Report: Chevrolet Bolt Will Come To Europe, But No Right-Hand Drive

SEP 16 2015 BY JAY COLE 101

Coming Soon: Opel Bolt EV To Europe - No RHD Available

Coming Soon: Opel Bolt EV To Europe – No RHD Available

The Chevrolet Bolt And 2016 Nissan LEAF Made Their West Coast Debuts This Past Weekend At LA National Drive Electric Week Event

The Chevrolet Bolt And 2016 Nissan LEAF Made Their West Coast Debuts This Past Weekend At LA National Drive Electric Week Event

Once word began to spread that the 2nd generation of Chevrolet Volt would not arrive in Europe (as either a Chevy or Ampera), we were quick to learn that the company’s plug-in plans had not died in Europe.

Soon it was announced that a city EV would arrive in Europe “no later than 2017“.

Then, once the Chevrolet Bolt debuted (with 200 miles of range), word leaked that production of the EV should start at GM’s Orion, Michigan facility in October of 2016, and that a companion “Opel” car was also reported to be built in-line.

The Chevrolet Bolt would be that Euro-EV that was promised earlier by 2017.

Now Autocar is re-confirming via General Motors “sources” that yes, the Bolt will arrive in Europe (quite obviously as an Opel product as the Chevrolet brand has left the building).  But that when it does, it will only come in left hand drive – no US RHD production will be undertaken.

Sorry, UK buyers.

Chevrolet Bolt Interior From NAIAS Debut In Detroit In January (InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)

Chevrolet Bolt Interior From NAIAS Debut In Detroit In January (InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)


In truth, this news is not terribly unexpected as we had already heard from “sources” that any Europe allocation for the Bolt would be limited for the foreseeable future.

And while GM has not put a target on a specific number of total Chevrolet Bolts they are looking to sell, a couple of suppliers for the EV have said GM is looking for enough supply components for its Michigan line to be able to build 25,000 to 30,000 per year.

With Europe getting a limited fraction of this amount, likely no more than 10%-15%, the R&D cost to produce a portion of those Euro-bound Bolts in RHD would make the exercise a money loser.

We expect to see the first Chevrolet Bolts delivered in the United States in early 2017, likely as a 2018 model.  Look for any European delivers in volume to start someday in the Fall of 2017.

GM CEO Mary Barra has promised the car will retail for about $37,500 in the US (33,000 Euros) before incentives, which would bring the 200 mile EV down to around $30,000 net cost.

Also from Frankfurt, the CEO stated that another new electric car – not based on the Bolt, would also debut in Europe before 2020 – no word on RHD availability.  Whether Ms. Barra meant an all-electric plug-in car, or an extended range EV remains to be see.   One assumes this new EV would also be made available in the United States.

Chevrolet Bolt EV - Will The Moonroof Make It To Production?

Chevrolet Bolt EV – Will The Moonroof Make It To Production?


Taking A Peak In The Back (InsideEVs/Tom Moloughny)

Taking A Peak In The Back (InsideEVs/Tom Moloughny)

Autocar, Hat tip to sven!


Categories: Chevrolet

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

101 Comments on "Report: Chevrolet Bolt Will Come To Europe, But No Right-Hand Drive"

newest oldest most voted

25k-30k is a very small number is there something wrong with it that GM is not telling us?

Small compared to ICE cars, but compared to PEVs, that’s a respectable number for a first year of production. With regard to 2014 US sales, 30k would tie with the Leaf for highest sales. Most likely the upper limit is based on the capacity of LG Chem’s Michigan plant.

A good ranged BEV with a decent price tag will sell madly. All carmakers know that but protecting their ICE car business, they will never build enough.

Right now if their concerns about the climate and their will to go green was genuine, we would see advertising campaigns praise the numerous advantages of the BEV all over the medias.

The feature BEVs (and hybrids) have that miss the most publicity, is the fact that in the cold, they ALWAYS start on the first attempt, instantaneously!

Stop it with the conspiracy theories already.

“. . . in the cold, they ALWAYS start on the first attempt, instantaneously!”

