General Motors Is “Working Quickly To Satisfy [Chevrolet Bolt] Demand”

Chevy Bolt


A couple of weeks ago, General Motors announced the delivery of the first three Chevrolet Bolts.

First 3 Chevrolet Bolt EV Deliveries

First 3 Chevrolet Bolt EV Deliveries…with ~17 dealer demo cars in the backshot for effect

Since then, we haven’t heard much in regards to other Bolt deliveries, but GM assures us that it’s working to satisfy demand and that demo Bolts have been distributed across the initial launch markets and that order books are fully open at all certified dealers in California and Oregon. Inventory has began to arrive at dealership over the last few days.

Chevrolet media representative Fred Ligouri stated:

“Bolt EVs have begun to arrive to California and Oregon. The process for dealer order entry in these states began in late fall and is fully open.”

“In addition to the three cars delivered to customers, 17 dealer demos were delivered last Tuesday to San Francisco area dealers.”

Ligouri added:

“We’ve since sold additional Bolt EVs. We have begun filling dealer orders and are working quickly to satisfy demand.”

So, sales are indeed underway, though we won’t have a sales figure for December until GM reports the amount on January 4. We do believe that up to 2,000 Bolts will be produced by the end of the year, but sales themselves will fall well short of that figure due to the lag getting to dealerships.

GM will have built some ~2,000 copies of the Chevrolet Bolt EV by 2016's end

GM will have built some ~2,000 copies of the Chevrolet Bolt EV by 2016’s end

There is an interesting (if not somewhat meaningless) race brewing between the Chevy Bolt EV and the 2017 Toyota Prius Prime.

The Toyota recently set the record for most plug-in vehicles sold during a debut month in the US, with 781 sales over the last 3 weeks of November.  The two newcomers are both expected to challenge this year’s winner, the Tesla Model S, for the title of the best selling plug-in vehicle for the US in 2017.

Ligouri let slip some timing for other states too:

“A number of Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States including New York, Massachusetts and Virginia will see first deliveries this winter.”

He added that most major metro markets nationally will see first deliveries take place by “mid 2017.”

Source: Hybrid Cars

Categories: Chevrolet

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

165 Comments on "General Motors Is “Working Quickly To Satisfy [Chevrolet Bolt] Demand”"

newest oldest most voted

Nice to read GM is at least saying to be working on it.
Sadly I got a major disapointment today when I found out the Ampera-E will not be be available in Belgium before 2018, which means I need to consider an alternative for the coming 4 years (Zoe, i3, …).
But that last line “mid 2017” at least makes me a little less jealous :s

Go for the Ioniq, after testing the Ioniq I don’t care that the ampera-e will wait until 2018

Except Ioniq may come up with even more range for 2018 model sometime in 2017. And then who knows how good Bolt will be for 2018, seeing how it’ll be up against longer range EV from many places, not to mention Tesla 3. I think 1 year to see how things are doing might be prudent.

Yes! There’ll always be something better in a year or two! Keep delaying and burning that fossil fuel!


@Dragon My thoughts exactly, I already postponed for almost a year (company lease car which normally goes 4 years, now almost 5) because I was hoping for some better EV to come (i.e. Ampera-E). Now it seems my choices are i3 (115mi / CSS 50kW), ioniq (124mi / CCS 100kW) or Zoe (~140mi? / AC22kW or AC43)… if only the Zoe had a CCS 100kW already, the choice would be that much easier (yes, size matters less to me, most of the time only 2 in the car anyways)

I had been waiting for the Ampera-E as well and was quite angry to hear that it won’t arrive until some time in 2018.

I’m now looking forward to CES (5 January) what Nissan releases, there are rumours that the new 40kwh Leafs are already being built in the UK. If there really is an updated look for the Leaf, I guess I’ll go for it or the Hyundai, Opel/GM don’t exist for me anymore.

In about a year when the market is awash with 200 miles range EV, today’s 120 miles EV value will take a huge dump. If you don’t mind losing 50% of value (or more!) in a year, sure, go ahead and splurge. But wise money is on waiting.

120 miles range might turn out to be less than 90 miles with heat in winter; SparkEV that normally get 95 miles range gets 65 miles in winter (10F). But 200 miles range EV would get 170 miles, good for 2+ hours on highway (ie, bio break interval). Basically, you’d get a car that’s about as long as your biology will allow by waiting a year instead of splurging on “stop-gap” cars of today.

My recommendation still stand. If you want to get an EV (other than Bolt), wait a year to see what will become available. Side benefit to waiting is that you’ll probably pick up a used EV with 120 miles range for close to half the price of today in just one year.

Dont wait a year, don’t wait two: get yourself a brand new EV now, but avoid the depreciation hit by taking it on a two or three year PCP contract, and hand it in at the end of the term.


This is probably what we will do. Even with the possibility of losing the federal tax credit by waiting, I think competition will lower prices enough to make the waiting worthwhile. Of course, I am in CA where the wait won’t be quite as long because we’re among the first to get the new stuff.

Lol I don’t think that’s what SparkEV said to do…

If someone prefers the ioniq or an i3 then they should go for it! If an upcoming range increase is a concern, buy a used one or lease.

Yep, buy a used one or lease. You can probably find a good deal on a used Leaf or Volt almost anywhere in the country, but especially in states that had extra incentives on top of the federal tax credit.


Park € 1000 in Teslas Model 3 preorder queue. Might not be here THAT much later after all.

All you might lose are 0% interest.

Perhaps they delivered the first three too early?

Even at the initial build rate 9/hour there should have been 1500 Bolts available for delivery and a solid 6 weeks for transportation. If they only deliver a handful this month I would guess they had a last minute issue that fouled up the delivery schedule.

Bad weather in the midwest delayed the Bolt train

Kia had the same problem a few years ago when bad weather delayed the Soul train. 😉

“A number of Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States including New York, Massachusetts and Virginia will see first deliveries this winter.”

I haven’t been able to find a dealer in Virginia who will admit to even PLANNING to carry the Bolt. 🙁

And GM’s Bolt online advisors don’t know either. What a way to run a business, with your dealers as adversaries!

They don’t know because they want to get you Fed up enough to buy an ICE car instead , That’s their REAL AGENDA !!

