Chevy Bolt: “Best Electric Car To Buy” Status For Two Consecutive Years

Red Chevrolet Bolt EV

NOV 24 2017 BY STEVEN LOVEDAY 103

Chevy Bolt

Chevy Bolt EV

For the 2017 model year, The Car Connection said no affordable electric vehicle can touch the Chevy Bolt EV, and this year, nothing has changed.

Aside from Tesla, which doesn’t specialize in affordable EVs, GM seems to be years ahead. If we peer ahead to what’s on the table for the next year or two, only the new Nissan LEAF (when it arrives in January with a 40 kWh/~150 mile offering, and then next Fall in a longer range ~60 kWh/225 mile option), will challenge the Bolt when considering price and range. The Car Connection shares:

Chevy Bolt

Inside the Chevy Bolt

“Last year, we pointed out that the Bolt EV rendered all other affordable electric vehicles ‘outdated and nearly obsolete,’ and it remains the case.”

In regards to the current first-generation Nissan LEAF, the Bolt has significantly more range. This also holds true for the first (base) iteration of the 2018 LEAF, as well as the base Tesla Model 3. Of course, Tesla is currently building a 310-mile Long Range Model 3 at the moment (albeit very slowly), but it’s much more pricey than the Bolt.

The Chevy Bolt brings 238 miles of all-electric range to the table and costs about $30,000 if you factor in the $7,500 federal EV tax credit. The Car Connection says:

“The choice is as clear today as it was a year ago: ‘range anxiety’ is a thing of the past with the Chevrolet Bolt EV.”

We don’t know if we’d go so far as to say that there’s no range anxiety with 238 available miles and limited charging infrastructure. However, the Bolt is truly today’s range champion and it will only get better from here. GM has grand plans to use the Bolt as a platform to move toward a future of electric vehicles.

The Car Connection didn’t pick the Bolt based on range and price alone, however. The publication shares that it drives like a regular car “with a mountain of torque.” It handles well; provides a smooth, quiet ride; and has a spacious, quality interior with “plenty of tech, too, but it’s not overwhelming.” The Car Connection concludes:

“Over the last year, we’ve had plenty of time to ponder the question: Can the Bolt EV be truly ‘groundbreaking’ if it acts like a regular car?

Absolutely.”

Source: The Car Connection

Categories: Chevrolet

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

103 Comments on "Chevy Bolt: “Best Electric Car To Buy” Status For Two Consecutive Years"

newest oldest most voted

to me the Reanult Zoe is much better , similar range , lower price and way better AC charging , so you can charge everywhere not only at charging point

It’s a Good electric car.
But, “best?
-It needs a real rear independent suspension.
-And a non-poverty interior.

Otherwise, great.

Hi Simone
I don’t know in what country you live but the bold can charge anywhere, also at home or on any standard plug as long as, like the renault, you habe the right cables. And there are no comparison between a Renault and the Bold. The Bold has higher technology, higher range, higher quality. I can not find one point where Renault is better!

I think Car Connection’s choice is US market-centric.

Good to see the “compliance car” chugging along! It may not be flashy or come from a hip company, but it’s actually available and practical for what 90% of what people need from an EV.

Hopefully GM keeps under-promising and over-delivering on their EVs & PHEVs!

“Unfortunately GM keeps over-promising and under-delivering on their only good EV, even if they won the Car of the year, they didint even met their lousy 30 000 car the first year.”
There, I fixed it for you.

Hey Brangelina,

GM never made any official sales expectation for the Bolt, but even if it did, it has already sold 20,000+ this year, and will likely hit that 30k mark by the end of the year.

Bolt just keeps powering along, which other manufacturers are stuck in neutral or hanging out with the devil. 🙂

Hey burp1999
“”The CARB credits are only effective at a production rate of about 20,000 to 30,000 vehicles a year,” explains Musk. “So that’s why you’ll see – mark my words – it’s not going to be any higher than that for the Chevy Bolt.”

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/elon-musk-gm-is-in-it-for-the-carb-credits-will-produce-only-25000-chevy-bolts-per-year/

Production began in early November 2016, so a full year of production has already gone by.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1107127_gm-ramps-up-2017-chevy-bolt-ev-electric-car-production-how-many-can-it-build

If Bolts are completely sold out and they did not deliver, you and Musk have a point. The fact is, Bolts are not sold out, and plenty available. What, you want Chevy sales people to go to people’s homes with guns pointed at their heads to buy Bolt?