That’s absolutely not true. BEVs have a 12 volt battery just like ICE cars, which is affected by cold weather just like a 12 volt starter battery in an ICE. If the 12 volt battery is dead on any BEV including Tesla, then the BEV won’t start.

Just for good measure, here is another dead 12-volt battery in a LEAF.

Stupid question but why does a tesla need a 12 volt starter battery?

I believe it’s because when a BEV is shut off the contactors completely disconnect the large Li-ion battery from everything. A 12-volt battery powers the contactors on and off, and also powers the door locks, dashboard display, onboard charger electronics, and anything else that need juice when the Li-ion is disconnected by the contactors.

Thanks for taking the time to educate. With respect to why you need a 12v battery to start an EV, most importantly the 12v battery powers the computer(s) which run everything.

Note that this means you don’t need a lot of power to start an EV. Probably not more than 120 watts or so. You’re not cranking an engine, so those little battery starters should do the trick.

Wrong answer, the right answer is pure conservatism reminiscent of the past. There is absolutely no valid reason to keep that antiquity into the car. When you leave home you don’t turn off your general power supply so it should not be the case in a car.

I think most EVs use a 12 Volt battery as a ‘firewall’ to protect the Li-Ion. It powers accessories and things. But if an electrical problem occurs that uses lots of electricity, the car will just drain the 12Volt battery instead of bricking the very expensive Li-Ion battery.

Pretty much all ev’s require a 12v circuit to run the safety system. When you turn off your ev you disconnect the high voltage battery so none of the high voltage curcuits are left live. The high voltage battery can only be reconnected after a series of safety checks have been performed by the system. The whole system fails safe, so if the 12v battery fails the car won’t connect the high voltage pack. The simple answer is to put a secondary backup system in, a second 12v battery, a little solar panel, a switch that can be pressed and held down to allow the dc dc converter to connect the main pack to the 12v manually or some thing that allows the mains to charge the 12v through the evse. If your ev is not starting I would try pluging it in as the first remedy, you won’t be able to drive off but if the 12v can be charged from the mains it might start and charge the battery enough to unplug and then start normally.

Disconnecting the traction battery may be true for the LEAF or others, but in the Model S, it is always connected.

Remember the vampire drain issue that was solved though firmware upgrades?

“Why a 12 volt starter battery?”

Not a stupid question at all, PJ.

My Roadster had a small motorcycle battery. All the other cars, including GM have relatively large ones.

I was told yesterday that if you leave a Leaf plugged in after it finishes charging, that the 12 volt battery will evenutally go dead.

Since the dc/dc converters (alternator replacement) that make the 13.8 volts to begin with are relatively efficient, why not just have a motorcycle battery, and turn on the converter anytime someone is near the car? After all, even in the GM Phev’s, the engine is ultimately started off the High-Voltage main battery.

Obviously, EVs don’t need cranking amps, just enough power to start the computer. They should be cold immune in this case.

Dead 12v LEAF batteries seem unrelated to temperature.

Most likely there is some parasitic drain on the 12-volt battery that causes it to become dead. But I could see really cold/frigid temperatures dropping the power and increasing resistance in an old/weak battery that on it’s way out to the point where it wouldn’t be able to start the computers and contactor in an BEV.

Yes, severe cold does that. I grew up in Minnesota and when the temps drop below -40 degrees, people often wake up to cars that won’t start. EVs will do better because they don’t need to draw as much but EVs can fail to start in the severe cold.

Much much less of course because the power required to turn an engine stuck in its own oil molasse at very low temp can drain any battery that is not in perfect order.
I know, I live in cold Quebec.
99% of the time hybrids and BEVs don’t have this kind of issue.

Dead 12V batteries is a common complaint on the Ford PHEV’s as well. In some cases it’s due to mechanical problems, like wire insulation getting chaffed. In other cases because various computer modules don’t always go to sleep like they are supposed to, draining the battery overnight.

Dead batteries is a specific problem, what I mean is you need only a little power to start the car. In a Hybrid, the electric motor act as a giant starter 🙂

And please don’t tag me with conspiracy each time you disagree.

Dead batteries are exceptional, a BEV or an Hybrid for that matter will start with very little current left in a battery, impossible task for an ICE in the cold.