That won’t affect us. We would only be buying it to make a political/ethical statement, and to play with the tech. Otherwise, the wife’s Corolla will last us until we’re in a home.

As I have stated before, cars never made any sense as transportation. But we are now at the point in history where economics mythology is coming up against the wall of physics. I hope our airbags work. 🙂

Rephrase this in English please.

A person runs on about 2000 calories a day. So we are, basically, a 100 watt light bulb. If we ride a bicycle at 12 mph we add another 100 watt bulb, so riding costs 8.3 Wh/mile. Let’s say the US fleet average is very roughly 25 mpg at 60 mph average, so driving costs 1348 Wh/mile. Even if energy could be directly exchanged for time, at 5 times bicycling speed, you are still burning over 32 times the energy. Since the beginning of the industrial era, and the use of fossil fuel, we have pretended that we don’t need to live sustainably, like every other species. By the end of this century, there will be no denying we were fooling ourselves.

Warren, good for you for knowing this… Many EV fans think EV cars will solve global warming, pollution & environmental damage, and don’t realize that while they are a little better than ICE cars, it’s only about 10%-15% better, and compared to a two-car household giving up a car for an e-bicycle if they can (<10mi commute, bike paths exist), an EV does very little.

Also, very few people know that the world's use of all plant- and fossil-based fuels (wood, coal, oil etc.) became unsustainable a long time ago… Around 1760.

Darwin, and Malthus made some pretty powerful, though basic, discoveries about the nature of biology. Those discovers are rooted in the laws of physics. None of our amazing inventions, nor endless wishful thinking, will change that.

Eduardo Pelegri-LLopart

Hi Wavelet – do you have a pointer to the 10-15% better analysis?

Re: role of cars, I agree that e-bikes should be part of our repertoire. That and WFH and better collaboration software and hardware, including VR and MR – actually these days I’m mostly working from home.

That said, it seems to me there are signs out there that may mean that “cars” will still play a positive role for a while:

1) In short-distances, (semi, or fully) autonomous, peer-to-peer, or rented EVs, with solar panels for local production, would provide high-utilization vehicles that are using local power

2) In medium-to-long distances, vehicle-to-vehicle communication in (semi or fully) autonomous cars traveling in dedicated lanes should be pretty efficient.

I, too, am curious about 15%. While it’s true EV cost only about 15% less to operate than gas cars in SoCal due to very high electricity cost, EV emit far less green house gas and more efficient. How much GHG depends on your energy make up; for example, running entirely on solar would be practically no GHG emissions, running mostly on coal could approach about half of ICE.

As for bicycle, good luck in trying to get that going. When people won’t get off their giant SUV driving solo stuck in traffic even to replace them with more efficient gas cars, never mind hybrid and forget EV, there’s no way they’ll go for bicycles. Indeed, even China that had lots of bicycles are moving to drive cars.

As developing nations get richer, they’ll want cars. While EV won’t solve climate change, or even have much impact, it will at least remove local pollution that really kill people, like NOx, SOx, HC, etc.

SparkEV wrote, “As developing nations get richer, they’ll want cars.”

That certainly hasn’t happened in the Nordic countries, The Netherlands, Germany, etc., where excellent bicycle infrastructure has been supported, built, and maintained and where residents are enthusiastic bike riders despite weather that frequently isn’t ideal and the fact that many bike riders also own cars. The half of each year we
live in Sweden, we ride bikes far more often than we drive our car. The half of each year we live in Honolulu, our bikes sit rusting due to a dangerous lack of biking infrastructure and the refusal of the citizens to pay taxes to build and maintain biking infrastructure despite terrible vehicular traffic and nearly ideal biking weather.

I suspect those Nordic country people ride bicycles not because they don’t like cars, but because cars are less convenient and too expensive due to taxes. But just look at the developing world; many are already on bicycles, they won’t stay that way once they have money if for nothing else than for status symbol. You can look to developed world driving Tesla and other “luxury cars” instead of suffering minor inconvenience with lower range EV, and we’re not talking about huge difference like it is between cars and bicycles.

As for not riding bicycles in Hawaii due to “infrastructure”, I doubt that’s the case. There are people in developing world that ride in far more hazardous conditions, often not paved roads and lots of debris. Developed world with paved roads not riding is just excuse for not bothering with inconvenience of bicycles.

Same is true with public transportation; there is enough public transport in US if one move closer to where they are offered. But people simply don’t want to be bothered to move only to share urine soaked seats on public transport, instead opting to drive giant SUV.

Where do you get 10 to 15 percent better? My Tesla averages 325 wh/mile which is one fourth the 1300 of a gas car as Warren wrote above.

Yeah, but the efficiency to create that electricity is markedly lower. You have a “wheels to well” problem.

Anyway, it hardly matters. If you’ve been to a city it’s obvious there are plenty of problems (including environmental) created simply be cars being the size they are. They could run on rainbows and their impact would be enormous.

Just for starters more cars means more roads. They’re made out of oil too.

EIA puts out stats for line losses showing less than 10%. We’re 33% coal, and the Clean Power Plan’s goal of 27% coal in 2030 is this unbearable, “transformative” thing to the crowd upset about “regulation”.

Gas takes ~5-7kwh per gallon, to make anyway. Enough juice to push EVs 15-20 miles down the road before people start pumpin’ away. It’s not even close how bad the well to wheel problem comes shows up for gasoline cars. On CO2, 20lbs at the tailpipe gets as high as 36lbs per gallon consumed.

It sounds to me like these guys are ICE lovers that have been drinking their Bath Water…EV’s ARE THE 0NLY WAY TO GO, NO QUESTION ABOUT IT !! “WE ARE NOT” FOOLING OURSELVES. YOU “ICE” LOVERS WITH YOUR HIDDEN AGENDAS ARE THE ONES TRYING TO F00L US..Face it “ICE BOYS” the Cave days are over & gone.

Whoa. Lots of capital letters, and exclamation points. It would seem somebody’s drink something, and I don’t think it is bath water. The percentage of climate scientists, biologists, and physicists who think cars are a dead-end is, not surprisingly, much larger than that of politicians, economists, executives, bankers, lawyers, and financiers.