Despite what fantasy you believe, “slow sales” of Bolt has nothing to do with GM not selling them.

What silly folly! If GM wanted to they could sell three times as many. Just export it to the people who want it.

GM wants CARB credits and to learn about EVs in preparation for when they won’t have a choice but to sell them.

The idea that they make no profit on the car if it’s exported is ridiculous – there’s strong demand at the US price plus shipping.

It sold out in minutes in South Korea, and even Canadians struggle to get the car.

Elon says much we should take with a bathtub of salt, but about Tesla (SpaceX, Boring, etc.); he’s spot on about GM and the Bolt numbers.

Ten Times as many. They are still sabotaging EV as they have always done since 2003, along with the cartel of ICE car manufacturers. Why do you think Toyota made such a kill with the Prius from 2004 to 2010? Because the cartel wanted to calm people who had tasted real EVs with the RAV4-EV and the dozens of EVs the CARB had forced them to build. It was when the CARB had teeth and not infiltrated.

If not for GM the only mainstream EVs we would have had in 2011/12 would have been the Leaf and Model S.

The Leaf’s early battery was a distaster. And the Model S was unaffordable and not particularly reliable.

Luckily GM also released one of the best cars ever produced by anyone, the Gen1 Volt. Without that, I’m not sure the government would have stuck with their plans to force EV adoption in the US.

Between the 1st Gen Volt, Cadillac ELR, And 2nd Gen Volt, plus the Bolt EV; GM has all the pieces for som Incredible EREV’s, with EV Miles of 100-150, using about 40-45 kW from the Bolt Battery, plus 8-10-12 Gallon Fuel Tanks, in AWD SUV or Small Pickup categories, how I see it!

They could also deliver a Full Up SUV, with 80-120 kWh worth if Bolt EV Battery, and Dual Bolt Drivetrains!

Waiting….

You sound like a paranoid nut job.

The reality as that EVs offer less utility than similarly priced ICE cars even after the tax credits. Their real value is best reflected in used car sales where tax credits, rebates, and highly subsidized (by the manufacturer and tax credit) leases don’t exist.

I drive a leased PHEV and may well (if the tax credit/CA rebate remain) buy a new EV when my lease is over (I’m not anti EV, just rational).

If there is no credit/rebate at that time and new EV prices are like current prices I will look at used EVs for a local runabout. We have a $0.07/mile Prius for long trips.

No, I sound realistic. If GM hadn’t introduced the Volt, odds are the other offerings would not have been compelling enough to keep the federal government and maybe even CARB from pulling back the EV mandates and credits. It happened once before when all of the manufacturers managed to convince the government that EVs were impractical.

You can take that argument and say if Tesla should be selling in Zimbabwe and North Korea. The fact that they are not selling there nor are they working towards that goal means they are only interested in CARB credits. That’s just plain silly, and that’s basically what you’re saying; they’re not selling where I am, so they are unwilling to sell, period.

This thing about “Chevy is not selling where I live so it’s a compliance car” makes just about as much sense as Tesla unwilling to sell cars, because they are always late. It’s a matter of time, not matter of unwilling. If anything, Tesla 3 not being produced in large numbers RIGHT NOW (late 2017) that Musk “promised” with 400K+ waiting is far more egregious than Bolt being produced and delivered as planned (late 2016), available in most of US, and inventory in stock.

Aside from your ridiculous, over-the-top assertion about N. Korea and Zimbabwe, you argue your side of the case well. But you can’t explain why GM refuses to send more units to regions outside the USA where they are in high demand; regions such as S. Korea and Canada.

Was what Elon Musk said about the Bolt EV acting as a sort of super-compliance car right? Well, it was not entirely right, since GM is selling the Bolt EV in non-CARB States of the USA.

But certainly what Elon said was partially correct. The only reasonable debate is over just how much of what he said is true.

https://insideevs.com/elon-musk-talks-carb-zev-credits/

It’s called profit, and since GM is a publicly traded company with an established business model it is incumbent on them to increase shareholder value. That will always explain GM’s objective.

The Bolt is an amazing car. It’s up to the market to decide if they want it. As for availability, here is Utah there are plenty of them available for purchase for those that want one.