Rex, I can lend you my copy of “I Was Raised by Bigfoot” if you need some good reading to distract you from all of your wild conspiracy theories. In the meantime understand that a brilliant first year for a 200-mile, $33k(ish) sedan would be about 30,000 cars. That is a simple reality. You are part of a tiny, very vocal and religiously zealous community who puts complete pure BEV at the top of moral imperatives. The enormous majority of the present new car market in the US is simply not aligned with you and won’t be for some time. If people really, really want them and will fork over the money the lines can respond within a few months. There is rarely an actual “supply constraint” that exists for very long. (Tesla’s fabled condition is largely mythical as you can see by their bloated inventory numbers. Either they are too dumb to properly plan and have piles of the wrong parts or Musk just keeps saying something that isn’t true. I vote the latter in respect to the Tesla workforce.) GM is under no obligation to expend irresponsible amounts of capital anticipating a wave of demand that will not… Read more »
Thanks for the insults, I like when people insult me instead of bringing constructive questions and facts. You say it yourself, GM (or any) could build battery factories fast if they wanted to. But where you are wrong is saying they don’t do it because of a lack of demand. The real reason, and you say it too : “they will instantly respond to profit opportunities with investment” The hard fact is that ICE carmakers see NO PROFIT OPPORTUNITY in BEVs, for the simple reason that they make way much more profits with regular maintenances, repairs, parts and premature replacements of internal explosions engine vehicles. Much more complicated than electrics, they overheat, scrape, vibrate and wear much faster than an electric motor. So ICE carmakers killed the first wave of electrics at the beginning of this century, offered hybrids in limited numbers, and about no choices of BEVs. They keep the prices high, they don’t build many and the range really sucks. With those 3 roadblocks they put in place, they kill the demand, and after the fact, they use the argument of weak demand (they created) to build even less cars… Before tagging anyone of conspiracist religious or fanatic,… Read more »

Clif Jacobs said:

“And please stop it with the limited global battery capacity thing. Name a product release or availability of any significance (volume or length of delay) that has been limited by Li battery production.”

The Tesla Model S. The Nissan Leaf. Probably the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, too. Very likely the Tesla Model X has been delayed months or even years by limited battery supply. Perhaps even the Volt 2.0… it’s not clear just why GM cut back the production plans.

“They don’t exist. The world’s Lithium battery suppliers can respond far faster than certain sellers of multi-$B convertible bond and share issuances want you to think.”

Yeah, that’s why Tesla is building the Gigafactory, because it’s so easy to get the supply of li-ion batteries it needs. [/snark]

RexxSee has certainly promoted some pretty absurd conspiracy theories in comments on InsideEVs articles, but not in the post you’re responding to. As it is, your response to him is both a misplaced ad hominem attack and a “poisoning the well” fallacy.

Name one, and we’ll discuss it in a newer article.

What’s the opposite of a conspiracy theorist?

You should take RexxSee’s posts with a mountain of salt. He insists that the public desperately wants BEVs and that PHEV/EREVs are filthy gas guzzlers… but he drives a non-plug-in Prius.

It’s easy to have high standards for what everyone else should be driving.

Carmakers are in reaction to Tesla. And for the batteries, if they were serious, Mega factories would already grow like mushrooms for anticipated contracts.

I was under the impression that batteries for automobiles are a small, albeit rapidly growing, part of the lithium ion battery industry. I thought it was less than 20% but it is growing fast.

Ziv, your impression is quite accurate. Markets change, sometimes dramatically, so what is true today will undoubtedly be different very soon, but the giant groundswell of M of EVs annually in the US and Europe still awaits.

Woah . . . autos are only 20% of the Li-Ion market? Autos use huge amounts of batteries compared to cellphones & tablets. That really tells you how big the cellphone & tablet markets are.

Spec, do you have a link to that? I can’t find mine, so I am not saying you are wrong, but I read something this spring that said the amount of kWh of LiIon batteries that are used in autos is less than 20% of the total sales of LiIon batteries. And it was closer to 10% than 20% if memory serves. But I can’t find the article, so maybe I am wrong.