I, like most kids of my generation, was raised on an endless barrage of media, telling me how a car was the gateway to adulthood. I could pick out my own personal avatar to merge with, and become superhuman. By the time I was in my mid-twenties, I had read enough science to know better. Not that it did much good. There is nowhere in the US to escape its reach.

That really depends on the ‘energy mix’ you’re consuming. A Dutch research institute has calculated that with the current Dutch energy mix (mostly coal), a BEV is about 30% cleaner CO2 wise, then an efficient ICE car.

It’s in Dutch, but perhaps running it through the translator may make it readable.

Warren said: “Since the beginning of the industrial era, and the use of fossil fuel, we have pretended that we don’t need to live sustainably, like every other species.” As is always the case with Warren’s “We need to imitate stone-age hunter-gatherers” posts, Warren talks about only half the equation of resource usage. The other half is population. I’d much rather see a smaller global population with everyone living well or at least comfortably, rather than Warren’s solution of a large population with everyone living very poor. Even raising enough food for a world of 7+ billion humans, and the various domesticated species needed to support us, is a huge and probably unsustainable drain on Earth’s resources. The amount of fertilizer needed for all that is a heavy use of fossil fuels, and the ecological contamination from fertilizer run-off, pesticides and herbicides are poisoning our water supply. If we concentrated our long-term efforts on birth control, efficient usage of resources, and promoting non-polluting energy production such as nuclear and solar power, then we’d all be much better off than Warren’s scenario of forcing everyone to live like the desperately poor in third-world countries. The desperately poor don’t want everyone else… Read more »
If we had put all women on birth control, in 1960, when it was first developed,and the population was 3 billion, we could have done as you suggest. Now that we are at 7.3 billion, it is too late. There was no way to do that, of course. Religious, and business leaders were adamantly opposed, as they still are. No one is suggesting that we in the developed world go back to the stone age. But we have to acknowledge that we were the ones who benefited from all the growth, and each child born in the US has the same impact as five born into poverty. Therefore we have an ethical obligation to reduce our standard of living to something approaching the global average. The rest of the developed world uses half or less of the per capita energy of the US. Saying we are a big country is meaningless. Now that we live in a global economy. Our stuff travels no further to our door than that in the rest of the developed world. The difference comes from our bigger vehicles, and bigger homes. These are made possible by the global oil price being tied to our dollar,… Read more »

Suggesting that our showing restraint would make people in other parts of the world poorer is simply not true. In fact, they compete with us for resources on the most uneven playing field imaginable. As just one example, if we add food crop based alcohol to our fuel, it drives up their food prices, by a much greater percentage of their total income.

Warren said:

“No one is suggesting that we in the developed world go back to the stone age.”

I don’t see much difference.

Most people in rich nations tend to restrict the number of children they have, for sound practical reasons. Most people in poor nations tend to have as many children as they can, again for sound practical reasons.

You want those of us who live in first-world countries to voluntarily make ourselves poor, to live like those in third-world countries (altho clearly you don’t practice what you preach, since you obviously use a computer regularly), but refuse to recognize what would actually happen if you could actually convince most people to do that.

“A difference which makes no difference is no difference.”

Warren — This sort of reductionist debate is interesting I suppose. Although technically speaking humans have been over-consuming their local resources beyond what is sustainable for thousands of years.

Going all the way back to the Sumerians and Mayans, consuming beyond available resources has always been a problem for humanity.

Even at the point where the United States declared our independence, there already wasn’t enough hunting lands available within reasonable travel distance to population centers, causing depletion of wildlife in the original 13 States.

Technology has often been the solution to centuries of human resource depletion crisis after crisis, not reverting to bicycles, or walking everywhere.

At a certain point, if population itself is the problem, why stop at riding a bike instead of driving an EV? Why stop at walking instead of riding a bike? Why stop at walking instead of simply no longer eating?

Following this reductionist argument to the only logical end would simply be to say “don’t buy an EV, just stop eating instead”.

To which the only logical response is “you first”.

Warren – yesterday my wife and I drove from my 85 year old mother-in-law’s house in north central Indiana to visit my 84 year old father in northwest Indiana and then home to our house just outside Indianapolis. The trip was impossible by bicycle or public transportation as we had nowhere near enough available time. At 85 and 84 years old respectively, neither do our parents….so tell me again about how the automobile makes no sense. When you have someplace to be and a limited time frame to get there, personal transportation when you need it makes a lot of sense.

Bikes are great. But so is good old-fashioned walking. We can drive between short buildings far apart, bike between taller buildings slightly closer together, or walk between even taller buildings even closer together. Makes no logistical difference. People who would call this change in our modern built environments “going back to the stone-age” should do some research on how tall buildings were in the stone-age (or, you know, the 19th century).

We started building things for cars after WWII for a number a reasons, including to create new kinds of segregation after the old kinds didn’t fly anymore. This wasn’t an inevitability, this was political shortsightedness and poor prioritization by modern politicians. You know, the things that are generally popular to hate on.

Timebomb said: “People who would call this change in our modern built environments ‘going back to the stone-age’ should do some research on how tall buildings were in the stone-age (or, you know, the 19th century).” You’re not actually thinking through what Warren is calling for, which is 100% renewable living, with zero use of non-renewable resources. That means nothing made of metal or plastic, unless it’s a product of recycling. Forget about tall buildings made with steel structures, forget about computers or other electronics. Forget even about generating electricity: even solar panels require use of materials that aren’t renewable. Even the bicycles Warren praises, in the long run, couldn’t be made without some use of non-renewable resources. Oh sure, in theory you could make them for a limited time with nothing but recycled materials, until those ran out. But then, even the process of recycling uses some non-renewable resources, now doesn’t it? So in reality, not even that. The truth is that Warren isn’t willing to face the reality of what he’s calling for. What he advocates is an all-or-nothing approach; either very high-tech living, with ubiquitous use of nanotech to recycle everything on an atomic level, and fusion… Read more »

The reality is we are going extinct. We have known this for decades. The fascinating thing is, it is so close now you can see it happening in real time. When you have the crazy mystics taking over government, and real scientists standing in the street with signs saying, “The end is nye!”, you know it’s over.