S Koreans can order Bolt the same way they order Tesla via third party: buy it in US, have it shipped there, pay the premium. They can do that right now, but they can’t do that with Tesla. So Tesla is far more of a compliance car (not available outside of CA) than Bolt.

But as I mentioned, it’s a matter of time, both for Bolt (and other Chevy EV) and Tesla. This thing about compliance car is just silly nonsense dreamed up by unimaginative morons who think EVs will never take off.

Tesla, I meant Tesla 3. Tesla S, of course, has been available to order (and waiting to be built then shipped) in South Korea since late 2016.

Also have to add, if you wanted a Bolt vs Tesla S/X in S Korea, you can get Bolt whole lot quicker. You can simply buy Bolt in US dealer and have it shipped while you have to wait for Tesla to be built (month or more) before being shipped. Car that takes longer to get delivered than Bolt, and you call Bolt compliance car?

I think part of the reason that Bolts and Model 3’s (base model) have not been pushed to the extreme in sales is due to the low profit margins. Battery prices are very expensive however the pricing is coming down every day and every day that Tesla & Chevy & Nissan wait for their big battery/low price cars to debut they will start pushing sales more. Both Nissan and Tesla have delayed as long as they could to make their 220+ mile versions at a low price and the longer they wait and drag their feet the more profitable it will be when they finally do come out. Kudos for Chevy to releasing their product a year ago!

I don’t know why this has to be repeated ten times: As BOB LUTZ plainly stated, GM only makes vehicles which are profitable. If they don’t make the company money, GM doesn’t manufacture them. CEO Mary Barra was somewhat threatened last year by a private investment group trying to basically take over the board and throw her out over some financing deal. The rest of the board – seeing as Ms. Barra’s tenure has been PROFITABLE for shareholders promptly rejected the idea. So yes, my now year old BOLT ev is a cheap car built down to a price. But it does seem to be relatively intelligently designed, and GM in general usually gets the ‘BONES’ of the car (the part most can’t see) adequately robust (eg: Big Beefy Gearbox, easy to get to radiators and pumps,etc, temperature pampered battery). The car is a very SIMPLE, relatively long range, totally electric car. There is NOTHING like it on the market for the price. GM has abandoned Europe – therefore if the new owners of Adam Opel/Vauxhill want one (PSA Citroen), they will have to BUY THEM, which I think they’d immediately do, since the car is unique in Europe as… Read more »

The unofficial 30k sales figures were always for 2017. If you want to put your money where your fat mouth is, I’ll gladly make a bet with you that GM will hit at least 30k global sales of Bolts/Amepera-E’s this year.

How many Ampera’s a few hundred? I think they only produced 20k Bolt or less this year.
Bolts this year. You say sales, you mean in someones driveway? I don’t think so.
Sold and delivered 30k Bolts this year?
No.

17,083 Bolts SOLD (not just produced) in the US through Oct. 1,666 Bolts sold in Canada this year. At least 1,100 or so Ampera-E’s sold this year. Another 400 Bolts sold in South Korea.
That puts the current global count over 20k for 2017.

Bolt should easily sell another 6k units minimum in Nov and Dec combined. If US sales end as 3k in Nov and 4k in Dec as I expect, that’ll put the annual global count right at 30k.

But since GM never made an official prediction for sales, what does it really matter?

You may argue all you want … 30k or 50k Bolts is NOTHING for a company with 40 times the munufacturing power of little Tesla.
GM ~ 95 facilities
Toyota ~ 45
Nissan ~ 40
VW ~ 60

The truth is those climate fuc4ers want EVs to die, or at least delay the death of the ICE as long as they can for their profit only and s6rew the humans and species survival.

You really think they go out of their way to hurt the climate. At most, they just don’t care. Which is the correct attitude since they’re a for-profit company.

Their job is to maximize profits, which is best done by ICE Trucks. Luckily they’re also hedging their bets by slowly and steadily creating some of the best EVs and PHEVs available. At some point they’ll become profitable and affordable on their own. Until then, they’re niche vehicles and will have low volumes.

Bolt is the best selling EV in October in the USA. Nobody else sells more.

FYI, they’re selling every Bolt they ship to Canada right now. I’ve been asking a deal about getting one for my mom, and the wait list is 1.5 years.

