model 3 if both offered AWD and a charging network that would allow me to travel to my frequent destinations. I don’t care how it looks, but do want utility and reliability. The hatchback design of the bolt trumps the model 3 sedan for me and I’m not sold on Tesla’s being reliable yet. Too many owners I know are at service centers way more than I am with my Leaf or my friends are with their i3’s and Volt’s.

It is ironic that between the Volt and the Bolt the “sporty” looking one (the Volt) is the “slow” one. It would seem GM could rectify this with an ELR-like sport+ mode that allowed the engine to engage if for not other reason than those occasional fun full throttle blasts.

As it sits, the Bolt is intriguing for its more upright seating position and what appear to be go-kart like fun to drive factor – essentially the exact same things I liked about the BMW i3. Indeed, I would say I PREFER a smaller fun to drive car over the larger S – all out acceleration isn’t the be all / end all of performance/fun on the street.
The Bolt successfully deals with a lot of the i3’s shortcomings too (choppy ride, darty freeway handling, and less than pragmatic suicide doors). I look forward to test driving one (and before the Tesla fan boys descend upon me…I drive a Model S).

Its subjective of course, but I rather liked the “S”‘s ‘catfish’ grille. I haven’t gotten used to the new ‘skinny lips’ look.

Since it is a new vehicle, and there have been some complaints about the GEN 2’s reliability from the CR article (although in fairness I don’t know whether these are trivial or major concerns), I might hold out on the BOlT purchase until it has a reliability track record.

But there’s no question of the Value comparison. 2 cars for the same price as 1 s is something only a very rich person could ignore..FLmark also stated his “X” (apparently it also applies to the current “S”) looses too much range overnight and therefore also uses too much electricity to recharge.

For me, I want a reliable vehicle with no surprises. The fact the car is bigger than the S, and presumably also is frugal with its electric usage (as other GM cars have been), are just added bonuses – as well as the by far greater range.

We actually need more a 0 to 30mph.
That’s where any EV would shine and put a smile on everyday driver’s face 🙂

First, this comparison is only because these vehicles are the current ~200-mile EV crop. No one would rationally compare these two in other circumstances, especially given the $30k price difference.

Second the “Bolt will fail because it’s not sleek and sexy” chorus here misses the point – not every car buyer wants “sleek and sexy”.

As an example, the Honda CR-V this year is outselling the Accord. The Audi A7 is handily being outsold by the cheaper Q3, and the equal-price Q7.

And even the equally “stylistically-challeneged” Honda Fit sold over 50k units so far this year.

And if the point is to get electrification to the masses, then cars have to appeal more than just being sleek and sexy. And in the ~$30k price segment, practicality matters.

I don’t understand the criticism of the BOLT not being able to charge as fast as ‘2.5 C’.

The Model S 100kwh model cannot charge at ‘2.5 C’. Sometimes at a busy SC location it can’t even do ‘1.0 C’.

So why pick on the BOLT? 200 (80%) miles over a lunch hour isn’t enough recovery? Maybe not for a time-constrained travelling tech or salesman.

Reliability of the BOLT is unknown at this point, but Per Jay COle’s point of GM products being generally reliable, all there has to be is one failure of the Tesla to the continued running of the BOLT, and the convenience math is thrown out the window.

But, i’ll suspend judgement until the Bolt’s reliability is proven.