What I’m coming into is what what point will car insurance equal sixteen pay checks in the low wage economy.

This will cause me to kill the idea of a car if I want to or not.

Really like this post. I’m a big proponent of EVs, but I ride a bike to work despite the naysayers and I laugh at the Teslas stuck in traffic. Cars as a primary means of transportation for the masses is not sustainable. If you think it is you need to really think about not just the energy used getting to and from work every day, but the immense energy into sustaining roads that can handle 3 ton cars, the actual materials needed to make a car (uses more GHG than a lifetime of use according to some), traffic signals, EV and ice charging/fueling infrastructure, etc

Absolutely. And now, e bikes are really coming into their own, as even older people, people with bad knees, etc can do all their local running around, even commuting many months of the year on bikes.

During rush hour, bikes are often faster than cars, and much cheaper/easier to park.

I, too, was a child of the 60s, in rural US, going crazy until I turned 17 and could get a car and a drivers license. Once I got them, it never occurred to me to ride a bike again.

Now that I’m in my 60s, I have given up a car and started riding again, and I love it. Getting an e bike next summer so I can go further and faster (and not keel over in the AZ heat).

Exactly right. Phantom shoppers found that Ford dealers always steered EV shoppers away from the Focus electric too.

Yes they are and it is safe to assume big auto likes dealerships less than we do but they are locked into 100 year old contracts and dracionian state laws that dealerships got passed…

No surprise there. Same thing happened to me in NJ when I went (3 times) to try to buy a Volt. Nobody knew anything. I’ve since bought two Prius. I’ll try once more but methinks I’ll likely end up with the Prime while I wait for my Tesla.

Henry, it seems like 20% of Chevy dealers sell 80% of the Volts sold. So find out who the Volt specialist dealer is near you and go there, don’t waste your time and go to any “ICE only” Chevy dealers. It is easy to figure out a Volt dealer, drive by and you will see 4 or more Volts lined up.

Corvette and Duramax sales follow that same pattern too. The majority of sales are made by a small minority of dealerships.

Nix, the funny thing is that my Volt sales guy at Criswell Chevy in Gaithersburg MD is a Corvette Specialist. But his daily driver was a Gen I Volt. Criswell is happy to sell you a Corvette or a Volt, they just want to sell you a Chevrolet, which is refreshing.

I put down a deposit on a Bolt in Maryland about three weeks ago. The particular dealership currently has a total of four allocations; it is able to place the order in January; and delivery is expected in February.

I’m assuming you are on the West Coast? what part? tx.

ah Maryland.

If I had to guess, I would say it is probably Northern, VA. Check the Dealers in Arlington, Fairfax, and Alexandria.

Criswell Chevy in Gaithersburg MD beat every Virginia Chevy dealers offer for my Volt by a large margin, and they had more Volts on their lot than any Virginia dealer as well.
I get my Volt serviced at Koons Tysons, and I live in Arlington, but the Virginia Chevy dealers didn’t come close to the deal I got from Criswell.

Our Md. Dealer said by end of year for our his n hers but looks like going across the pot river won’t help
Worldwatch institute ( 1974)and we agree bicycles remain the most efficient form of transport ever

In Pennsylvania, they don’t even admit to having heard of it.

But then again, the salesman’s motto is SWAT, Sell what’s available today.

Sales are not actually underway. After the publicized 3 initial sales there have been no more.

GM made the penny-pinching move to ship their cars by train cross country and they just sat around in Chicago for weeks.

It seems possible some will be delivered this week.

It’s hard to believe GM would choose a delivery method for the initial cars which takes over a month to get them there.

I wonder if the carbon footprint for these cars will be better since they are not shipped by trunk.

Very likely so. But they should have taken another tack to try to get cars out by the end of the year. If sales are in the single digits for December they will have egg on their face.

You’ve got all the rest of the year to send cars by slow boat. They should have sent them a faster method or just sold them around Michigan in order to get some sales done in 2016.

Yes! The first Bolts should be sold in Michigan, so Mary Barra could rub it in that it is the Only 200 Mile plus Range EV you can Legally buy in Michigan! Or not!

They could also sell the first ones in Indiana, Ohio, & Illinois, if they wanted to cut shipping times! And in Ontario & Quebec! All close by, and good EV support in ON/QC too!

Selling first in California is only logical from the idea that they get their CARB Credits there!

Tesla, being a California Auto Maker, will ship 1st Model 3’s to California customers because they want them close, in case they have any issues, with an extra benefit of CARB Credits, and if they can get early ones out with 300+ miles range, and new faster Superchargers installed, might even scoop the FCV equivalent 9 Credits!

I wonder if GM is ticked that they stepped away from that NUMMI Plant, now?

Then everyone would complain about how much energy was wasted delivering the cars. Rail works unless it doesn’t.

I think you overestimate how much people look into how cars are delivered.

Do you know how Tesla delivers their cars? Does anyone?

No one is going to bury a company for expediting the early deliveries of their cars to make an end-of-year deadline.

My point was that people will complain no matter how it’s done. Rail is the cheapest way to ship so that’s how GM does it. Unless the dealer is near the factory, which of course isn’t a factor given distribution is limited to CA and OR.

I don’t think it matters a great deal to GM if the cars get delivered on December 30th or January 2nd. For that matter I doubt the IRS cares either.

The IRS cares. The law is specific.

As to GM caring, they should care. They claim the car was put on sale before the end of the year. If they only put 3 on sale then they have turned that into a lie in all but the most technical sense.

My bill of sale for my Bolt is dated 12/21/2016. So that’s pretty much sale #4 in the bag. :p

Mine was on 12/17/2016. 🙂

question: since it’s an ‘in demand’ product, I’m assuming there is little, if any negotiating for price?

A Bolt delivered in Dec 2016 means the federal tax incentive will be in your tax return you file in 2017.

A Bolt delivered in Jan 2017 would be in your tax return you file in 2018.

A tax incentive on a purchase in 2016 can only be impacted by legislation passed before the end of 2016. A purchase in 2017 could technically (though unlikely) be affected by legislation passed anytime in 2017, even the last hour of the last day of December 2017. (ibid previous links I’ve already provided here on insideev’s).