Argh. I completely misunderstood Spec’s post. Sorry.

Tesla has nothing to do with it (maybe a little something but effectively nothing). CARB and China and CAFE have everything to do with it.

I know you dislike giving Tesla credit for anything, but in a world where Tesla doesn’t exist, I have a hard time believing CARB would not cut back on their ZEV mandate just as they did years ago and continue to pound the hydrogen drum (they are still doing that today even when BEVs are shown to be clearly viable even for long range).

As for CAFE, ZEVs are not required to meet those standards. Similarly, China does not have a requirement for ZEVs (only “new energy vehicles” AKA alternative fuel vehicles).

And relevant to this article: would GM be rushing out the Bolt if the Model 3 was not just around the horizon? I don’t believe they would be doing that. Even the Volt project can be called into question given Lutz has said Tesla was one of their motivations.

RexxSee said: “Carmakers are in reaction to Tesla. And for the batteries, if they were serious, Mega factories would already grow like mushrooms for anticipated contracts.” Perhaps you’re not aware that it was only a few short years ago when battery makers ramped up production of li-ion batteries in anticipation of rapid growth in the plug-in EV market… growth which failed to materialize, leading to a glut on the li-ion battery cell market and rapidly falling prices. The fallout from that included the bankruptcy of Envia and the near-bankruptcy of A123. If battery makers are cautious about ramping up production these days, they have good reason to be. I wish it were otherwise; I’d like to see the EV revolution grow without restraint. But in the real world, growth of any industry is limited by available resources and time. It takes about two years to build a new battery factory and get it running at high production; throwing more money at it doesn’t speed the process much. Right now, it looks like LG Chem is growing its list of customers faster — maybe a lot faster — than it can build out production capacity. That’s not due to any conspiracy;… Read more »

“growth which failed to materialize”
I just explained yesterday how and why the carmakers sabotage themselves this growth.

“ICE carmakers killed the first wave of electrics at the beginning of this century, offered hybrids in limited numbers, and about no choices of BEVs. They keep the prices high, they don’t build many and the range really sucks.
With those 3 roadblocks they put in place, they kill the demand, and after the fact, they use the argument of weak demand (they created) to build even less cars…”

You can add the regular disappearance of good cars, such as the Fit-EV or the RAV4-EV.

Heck isn’t it obvious that they build the strict minimum to comply to regulations and make believe they do their homework for the planet?!?

There is no competition, there is a CARTEL!

4-seater only right? Does that play a part?

Might this car be a money-loser? Perhaps for now but battery prices will drop as scale increases?

Good questions, but I doubt you’ll get an answer. The new car industry is highly competitive, and auto makers don’t generally publicly disclose info on what their costs are. My understanding is that auto makers generally don’t make a profit on the first year of any model. And for companies making their first BEV, the payback time is probably longer. Nissan said very early in the Leaf production that they planned to start earning an overall profit in the third year of the model, and that was before they built battery factories and auto assembly plants in Tennessee and the UK, partly or mostly to eliminate bottlenecks in Leaf production. So very likely Nissan is still “in the red” for the Leaf.

GM seems to have learned to underpromise and overdeliver. They did the reverse in the build up for the Volt.
If the base model Bolt has an MSRP of $37,500 and has an EPA range of 200 miles I will be impressed.

I would not call the “half seat” with no foot room in the rear, an “over promise”. 😛

Besides, GM pulled back on what they said they were going to deliver, and are now redesigning it again. Hence the delays.

Hopefully it will be a better vehicle for it.

Anon, it sounds like you are talking about the 2016MY Volt, not the Bolt. The Bolt has a flat cabin floor, so even though the fifth seat will be a narrow one, like all compact cars have, it will have decent leg room.
And from what I have read, the Bolt appears to be coming on time in late 2017. I would have preferred to see it arrive in August, but they didn’t ask me.
I do agree with you wholeheartedly about GM needing to keep a little flash in the Bolt. Chevy is just about as pedestrian a car maker as can be imagined. That having been said, I was walking with friends a month ago and all 4 of us noticed a black sedan approaching and two of my friends commented that it looked sharp as hell. And it was an Impala! I was dumbstruck. It actually looked good.