With the threat of the Fed tax credit possibly being killed by pending legislation, I would expect a significant bump in all EV sales for Nov and Dec. This will be on top of the traditional Nov/Dec bump that is attributed to the fed tax incentive.

It is highly likely that this will push Bolt sales past 30K.

bro1999 said:

“The unofficial 30k sales figures were always for 2017…”

And apparently for 2018, too, given that GM said it’s not increasing production next year.

Also, it’s rather disingenuous to call what that LG Chem executive said, “unofficial”. Since LG Chem & LG Electronics are building the entire Bolt EV powertrain, and since batteries are the bottleneck putting an upper limit on how many Bolt EVs that GM can build this year, then the quote from that LG Chem saying GM had contracted for “over 30,000” cars is about as official as it gets!

Of course, we can rightfully argue over the exact meaning of “over 30,000”, but my interpretation has always been “a bit over 30,000”, and as the year goes along it looks more and more like I’m bang in the mark.

https://electrek.co/2016/10/18/gm-will-produce-over-30000-chevy-bolt-evs-in-2017-says-battery-supplier-lg-chem/

Yes, you can keep the sales at under 30,000 by the high price.

The price was always slightly below $30,000 for US market, even 2 years ago. Don’t act like they jacked up the price. According to TrueCar, you can buy it for $33.8k (before incentives, calif). So after federal incentives, it is down to $26.3k. California has another $2.5k incentive. That is $23.8k for final buyers.

$23.8k is well below average price of a new car. What is your thesis for “high price”? Comparison with a cheapest hatchback?

Normal companies are not in business of losing money. They are in business of making money. EVs are will for a few years still be more expensive. If you don’t have sufficient taxable income, don’t buy them.

Truecar hasn’t changed much on the real world price for the Bolt in 6 months. It has always been $2800 to $3600 less than MSRP. Why Chevy does this to themselves I don’t know. You can argue that they are able to make deals for the people that know about the real world price, but the problem is that most people see a high price on a small Chevy and don’t bother to look at or sit in these overpriced cars.
GM thinks they are the first among the Big 3. But they have been coasting on their laurels for years.

In San Diego, I just leased a nicely equipped LT $2500 down, $240/mon, 15k miles. All Bolts on the lot have $6500 off of MSRP. If I had chosen to buy, after tax credits and CA’s rebate, I’d by buying at around $23,500, damn good deals to be had.

What exactly did GM under deliver? Delivery goal is a goal, not a promise. In all respects I can think of, GM under delivered. For example, they were alluding to 0-60 time of 7 seconds, yet it turned out to be 6.3 seconds. Same with range.

It’s Tesla who over promise and under deliver. Musk tweeted long ago that Tesla 3 will be capable of towing, which I suspect is why many put in a deposit for 3, but it cannot tow after release. There’s also “barely meet the rating” of the range of Tesla S, unlike SparkEV getting 125% (or more) than rated range.

Quite simply, GM always downplay / under promise their EV. It’s almost like they don’t want people to know how great they are.

Or they don’t want to end up like Ford, Hyundai, etc…and end up paying millions in fines/payouts after inflating fuel economy numbers.

I don’t think that’s the case based on SparkEV. 2014 was rated the same range as 2015+, yet 2015+ has about 10% smaller battery. But even with smaller battery, range is about 125% over rated range.

If GM was only worried about inflated numbers, they would’ve downplayed 2015+ SparkEV much more, yet they didn’t. That tells me they wildly under promise to make their EV seem less than they truly are.

That should read “GM under promised”. Bitt’s mental illness must be contagious.

“The [owner] manual also reiterates that the Model 3 doesn’t support towing, though it says that it “currently” can’t – possibly opening the door for future capability. Tesla CEO Elon Musk previously said that the Model 3 would allow towing.”

Well if GM always over-deliver (I corrected your freudian slip 😉 why is it that they do nothing to meet the overwhelming demand for a good EV? And woudn’t you agree that winning the Car of The Year award is a strong motivation to push the production???
In most places customers have to wait months to get one even at this too high price tag.

Push production for what? People are not buying Bolts, and they are available in dealer lots if you want one. If you have to ask why people are not buying Bolt, why didn’t you buy Bolt?