I think you underestimate how far people go out of their way to look for ways to criticise GM.

Honestly, the only folks who care about a few weeks of initial delay are us EV enthusiasts. January and February will likely have plenty of reasonable vole appearing on lots…and then we can all start complaining about the inevitable low sales figures, how GM isn’t advertising, etc.

Except that you lose your fed tax break for this year.

If you don’t get it next year you can’t claim the tax rebate until next year.

Otherwise I wouldn’t care about another week or two delay.

It is common for folks to just change there W-4 so there is less taxes taken out of their paychecks to equal the $7500 by the year end.

If you get the $7500.

There is a large political change coming. Who knows what happens in a tax overhaul?

Some commenters here suggest that not everyone would qualify for a full $7,500 Tax Credit anyway; so that makes me wonder how low your taxes are, that someone earning enough to consider an EV, at $30,000 plus, would not be paying out over $7,500 per year in income tax!

It used be said that your car payments should not be over 25% of your earnings, but I guess with the quite low lease rates I keep hearing about in the states, I guess one could almost be homeless, and buy some of those EV’s, and fund it, and a smart phone, just by begging!

You would have to be one exceptional begger to make the $500-$650/Mo. EV payments I see on Canadian Dealer Websites!

Anything might happen at this point, but I’d bet on EV incentives being allowed to expire on their own (after a certain number of cars sold per manufacturer) rather than the incentive being cut short in 2017.

Prospects for renewal after that initial allotment per manufacturer might be dim, though. Maybe some makes that are abstaining will breathe new life into the market after the current players lose their credits and that’ll take us through to 2020 or (shudder) 2024.

I think that once Tesla, GM and Nissan have all sold their 200,000th car and they all have had 3 to 6 months of further additional sales with the full credit, as per the Energy Security Act of 2007, then the full credit may/should get phased out.
Why pay the losers like Ford, BMW, Fiat, Audi and VW to bring out their second rate products? They snooze, they should lose.

Meanwhile, salesman at my SoCal dealer told me Bolt is only for special order and they won’t have any in stock. This is the same place I got SparkEV. I don’t know if this is salesman problem, dealer problem, or GM problem, but certainly working against selling Bolt to public.

If I had any love left for GM as a brand, I would order through the Costco Wholesale program. They dig their own grave with this kind of adversarial nonsense, what, really is their value add, again?
So, how hard is it to buy a Bolt?

Why would you expect a car that is just starting to appear at dealers to be in stock? Given the number of vehicles available it might be awhile before a dealer just has one “in stock”.

I asked when I can see it to which the reply was it’s only for special order. It’s not due to it being new, but they are not going to keep it as car they sell regularly, kind of like FFE is doing now.

I’ve spoken to two of the largest Los Angeles County dealers (Rydell & Keyes) and neither stated that they were for order only. Keyes was taking a $500 deposit for potential buyers to be ‘first’ in line. But even they took my name down and said they would call. Rydell was just adding people to a list, and would call when cars arrive. Whether either does, remains to be seen. As of this morning Keyes shows 53 Bolts in transit, and Rydell shows 68.

Certainly, there are exceptions with Rydell and Keyes being the forefront on GM EV sales in SoCal. But those are almost 200 miles from where I am. WTF is dealer network for if they’re not going to stock it for sale locally? If I’m driving 400 miles for a car and practically at MSRP, I might as well get it direct from MFR.

Your local dealer may be out of allocations, and they might be telling new customers that it is order-only at this point.

Dealers can’t just order as many of any car they want. Especially new high demand cars. They get assigned allocations based upon their history of hitting sales targets, with more allocations going to dealerships who hit the biggest sales targets.

Your local dealer may have sold out their allocations, and only have allocations a couple of month out, that they are only selling as special orders.

My dealer here in Oregon, where we have a deposit on a Bolt, says they had a meeting with GM, and supposedly they will be getting some on Dec 27th. Fingers crossed.

Delay seems awfully Tesla like for being the anti Tesla.

And some are still saying that GM with the Bolt EV is a full year ahead of Tesla with the Model 3!

Even for California 1st deliveries, there are already down to maybe…7 Months? I wonder which EV…Bolt EV, or Tesla Model 3, will make it to 10,000 deliveries first? And, by when?

Also who makes it 1st to 20,000? Or 30,000??

I wonder if GM is moving 9 Bolt EV’s per Hour on the Production Line now, how many Tesla will be producing in the first Month they start Deliveries?

Also, will Tesla be ready and online, beginning July 1st, 2017, to be able to exceed 9 Model 3’s production per Hour?

Anyone keeping track of these numbers for a future comparison of GM Bolt EV start vs Tesla Model 3 start?

One year is optimistic. You will get a model 3 in 2018 only if you are very early in the waiting list and happy to drive a prototype quality car.

Ummm… if you’re buying a mass produced car, then by definition it’s not a “prototype quality” car.

Now, if you had said “early production” quality, that would be a reasonable claim. Even “pre-production” quality wouldn’t be a defensible claim, unless you’re talking only about cars delivered to Tesla employees in the first few weeks of production.

But you didn’t, so it’s not.

I think an optimistic take on Tesla’s Model 3 delivery timeline is late 2017, a lot like what we are seeing for the Bolt this year, but worse: pushing a very few models out the door and delivered in December 2017 to technically meet promises to deliver that year.

Based on forum postings, most of the early adopters had a TPW of 11/28 (mine was built 12/2). It shipped on 12/9 and arrived in the West Coast distribution center on 12/19. If you assume a week of QC on the front end, a week of handling and delivery prep on the other, along with holidays and vacations, the shipping schedule is not out of bounds.

Zip Lock needs to make a reusable bag, big enough to just drive a car into, and Zip Shut, for car shipping! Quicker to prep for shipping, and quicker to unzip and do Dealer Prep! Pack the empty bag and fedex it back for next shipment!

Have you ever seen how BMW ships their cars?
Basically a side loaded container truck. The cars come out just about as clean as when they went in.

Sounds like a much better solution than the wrap they put on new cars. That seems to me to be an awful waste of time and energy just to protect the finish for a few days or (for cars shipped overseas) a few weeks.