The new Impala looks pretty nice. If you took the badges off, it could probably pass as a European luxury brand.
The new Malibu also looks very nice. GM’s marketing arm might suck, but their designers seem to be very talented.

GM officials have been quoted saying the production Bolt’s exterior will be “90-95%” the same as the concept. I’m guessing the looks of the front and rear will change some, but the body style will remain pretty much the same.

Re: GM’s marketing arm sucks….

Perhaps so in many areas, but that just makes those of us who take the plunge with the great yet little appreciated GM products that much smarter than those who remain in the past, continuing to bash GM for their pre-bankruptcy product issues.

The biggest changes will be a non-all glass roof and a more streamlined rear hatch (it’s a bit fiddly in design). Of course the interior will be similar in style to the 2016 Volt.

GM has a history of showing nice prototypes, and then giving consumers a far more pedestrian version on the car lots. The Volt is a classic example of how radical a departure they’ve been known to go…

How much of the “cool” are they going to take out of the Bolt, when they start mass producing it?

GM needs to keep this as close to the above pics, as possible. I think the sin of blandizing (or “Malibuing’) it, will create a huge backlash for them.

Please GM, no tacky metalized fake grills for the front. Leave it as it is.

I think it was pretty evident the concept Volt’s styling was “out there” and would never make it to production in similar form. If you read the Volt book that was provided to earlier Volt adopters, they have a section that describes the battles the design team had with the aerodynamics people to win concessions. You can’t ignore physics, unfortunately.

Yeah, I seem to recall that when they put the prototype into the wind tunnel it had horrible aerodynamics, and was actually more aerodynamic when placed into the wind tunnel backwards.

That is correct.

Th prototype Volt design with its long hood looked rather obsolete to me. Plus its compound curved side windows that could not be rolled down were a stupid idea. I’m glad GM realized how unpractical they would be and ditched them, unlike what Elon did with his showy yet complicated Falcon Wing doors.

That was a joke Lutz made. I doubt it was actually true.

Right, he was just joking. They never actually put in the tunnel backwards and collected data.

Yep. From the link above Lutz said “if”.

“When they put the concept into the wind tunnel it was a huge disappointment. Lutz said they might have gotten better results if they put it in backwards.”

bro1999 said:

“I think it was pretty evident the concept Volt’s styling was ‘out there’ and would never make it to production in similar form.”

Indeed, the absurdly low windshield and tiny windows were obviously something that would never appear on a mass produced car (link to photo below).

Contrariwise, the pictures of the Bolt prototype seen here look pretty much like something you might actually see driving down the street. I’m not sure about the tiny side mirrors, though.

It would be wonderful if everything turns out as described above and GM starts production of a 200mile EV about a year from now, and sell them for the low price we hope for.

There are two big risks that I can see
1) Some technical problem on the batteries, e.g. delays or their specs are not as good as we hope
2) The batteries end up being very expensive and GM loses money on every car

I hope neither problem happens – but LG concern would do well by releasing some independent test results on these new batteries.

+1 I really want to believe LG when they say they have the advanced battery chemistry but it would sure be great to have “independent test results.”

I don’t expect independent test results (not really done in battery industry), but a standard battery datasheet would go a long way. Even a marketing website like AESC had for the Leaf battery cells would help.

“LG concern would do well by releasing some independent test results on these new batteries.”

It is surprising to me that we haven’t seen any details on LG Chem’s new so-called “200 mile battery” cells. I can only conclude that anyone who has been given details is under a non-disclosure agreement. I’m sure that LG Chem’s customers have submitted samples for third-party testing… they’re just not giving out the results of those tests.

It’s really a shame that no RHD model would be available, since here in the USofA rural postal carriers could really use one of these. I’ve seen a number of mail carriers driving RHD Subaru wagons and all varieties of Jeep RHD vehicles. An EV for rural mail delivery would be pretty cool with all the stop and go they do.

Maybe if they had a firm order from the postal service they would develop one. Remember, they have to make a profit.

A car with this size should fit well into the Japanese market.

More tears for Australia with no RHD anywhere

Why not switch lanes to LHD?