If people aren’t buying Bolts, then they aren’t buying EVs period! As far as I can see, the Bolt is the best selling car on the market. When someone sells in the 5 figures a week, then there might be a point. At the moment, Bolt is king. I drive an i3 but have a lot of respect for how GM’s EV program is evolving. This is a solid car that actually works for most people. The fact that GM is able to do all of this without any of the marketing dog-and-pony shows makes me like them even more.

Bolt was best selling EV on the market in US, but compared to cars, it’s nothing. I think Corvette sold more than Bolt.

Again, Chevy could produce billion Bolts, but the fact remains that there are Bolts available from dealer lots as of today even with current level of production. Simply making more won’t change that. If anything, Chevy would have to store all the excess inventory and/or take huge losses to get rid of them. With huge losses will inevitable come discontinued model.

Here’s another thought for the clueless. If Chevy only offered Bolt on made-to-order and deliver them months later like Tesla is doing, people will howl that Chevy is limiting sales. In fact, to order a Chevy like that means fewer people will buy them. What Chevy is doing now is probably the best they can do given the circumstances.

LEAVE CHEVY ALONE!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUtpztmi5eQ

Sales data for October: Chevrolet Corvette 1,345 Chevrolet Bolt 2,781

I meant total sales since Bolt’s release. Corvette took a dump in sales lately, not sure why. The new one looks awesome, too bad it’s not electric. Maybe people foresaw Tesla roadster coming?

Yeah, they also over engineer. Like ignition switches that are designed to fail and did so, over and over and over.

What, you would rather their drive units fail and need replacement?

Please stop talking about the Model Y vaporware. That’s all it is until we see it. At least VW can actually be bothered to put their alleged vaporware on stage!

Why yes, I would rather have a drive unit “fail”, where the consequence of the washer in the drive unit failing being an annoying whine, than have my air bag fail to deploy and kill me.

Your choices may differ.

Or like radar systems used in glorified cruise control advertised as “Autopilot” that can’t even detect enormous tractor trailers crossing a highway and resulting in the driver getting decapitated? Something like that?

I have no sympathy for someone who hung a 1-pound keychain off their car key, had the car turn off while driving, and couldn’t manage to safely pull to the side of the road.

The keychains are ridiculous. And losing control of your car just because the engine shutoff is ridiculous. These people shouldn’t be allowed to drive.

Fun fact: Bjørn Nyland had a Model X die on him, while he was driving (no power).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wanr0LThvkM

Yup, cars sometimes lose power. A competent driver should be able to handle the situation.

It isn’t about that. It is folks with regular old key rings worth of keys having the ignition shut off due to the impact of a collision, and having the air bags fail to deploy because the ignition switch browned out or cut out the power completely at the exact wrong millisecond.

It isn’t about being able to pull off the road when the power cuts. It is about dying because your air bag failed to inflate in an accident.

Are you unaware of this, or simply trying to spread falsehoods in order to obfuscate the deaths?

Airbag systems have power retained in capacitors for a minimum of 60 seconds after main power is lost. So, turning off the ignition does not cause them to fail during an accident. That whole ignition switch thing was overblown BS.

And yet that is EXACTLY what was happening in car wreck after car wreck. And even worse, GM KNEW ABOUT IT FOR YEARS and did nothing.

“When a key slipped from the on position while a car was in motion, it meant the loss of power steering and power brakes, increasing the likelihood of drivers losing control of their vehicles. It also meant a loss of power to the sensors that deploy the front airbags. Even more surprising, Cooper discovered, was that GM knew about the airbag problem and kept tabs on the potential link to a rising death toll that began at least five years before Brooke’s crash.”

http://www.atlantamagazine.com/great-reads/no-accident-inside-gms-deadly-ignition-switch-scandal/

“loss of power to the sensors that deploy the front airbags.”

“loss of power to the sensors that deploy the front airbags.”

“loss of power to the sensors that deploy the front airbags.”

Repeating it three times doesn’t make it any more true. The Atlantic being your source for car engineering “facts” is very telling.

Turning of the ignition, or crushing the battery, or any other power failure does not disable any working airbag system. They retain power, exactly because 12V power is often lost during an accident.

As for losing power steering and brakes, that goes back to my issue of people not being able to control their car when the engine dies for any reason.

It is absolutely true. If you don’t believe me, or this source, go read the congressional record. GM testified to the exact same thing in front of Congress.

All you are doing is proving you are blind and dumb.