There are no Bolts selling in the Bay area. All of the early deliveries went to dealer demo cars.

Maybe some dealers would add a Bolt EV or two, to use as Rentals, or at least as customer shuttles!

We are also in the dark in Arizona. Our state used to be a CARB state but is the only one that voted it out. Our Auto Dealers and Governor at the time didn’t want electrics and still won’t let Tesla sell direct. We have to order on line and get EVs from California.
We may see a few Bolts in 2017 or maybe not.

I have a Bolt reserved and it is being delivered to a Bay Area dealer on Jan 9th. Will test drive it and if the wife and I like it, we’ll lease it and turn in our Leaf.

You have just confirmed that it is the LEAF that is facing potential threats from buyers switching from LEAF to Bolt EV, reather than from a Tesla Model 3 Reservation, to a Bolt EV waiting list!

I suspect there will also be considerations of moving to the Bolt EV, by KIA Soul EV owners, and even BMW i3 owners! Likely also from eGolf, Spark EV, Fiat 500e, Ford Focus EV, and Mitsubishi iMiEV owners!

There is lots of talk about how GM’s Bolt EV will draw customer sales away from the Model 3, but I suspect it will draw more away from the other brands EV products I list above! It might even pull some sales from the PHEV crowd!

Well the only real options for me are get another lease on a new LEAF or try out the bolt. None of the BEVs really do it for me or my wife.

Ultimately we will purchase our next EV which will likely be a Model 3 with dual motors and a bigger battery (hoping for a 75 version w/ over 300 miles). I need a fast reliable charging network so I can actually take it on trips. So I see the Bolt as a stepping stone to my next BEV.

Can we infer ftom this article that the demand is greater than anticipated?

At the risk of swimming against the tide here, I suggest there is a similar first-world problem with any brand-new model of car. Early production rate is going to be limited, and most of the first ones off the line are going to be used as demo models, not destined to go into the hands of car buyers immediately.

Sure, there is the added problem of most (but not all!) “stealerships” not wanting to sell EVs. But that aside, I suspect there would be just as many frustrated gear-heads complaining about the delay in getting that brand-new model of gasmobile.

Sheesh! What a bunch of whiners you people are! So just chill and the cars will come in due time. This is the dawn of a great new era that will benefit the planet, not some bogus plot to keep everyone driving ICE-mobiles.

When I heard GM would be showing the Bolt prototype at the 2015 North American International Auto Show in Detroit, I quickly purchased two round trip airline tickets (and tickets to the show as well as three nights in a hotel) just to see the Bolt in person. I’m a two-time Volt owner, totally satisfied with the technology and the vehicles and thus, buying a Bolt would be an easy transition for me. Sadly, Chevrolet dealers in my part of Texas (Abilene) are bailing out of the Volt or never “signed on”. The stretch of road between Dallas to Phoenix, Volts are nearly impossible to find. For me, if I want to buy a Bolt, instead of going to a Chevy dealership, I’d be better off going to a hardware store, because that will (sadly) be the only place I’ll ever see a bolt. East to West, Fort Worth city limits to darned near San Diego and North to South, almost from the Canadian border to Austin, Texas is a large “black hole” that partly is the fault of Gawdawful Marketing (GM) and their lackluster marketing and non-existent attempts to advertise the Volt. I sure as shootin’ won’t buy one… Read more »

Fortunately, DF/W has one dealership that is really interested, Classic Chevrolet in Grapevine. They are enthusiastic about the Volt and Bolt. They are building a special building just for selling EVs and Hybrids, and have already installed a bunch of charging stations. So I say that people in DF/W should go there to buy their EVs because that dealer has earned the business.

GM needs a Map, more like, or, that lists Volt and Bolt EV Dealers, that we as buyers, and potential buyers, could go and see, as well as leave positive or negative comments, based on our dealing with them, and like the ‘Plug Score’ rating on plugshare, we could get a better handle on who is ‘In it to Win it’ in GM EV and PHEV sales!

Maybe Jay Cole could colaborate with PlugShare to put such a ‘All Brand EV Dealers’ website together?

Basic Filters: Dealers that are supportive of EV’s; Dealers that are knowledgeable about EV’s; Dealers that Want To Sell You an EV; and Dealers whose staff try to steer you away from a plugin; Dealers whose ‘EV Spealists’ need education; and so on!

Also, Dealers that not just ‘Allow’, but ‘Invite Any’ EV/PHEV to come by for a charge, a Coffee, and a Snack while they charge, and if they would like to see or test drive that dealers plug in cars, they are happy to fit you in!

I suspect there are some such dealers in EV’s/PHEV’s, but they number under 10% of overall EV Dealers, at best!


Ask and you shall receive!

Click the “Volt Sales & Service” box and/or the “Bolt EV Sales & Service” and go crazy.

Yep! I will be buying my Bolt from them. I briefly considered doing like I did with the Spark and having it shipped from California. But I can wait.

There are other DFW dealers who put in a token effort… my North Dallas/Addison area dealer has been helpful and friendly and they usually have a Volt or two in stock. But not like Classic Chevrolet. I’d much rather support them. 🙂

I have constantly mentioned that I felt GM’s special requirements for selling the BOLT were at once both: 1). Silly (insistence on a HUGE 80 kw charger in the SERVICE BAY for the purpose of, *NOT* servicing the CCS system (they have diagnostic tools for that issue), but for making sure all customers can go home with a ‘full tank of gas’ something that they obviously will not be able to do for their non-ccs BOLTS and just plain don’t do for 99% of their ICE customers. A level 2 facility at 3% of the cost would satisfy those very few BOLT customers who need a recharge to get home. 2). Onerous on smaller dealerships (needless upgrade of electric service, and the charger won’t even be publically available unless the dealer spends EVEN MORE cash they don’t have). Now the PROOF is, is that dealers are apparently saying, this is too much needless infrastructure that ultimately will not sell even ONE additional car, a niche product at that, so FORGET IT. Why I’m upset is that it limits my dickering ability between dealers if almost no one sells it. Those that do will command their own price. And I’ll be… Read more »

Just order one in Ca and have it delivered. or fly out and pick it up.