Yeah, at this point, the few remaining countries should switch to LHD & driving in the right lane. It is only obstinance that stops them.

Of course the very same is true of the USA which REALLY SHOULD switch to the metric system. Actually, the fact that we are not on the metric system is far more shameful.

Some consumer things are metric, and it also depends on what field you are working.

Well yeah . . . the medical field is metric, the military is metric (due to NATO), the scientific field is metric . . . so let’s just get it over with and go full metric!

That would make some things easier for us european people. And some things more complicated. We in fact use non metric s**t for the sizes of tubings. The numbers would be odd… Well. Nonetheless. Let’s go! Metric system + LHD worldwide + globally standardized plugs and voltages, frequencies+ globally standardized safety standards for cars. all of that will make things cheaper for everyone.
(Hmmm.. I sound like someone promoting TTIP)
Well. Standards do make sense in certain areas. Could even reduce waste. I like them. Standardize everything except language 😉
Sorry tooo tired for useful comments…

I wonder if they don’t want to sell many of them, or if they can’t produce many of them, or if they just think there won’t be much demand for them.

I’m hoping it’s the “let’s not make sales predictions that don’t even come close to coming true and end up looking like a bunch of idiots” like what happened with Volt 1.0.

That is my hope as well, Bro. If they have switched to underpromies, overdeliver, I would be really happy with the decision.

So, already we get signs that GM is planning on only limited production for the Bolt, just as I suspected would happen.

“No soup for you!” for the UK, for Australia, for Japan, for Hong Kong, or for many other former British possessions.

We can be sure that Tesla’s Model ≡ won’t be limited in this fashion! Or the nominally “200 mile” Leaf, either.

The only thing we are receiving is a cautious estimate of initial production based on past experience with the Volt, where initial projection of 60,000/yr was used as a club by the media to bash GM during the initial years of the Volt.

Well, I hope you’re right. I would love to be proven wrong about this. And those who point to GM not being able to sell the Volt 1.0 as fast as they made them, have a good point.

Gasmobile makers have a strong disincentive to make compelling plug-in EVs in large numbers, which would eat into sales of their own best-selling gasmobiles. I see the Volt as an exception to that, apparently the result of a personal crusade by Bob Lutz… who is no longer at GM.

So we will see, with the Bolt, if GM is really interested in pursuing development of competitive PEVs… or if they’re only developing the Bolt to make sure they don’t fall behind if (or when) the EV revolution does shift into high gear. Call me cynical, but I think the latter is closer to the truth.

Where is GM’s “GigaFactory”? LG Chemical? The same LG with at least 5 other major automakers getting THEIR batteries from them, too?

If I start laughing, I won’t be able to stop…

The LG Chem factory in Michigan is only running at around 25-30% capacity. It may not be a gigafactory, but it’s enough to pump out batteries for 25-30k Bolts a year.

Nobody has a gigafactory yet. What Tesla has now is a big warehouse with currently neither the need, neither the business model neither the funds to significantly expand it further. It may happen that this situation changes but right now probably other car manufacturers are better off without such big warehouse in Nevada as far as their profit & loss accounts are concerned.

Not true at all. Tesla plans to start producing batteries from the Gigafactory in the first quarter of next year. You can be sure Tesla and Panasonic are working furiously inside the newly built, pilot portion of the Gigafactory to install electrical, plumbing, and all the production equipment they need to get the factory up and running.

“So, already we get signs that GM is planning on only limited production for the Bolt, just as I suspected would happen.”

No need to suspect. GM said from day 1 they would make about 30K of the Bolt the first year. Nothing has changed.

KDawg: Which is worse? Demand constraint for a production run, or an unsolvable physical production constraint?

Either way, economies of scale won’t kick in and GM loses big money on every Bolt sold…

Singular engineering achievement. Originally the hope was that the price of cells would drop. That hasn’t happened as fast as hoped, so what we’ve been left with is the engineering. Getting 200 miles of range from a car at this price point is super great engineering. Kudos to the engineers.

I doubt Tesla (or Nissan for that matter) can touch this but I’ll be very impressed if it can.