Site a reliable source if you like. But, if the air bags failed to deploy then there was some other issue with those specific cars besides the ignition switch. Again, they have capacitors to retain power during an accident.

Exactly – at the first hint of a lawsuit GM should have done exactly what Sergio Marchione would have done since the ignition cylinder seem a bit ‘weak’ in a Chrysler product, I can just hear him verbalizing this.

“The purchaser of any Chrysler or FiatChryslerAutomobiles product agrees to hold harmless FCA should they use keys on any UNAUTHORIZED key ring, nor use keys not provided by FCA corporation. This means a maximum of 2 keys on any given ring, both supplied by FCA – one for the ignition, and the other for the door/trunk/glovebox locks.

FCA corporation obviously has NO CONTROL over what a customer does after the sale, and any use of more than the 2 KEYS supplied by FCA, or use of an unauthorized key ring, or use of any keys not related to driving the vehicle or locking it, or foreign keys not supplied by FCA will void the limited warranty provided with the car.”

If they had said that GM wouldn’t have had to endure a single lawsuit.

So, buying a Fiat Chrysler product is akin to parking in a parking lot: Hey Baby, You Are On Your Own!

“GM always downplay / under promise their EV.”

More revisionism from a GM fanboy.

This ad from GM is rather far from “under promising” the Volt! Perhaps you’re hoping everyone forgot?

https://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/chevy-volt-gm-230-mpg-photo01.jpg

You’ve continued your moronic statements regarding this, what 8 times now?

1). The photo advertises the honest expectation of purchasers such as me that are interested in reducing their gasoline consumption. Seeing as the 2012 volt I purchased used had 17,000 miles on the trip odometer and a trip usage of 72 gallons obviously means the car delivered an average 236 mpg. Seeing as they advertised 230, it was indeed an ‘underpromise’. I pick up electricity for free from Solar panels on my roof.

2). Since you will NEVER purchase an EV since you don’t drive, nor will you purchase one for a relative, the advertisement is NOT for your eyes and you have no business judging it.

3). Since this needs to constantly be repeated to you it is obvious you are going Senile, or if not, the sophisticated nature of this commercial, which all buyers of the VOLT understood is just way over your head.

My wife easily exceeds 230mpg average in our Volt. She has months where she gets infinite mpg. And she doesn’t even know what hypermiling means. That’s the beauty of the Volt, you just drive it like a normal car.

GM was trying to concisely explain that if you’re the typical American commuter your mpg in the Volt would be amazing. And it is.

First off you aren’t getting s base of either car, if you are smart, and the M3 is simply cheaper. Oh but you can’t get the base model yet, well with the Bolt you are going to get the premium which is 44k, it has all the bell and whistles.

With the M3 you have a lot more wiggle room to choose which options you want, the Bolt not so much, you got the Base model at 37.5k or the premium trim at 44k.

I think with the downsides to the Bolt it’s simply not the best value in the coming year. Atm if you want an ev now, get it, but then don’t be surprised if you are disappointed a few months from now when you see a M3 go by.

I gave the a B btw. I did not grade on looks.

In a couple of hours I will get a barebone Bolt LT with DCFC leased on 3 years, 18,000mi/year for $337/month. I will also get a $700 costco cash card with it and can claim about $2,000 MD excise tax, that I will have back in about 4 weeks. All this without any money down and the first month lease paid by Chevy. Not a bad deal. I have never owned a Chevy before and never thought, I would.

(future) congrats! You won’t regret your acquisition. Driving an actual car beats dreaming about fantasy cars every time. 🙂

M3 and Bolt both exist on the roads. Why would you call the Bolt a fantasy car, troll?

I never thought I’ll drive another Chevy after the bailouts, yet here I am. But to be fair, Bolt and SparkEV are EV, very different from “Chevy”.

The reason I have not bought one is that it has a cheap interior and it can’t tow a small trailer. As soon as I see something reasonably priced that is AWD/4WD and can tow a light trailer with photo gear in it I will pull the trigger. I suspect the Koreans will be first to market.

Maybe the Model Y, but there probably will be something before that.
On the Bolt they had to cut corners somewhere and the crummy seats and interior were the results.
They could not cut costs on the technology, since they don’t make that, and you can’t put a C grade drive train in like you can with seats and interior.
In addition the body is very much like the Sonic, which is produced at the same factory, so that cuts costs too.