You have an ELR , right?

If we had the time to stop every 250 miles we’d make a road trip out of that plan.
We’re getting 2- can we tow one and get a 500 mile range between charges?

Larry, short couple them together, put a driver in each, and split the load, it might get you to 300+ highway miles!

How fast can a Bolt EV drive in Reverse? If it could go as fast in reverse as forward, you could couple the realy tight, put a tough boot or skin between them, like on ‘Snake Buses’ (the city buses with 2 pieces!), and that could improve your Aerodynamics, maybe enough to get 350+ miles per charge(s)!

The requirement that the dealership have a DC charger has nothing to do with customers charging their vehicles and everything to do with service. If you don’t have a DC charger the service department can’t work on DC charging issues. The charging limit is about as low as you can make it and still test.

Don’t see this as being either silly or unnecessary.

“And I’ll be looking for used Bolts.”, Or, a Model Y will be available before used Bolt EV’s in Buffalo! Or, could you buy a Bolt EV in Ontario? Plan now and get an Ontario place/address to qualify for the rebate! You get your rebate faster than buying a Bolt EV in Buffalo in January or February! Or, ‘WE’ (The EV Owning and Buying Public), could advise/chastise GM for placing such onerous terms on who, among there dealers, can sell the Bolt EV! I bet that even a Nissan 44 kW level DCQC would do the job, and having a bank of five 50 Amp AC charging stations, would be more useful! Heck, even a bank of 10 of the 20 Amp Voltec Charging Stations, would go a long way! Even a 20 kW Fuji QC QC could be quite helpful! GM could have a dealer rating system that indicates the level of EV Charging Support and Customer Service! Basic ‘Bolt EV’ Dealer: minimum 4 stations 40 Amp 240V AC Charging (2 in service bays, 2 for public), minimum 2 Bolt EV’s – 1 in showroom & 1 ready to test drive/sell; Bronze Bolt EV Dealer: 6 stations 40 Amp… Read more »

WRONG. GM is only requiring Bolt dealers install a 24 kW CCS unit in the service bay. The 80 kW requirement was reported incorrectly by a news reporter.

Phew! That is a relief then.

The 80 kw requirement that was reported was silly.

TOM M. here also chose 24 kw for his restaurant, (WHY?) probably because it was doable, economical, and good enough for his clientelle.

I strongly disagree about there being a big EV black hole between Fort Worth and San Diego. Granted there are a lot of parts of the western states that have never seen an EV but there are a few bright spots. Most notable is the Colorado Front Range.

Colorado has been very proactive in adopting electric vehicles. With a $5,000 Colorado income tax credit, Colorado has the best EV incentive program in the country. Other bright spots include Salt Lake City and Phoenix.

I think this car is going to be killed by the backwards and bull headed pro oil car dealerships.

At least Tesla is personality motivated.

Only reason Leafs are selling so god lately is the $10,000.00s off they are offering

Bolt would sell better if every Chevy dealership sold them . The dealership in Champaign, Illinois has refused to offer the Bolt.

If local dealership continues to not offer Bolt I will just wait and lease a Tesla S.

GM is doing what IBM used to do effectively in the PC market: use FUD (fear uncertainty and doubt). IBM would announce months or years in advance a fire breathing PC that would eat everybody else’s lunch. IBM would then take forever to trickle out its fire breathing model in tiny numbers at a high price. Meanwhile, everybody waited hoping for the availability floodgates to open, which never happened. IBM killed off its competition while everyone was waiting for IBM to do something grand. Eventually people would wind up taking a lesser model from IBM, which is what IBM wanted all along.

GM is trying to do the same thing with the Bolt. GM will manufacture just enough Bolts to assure eveyone the Bolt is real, but we will never see Bolts delivered in commodity numbers. Meanwhile Tesla et. al. languish while people wait for illusory Bolts to show up.

IBM is no longer directly in the PC market. Playing head games with the Bolt as a tease will probably end up not especially well for GM. GM should heed the IBM lesson.

Well, nothing new to see there: IBM with its MODEL 67/360 (sp?) deliberately wrote inefficient software products to force businesses up to a faster, more expensive product back in the Mainframe days.
Software like the competing SyncSort had a field-day with sales since THAT software was written to be productive, and it was cheaper than a new machine.

Knowing IBM intimately for decades now, I can assure you that writing slow, inefficient software comes quite naturally to them. They don’t have to try.

Yeah, well, the case I mentioned I had only read about in ComputerWorld decades ago since they got into legal trouble and it cost them.

On another subject, you wrote that per wikipedia, 13,500 volts is the minimum ‘power distribution’?

This is the trouble with Wikipedia, as a Wikipedia author myself (see Linotype Machine), anyone can say anything – its rather a free for all since the host cannot research everything.

If someone asked me that question I’d say – in the ‘medium voltage world’; the LOWEST would be 2400, simply because large motors can run off of it directly, but 4160 is more popular because you can run still larger equipment off 5kv switchgear without going to more expensive 15 kv or more expensive still 35 kv switchgear.
Transmission and subtransmission voltages are higher still, as are DC links, but then this stuff isn’t used to directly run utilization equipment since its too costly to finagle with.

It was reported in the conservative press that Bolts would only be sold in CA & OR after Trump won. Time will tell I guess.

So all those journalists who argued that GM was going to crush Tesla because they were selling Bolts in 2016 were talking nonsense.

Those 2000 cars should be delivered to Norway asap.
We have more than 2000 signed contracts and customers waiting for cars. is showing 141 Bolt EVs including 75 with Premiere trim. There are no pictures with the adds so these adds are probably just dealers trying to sell cars they know they have coming. If your local dealer can’t get you a Bolt you might want to contact one of dealers selling Bolts on Autotrader and see if you can pick one up when it arrives. is also showing a bunch of Bolts for sell. A couple of days ago there weren’t any Bolts on Autotrader. Every day I’m selling more and more Bolt EVs for sale.

Production started only in Dec, and it will take 1-2 weeks to reach the dealers, so don’t expect Dec to be a big sales month. If they sell
100 – I am happy
500 – I am double happy
1000 – I am triple happy.

I think Prius Prime will be a big seller this month.