From your link … “from 2010 to 2017 or 18, when we can see our way to a 200-mile BEV for about $30,000 – it’s close to a factor of two reduction in cost in terms of dollars per kWh”

Factor of ONLY two ???

I very much doubt GM will be able to sniff the value proposition that Tesla offers.

Subcompact hatchback for $37,500 and no supercharger network vs

Compact liftback sedan for $35,000 plus Supercharger Network.

Plus the option of getting a ~$65K BMW M3 killer if you and your wallet so desire. Or something in between.

I don’t know about that. I think you’re leaving out an important part of the value proposition:

car that exists
car that does not exist

Neither car exists yet.

Correct, of course. So no one right now is “choosing” between any value proposition.

But if past performance is any indicator, GM won’t have to worry about the Model III for another 2+ years after the Bolt comes out.

To add: that’s the main reason why the Model X hasn’t been winning the “value proposition” against ICE SUVs since 2013.

DonC said:

“Getting 200 miles of range from a car at this price point is super great engineering. Kudos to the engineers.”

Kudos to LG Chem’s researchers and engineers for designing and building battery cells that are significantly cheaper, so Nissan and GM can afford to offer nominally “200 mile” BEVs.

GM can justly be proud of its Voltec engineering. Five years after its debut, the Volt is still by far the industry leader in PHEVs. But for the Bolt, GM is very much just playing follow the leader behind Tesla, Nissan, and BMW.

That’s what you get, UK, for not buying the Volt/Ampera.

Somehow, I will always find Anon and RexxSee to have something negative to say on just about every GM related articles…

And MMF always have a little something against EVs. Come on, I critics where there is something to critic, and knowing about the carmaker cartel, GM is one of the most active member… They gave us the best EV 15 years ago, with 105 miles EPA, much more in real life, and now they are completely unable to repeat and enhance this kind of car?!? B.S. Hybrids are not an in-between step to BEVs, they are a way to DELAY cars that do not make use this poison called OIL. Have you notice that car companies choose the ugliest designs for their EVs? Or they adapt the smallest cars? Never a mainstream good sized well selling car. THe Bolt is no exception, it is smaller than the Leaf and the price is too high for this kind of car.. Not very appealing on purpose, it’s called anti-marketing.. They will sell only a few, then after that they will say there is no demand.. as they do now with too high priced, weak ranged, not very available BEVs. That is if they succeed in killing Tesla. If not, MAYBE, maybe they will start to really compete for the best of their… Read more »

And tell me my friend if we live in a so perfect world where mega corporations follow religiously all the rules (which rules?)

Where is this investment recharging network, yet one of the biggest incentive to buy an EV ?


Do you have the spec on the Bolt to prove that Bolt is smaller than the LEAF? or are you basing it on your conspiracy theories again?

Yeah all this sniping back and forth is old, and its happening because GM is so tight-lipped about the Bolt.

Any Idea when the Final Spec is going to be approved?

Then people can say what they like or don’t like about the specs. It appears to be a very practical vehicle, kinda like a micro-crossover. Maybe if this sells well they’ll try making a larger cross-over.

No RHD = GM Fail

Well the Bolt will not sell in Europe if its not price agressively. The US price is around 37500$ (after incentive), 45.000$ (pre incentive). This related to a price around 45.000€ for most cars (after taxation). For 70.000€ you can get a model S70.

Tesla is percieved as middle luxury.Opel is percieved as cheap, reliable cars… Hmm which one will be bought more.

And there will be the 170 miles (EPA) Leaf for 35.000€. So the Bolt will be around 10.000€ more expensive for what? 30 miles more? Not worth it!

A four seater in Europe? No way that is not gona make it. Just a cultural thing but people expect 5 seats as standard, that is also the reason the i3 had lower sales.

25.000 – 30.000 units for a 200 miles EV is NOTHING. Especially when you want to sell in whole US and Europe.
Nissan sold 30.000 Leaf in US last year, in Europe around 14.000. With 2016 LEAF i think Nissan can go to 50.000 cars for this markets. And with 2017 Leaf > 150 miles they can sell 60.000 – 80.000 Leaf.
So it is a bid sad nobody want to sell EVs expect Tesla and Nissan.