Best EV to buy…well all said and done this is a $40K compact hatch that will lose a lot of its residual value once it’s fully up against Tesla’s Model 3 that offers lower luxury class street cred for similar money. That and serious quick charge capabilities and serious quick charge infrastructure support of course.

But Tesla is still struggling to get Model 3 in production so Bolt isn’t done yet.

The are absolutely right that the Bolt is the best pure EV that the general public can buy for the dollar today.

But I find it interesting that they complain about this for the year 2018: “you can’t exactly pop into your local Tesla showroom and take one home today like you can with the Bolt EV.”

But in Nov. 2016 when they picked the Bolt as their 2017 “best electric car to buy” winner, you couldn’t buy a Bolt EV at any GM dealership either. Not even in their limited initial markets in CA or OR. Seems like a double standard to me.

zero competition remaining zero competition is hard for you to grasp, huh?

M3 - reserved -- Niro/Leaf 2.0/Outlander - TBD

Say what you will. GM got out an BEV with:
-range
-in volume
-priced well enough for the masses

There simply aren’t any other BEVs that match that available.

By the time Model 3 arrives in volume or the Leaf 2.5; the Bolt will be on their own refresh and incremental improvements that the Bolt did on the Spark.

This is a steady project development that GMs been doing well while not siphoning significant volume from their core profit makers and sets the stage for the future.

I can’t wait for a real CUV from GM for 2018.5

There is aftermarket stuff allowing the car to tow a small trailer. I’ll wait until the warranty runs out on my Bolt ev and then have one installed.

Yes its taxing the drive train more, but an easy pedal when towing something should work out just fine.

2 years in a row, eh? So, the 579 they sold in Dec. of 2016, that were only available in a handful of states, made it the best EV to purchase in 2016.

Interesting criteria there.

Nevermind, discussing MY.

I’ll be picking up a Bolt within the next two weeks. Cheap, available with CarPlay and lane assist, and pedestrian safety features that actually work. I found a Premium for $350 a month. Whereas, the M3 is available for around $830 per month currently (no lease option), and will likely be a soft lemon for another year. I fear the resale value of the early M3s.

So you compare a $350 lease to a $830 a month purchase? Your intentions are clear!

There is no lease option yet for the model 3.

Leasing is definitely the way to go with a car that will likely depreciate like last year’s laptop once Model 3 becomes widely available.

I wouldn’t count on that. I now have a Bolt in the fleet. The fit and finish are spot on. The the gaps and seams align right up. The paint has a deep luster, no orange peal or the likes. The interior has no squeaks or rattles. The car is extremely functional being a tall hatch. It’s comfortable for my kids in the back in child seats with my 6’2″ frame in the front seat set where I want it. The tall roof makes it feel plenty spacious especially for a car of its size. Its a blast to drive on our backroads. What the Bolt is not is a sports sedan, which would normally be my preference to drive but I have a family and this is my wife’s primary vehicle and she needs function and convenience. The Bolt excels as a fun and functional hatchback and that crowd is buying those cars because they like them. Thus, the M3 might be a hit too, but at the expense of the Bolt? Unlikely since by the time the masses can buy M3’s GM will not only be in subsequent Bolt model years but apparently will have addition EV’s on… Read more »

If you want to lease a Model 3, contact a third party leasing company, like a credit union. Done.

Only the LEAF, the NISMO, the Niro, the KONA, the Ioniq, the Model 3, and a slew of yet to be announced cars will challenge the Bolt on affordable range. And only all of them will beat it.

I would pick any of the ones you mentioned over the dorky Bolt any day.

Spoken like a true GM hater. Bravo.

“If we peer ahead to what’s on the table for the next year or two, only the new Nissan LEAF (when it arrives in January with a 40 kWh/~150 mile offering, and then next Fall in a longer range ~60 kWh/225 mile option), will challenge the Bolt when considering price and range.”

Not true. TruCar.com lists the average sale price of the Bolt EV at ~$43,000. The Tesla Model 3 certainly will be a competitor next year, at an average sale price probably not much higher.

I just went to Trucar and typed in a Bolt EV and area code 90210. It says Trucar price = $33K.

Nonsense. TrueCar lists LT average sale price as 33k in Santa Clarita (Los Angeles area). I paid 31k for mine.