Yep. I’ve been watching the inventory and sales on the Prius Prime. I’m expecting to see 2,000+ in sales for December, despite how poorly stocked they are. I think they are essentially selling every one that hits the dealer lots.

Production started in November. My car was built a month ago. So more than two weeks.

Hardly surprising.

I have a VIN, but no clear delivery date.

I’m sure it’s cheesy salesman BS, or if there are other factors.

It a new model, it’s the holidays, there’s bad weather, and they want to check the cars very well. Mine took 3 weeks to ger on a train. I’ll find out where it is tomorrow.

When GM announced their Bolt EVs were being delivered at CA dealerships, I made time to take some pictures, do test drive, and write my experiences. See:
Bolt EV experience …

For EVLN EV-newswire posts use:

:: All my EV advocate efforts have been free since 1990 ::

Is the car as crammed as it looks in your pictures ?

“Sonic-ice rear seat (Bolt EV’s rear seat is a little shorter for more leg room)”

This isn’t encouraging at all .. it’s just a trick, a stupid one if you ask me.
It reminds me of (the chief engineer for the Volt) Andrew Farrah’s comment on the Volt’s 5th seat; the guy sounded more like a dealer instead of an engineer :


The Gamma II vehicle platform that is the basis of the Sonic is NOT the basis of the Bolt EV. The Bolt EV is on a all new dedicated EV platform.

If that was meant for me, yeah, I’m aware that they’re distinct platforms; made a comment about it here:

Companies don’t like to admit cheap and expensive cars share the same platform. But they do.

And while they may name it a different platform, it’s clearly the same platform. Yes, it’s modified a bit.

It’s true of the Leaf, it’s true of the Bolt.

Looks like one lucky buyer, in Maryland, may still get his 2016 tax credit.

Here’s the latest installment fresh off the presses. 😉

I hope you get your Bolt soon.

I hope I get mine before you. 😉

It’s the llamas/alapacas that make it stand out…

There are two bottlenecks to selling the Bolt:

1. GM (and LG Electronics) production


2. Dealerships promoting sales… or rather, not only not promoting them, but actually obstructing sales even when someone wants to buy one

I submit that even if GM does work hard to eliminate the first bottleneck, they are doing very little if anything about the second.

The latter bottleneck won’t be an issue where it counts. The dealers in Coastal California are raring to go on this.

Dealers want to sell cars. They want to sell cars that people buy. If there is a demand for these cars then the dealers will sell them.

For the Bolt’s target volumes, GM doesn’t need a lot of dealers. The range helps make it easy to pick it up from a more distant dealer.

It’s funny, but GM will have had me for a customer for probably 6 years because I’ve been waiting for the cheaper Tesla. Who knows, maybe they will come up with a compelling car and convince me to stay at the end of my Bolt lease? The Bolt will be a fine car for a lease, but it won’t keep me in the fold. It’s sad they don’t develop a butt-kicking car that would generate interest from EV folks as well as their regular customer base.

George S. Two people I know within 200 miles of me did that with the RAV4ev when it was at Fire Sale prices – but I would never do that, and the BOlt isn’t on sale in California at any better price than around here. I’m not THAT much in love with the car.

When I first mentioned GM’s requirements are too restrictive and onerous, people here said it is just chump change and dealers would do it. I’m basically saying “I told you so” – if you put up arbitrary roadblocks then sales will suffer.

Now, everyone here is mad that too many dealerships are passing on the BOLT. I can’t blame them. Yes I now have a 2014 ELR and a 2012 VOLT. Both are just fine and I’m in no rush to replace either.

If I can’t get the right price, I’ll reluctantly either wait, or look at a different model.

You’re saying “I told you so” before the thing in question has even happened.

It’s a prerequisite that you be proven right before you can gloat about it. You’ll have to wait a bit longer before you can do so.

Well he has to gloat now because he is about to be proven wrong.

Unlucky and Nero:

That’s just stupid. I’m responding to what OTHERS HERE have already typed. Check the dates and times.

But like most ‘Low information Liberals’ you’d rather pick on the person commenting than talking about the issue.

I’m picking on others? I’m not the one who engaged in name calling.

If you want to crow about how you were right and dealers didn’t pick up the car you have to wait until after the dealers don’t pic up the car. It’s not even offered to them yet, so none of use know what the take rate will be. And that includes you.

Complain to the people who stated their dealers aren’t going to carry BOLTS. I just responded to those statements as a fact.

However, it was reported here, not only by a ‘reporter’ as BRO1999 states but by a GM representative in a video here in IEVs, that :

1). An 80 kw CCS , in the service bay was required at a minimum, and of course the dealership could do anything else beyond this

We know about the DCFC requirement. You assume this will decimate the population of Bolt dealers. But that’s just an assumption. Sure, it’ll turn some off. But we don’t know how many yet.

And as to dealers who say they aren’t going to carry Bolts, right now that’s just hearsay. Salesman have a mantra “sell what you got”. If you go ask about a car they don’t have yet and can’t have yet, they’ll diminish it.

Once the car is actually on sale and being offered to dealers (outside the heavily EV areas it will start out in) dealers will see how it sells, what kind of ad support GM will be giving and then make their decision about whether to carry it or not.

And that’s what you have to wait for before congratulating yourself on how right you were. Wait for actual results.

Less than 2/3 of existing Chevy dealers sell the VOLT as it is.

So, I’m not encouraged by adding more requirements for the BOLT.

But the 24 kw requirement is far more attainable as mentioned by Bro1999.

Question: This is a product in demand. How much bargaining power does the consumer have?

Do Tesla buyers have bargaining power? Of course not. And they don’t complain. In fact, many (if not most) prefer Tesla’s ‘no haggle’ sales method.

I think a chunk of those who complain about the dealer system would not be so critical if dealers would sell at MSRP. Or maybe not…

I ask because I’ve put down a $500 deposit for an order and will be buying (which I have not done in some time). Are you saying my “salesman” will not be offering at MSRP?

If your salesman works at Keyes Chevy in Van Nuys, nope!
Rydell Chevy is offering $1k off any inbound Bolt. Who knows how many are left unclaimed though.

Coal EV is 10% of the emissions of Gas car