LOL. According to Teslarati and trackmodel3, the vast majority of reservation holders plan to option out the Model 3. Which is getting into $60k ranges. I expect the average for 2018 will be close to $50k

Truecar price for Bolt LT in 98012 is 34,800.

Interesting since MSRP $43,910 is the maxed out Bolt with all options including paint. Seems your data is made up. Much like your M3 data of “not much higher” for M3 average price. As other pointed out, real Bolt average price is about $34K while the M3 will be over $50K and have LESS RANGE! And still a year away. And no full tax credit. M3 is a joke!

M3 - reserved -- Niro/Leaf 2.0/Outlander - TBD

What would be interesting is if GM comes out and offers a smaller battery pack to take on the soon to be competitive Niro/Leaf 2.0/Kona market and then offer improved upgrades in the premier level to head competition to the Model 3 and Leaf 2.0+ level.

Regardless, it’s all semantics as the Bolt remains the only platform readily available, and what people believe is an either/or solution is more hopefully a tide raising all EV boats with awareness and transition to EV. GM as a whole appears to be on board with this as is Kia to build multiple models on thier EV platforms.

Ok two consecutive years? Most should have stopped there. They only sold around 500 in 3 states in December of 2016. How could a car that was only available in 3 states and was only able to get around 500 out with no hands on reviews until late December of their production model going to be the best EV to buy?

$39k in my zip. Premium only available (only price on Trucar)

This year I would like to give thanks that EV posters are willing to put their specific car company favorites aside to encourage EV adoption to the masses. /sarc

Because there are things a lot more important than individual bickering.

If your state allows it, you can buy from CA. It’s not that much to have your car transported. Considering all the Models 3s are made in CA, I wouldn’t bother paying MSRP for a Bolt in Syracuse, NY when I could have one shipped from Los Angeles for way less.

But these points are all pointless. Both the Bolt and base Model 3 are not very good cars. They are like the Canon 1Ds Mark II and Nikon D2x from 2005. Pretty good cameras for the time. But no photographer today would even take one for free. If both my Volt and Bolt were destroyed in a fire I would buy a 26k ICE vehicle, call it day, and buy electric 8 years from now when the cars actually have the capability and price that average people would want. I’m only on the Volt/Bolt wagon because I make a decent salary and have always liked the bleeding edge of technology; not really because the bleeding edge is actually better (from a financial or rational) point of view than existing technology.

Ew, I could never go back to a gasser. I’m spoiled by smooth electric driving.

Me neither, and I only drive a gen2 Volt. After driving a Bolt I imagine it would be torture to go back to a gasser.

The Bolt could have been so much more…

1. Style. It’s a bizzare choice to make it look like an ICE econobox. Why didn’t GM base it on the Cruze hatchback, which is a beautiful car?

2. Handling/ride. There is no excuse for GM’s decision to use an ultra-narrow platform without room for a full independent suspension.

3. Interior. Again, the narrow design is a huge problem. The front seats are too narrow and the rear sits, despite ample legroom, squeeze three people together.

I still plan to buy a Bolt but it’s stupid for GM to force so many compromises on their EV. Of course if I could just go buy a Model 3 I probably would, but I want it to have at least a year of production to get an idea of reliability.

If I remember correctly, GM intended to market the Bolt as an Uber-mobile, focused on Uber driver type customers. Hence the large rear passenger seat room, plastic wipe down interior, and less consideration for highway aerodynamics.

It largely hit that requirement target, but the huge range has attracted attention from people who want a nice aspirational EV for private use. The utilitarian Bolt comes up short for that purpose, but hopefully the upcoming Buick version will help to resolve that problem.

GM seems to have an internal marketing disconnect when it come to putting the truly advanced Volt & Bolt drivetrains into vehicle configurations that ordinary people really want to buy. It’s clear there is still a battle going on between the forward looking EV types and the people who point out the vast majority of their customers still want to buy large ICE trucks and SUVs whilst gas is cheap.

I don’t think it’s a disconnect as much as ICE vehicles pay the bills. EV’s are the long game. If GM magically replaced ever vehicle they sold with EV’s tomorrow they would be out of business. The market isn’t there yet.

The Buick Encore and Chevy Tax have rear independent suspension, so it has nothing to do with width. It was probably a cost/weight issue. Also not having independent suspension has been overblown given the car handles well.

Also any car midsize and below will be tight with three adult passengers in the rear.