General Motors Says It Won’t Seek Pre-Order For Chevrolet Bolt Despite Model 3 Success

2 years ago by Steven Loveday 142

Chevrolet Bolt Rear Hatch

Chevrolet Bolt Rear Hatch

General Motors Spokesman Fred Ligouri assured that Tesla Model 3 pre-orders do not worry Chevrolet, and that the company will surely not follow suit. He said:

2017 Chevrolet Bolt Interior

2017 Chevrolet Bolt Interior

“We don’t need [pre-orders] to begin building our products. We haven’t taken any. We don’t need to to begin building our products. We’re really excited to offer it when it goes into retail production at the end of this year to those that have expressed interest and we’ll work through our great network of dealerships to get them to customers.”

The Bolt will be delivered this year in late Fall, a year or more ahead of the first Model 3. GM already has verified interested customers and is working on marketing. No reports have been released by GM with any actual numbers of interested individuals though.

GM’s Kevin Kelly explained that the interest in Tesla’s Model 3 can pull along all EVs:

“Any interest you see from people in this type of technology, it helps everybody. We are very excited to see high demand for the technology in a vehicle like this and I think it will bode well for the Bolt EV.”

Both the Model 3 and the Bolt EV will boast 200+ mile range and base vehicles will be priced around $35,000. The companies have surely been at odds about the “correct” way to sell their vehicles. It will be interesting to see how everything rolls out.

Source: Autoblog

Tags: , , , , ,

142 responses to "General Motors Says It Won’t Seek Pre-Order For Chevrolet Bolt Despite Model 3 Success"

  1. Fabian says:

    The Bolt needs some sort of pre-order model. At least where I live, people are salivating at a 200 mile EV and may even get the Model 3 also just to have both.

    Folks will be falling over themselves to get a 200-mile EV at this price point, Bolt, M3, or otherwise. The problem is that many dealerships have ridiculous markups on these kind of cars, some as much as 10k, and you also have to deal with secret little lists which the dealer has been making which you are not allowed into unless you grease some palms. The GM model is flawed and too shady.

    When the Volt came out, all my local dealers for at least 50 miles would have 5k markup for several months till the hoopla died down. They were all in cahoots with each other.

    I am in line for the M3, woke up at 5am and I am CA, so I am hopeful to get one with the credit. I want the Bolt, even at straight MSRP, but will not pay markup for it or play games with snake dealers.

    1. Taser54 says:

      Go to the Dealership and order one. That’s been available forever.

      1. Fabian says:

        I tried to put in an official order and it was NOT possible. Most of the larger Stealerships near me have huge list of folks who want a Bolt, and “no one is gonna just waltz into the dealer and order a unit in front of their magical secret list.” This whole things is bonkers.

        COSTCO will not have this car for months.

        Please note I am talking about LARGE dealerships with REAL allocations from GM HQ. Smaller dealerships may make promises to you and take your order [on a post-it note scribbled in pencil], but you will never see your Bolt, at least for 6 months; cuz they have NO REAL allocations.

    2. Jychevyvolt says:

      Take advantage of Costco pricing. You will not need to worry about mark-up.

      1. Unplugged says:

        Costco often pricing often does not apply to “special” or limited production cars. The Bolt will probably qualify as both.

    3. evcarnut says:

      GM won’t seek Pre-0rders because are not there to be seeked 0ut ! There is Zer0 demand pre-orders for this BOLT ..Gm & their…L O L.. Bolt have Just solidified & confirmed that the Model 3 Is a “Killer Car” at a “Killer Price” & has given the people the more reason not to buy a Bolt! Compared to the Model 3 this Bolt is Laughable at best. Gm has thousands of miles to go, to catch Tesla & by then Tesla will be Thousands of more miles furthermore ahead of GM.. Gm is chasing a moving train thousands of miles away , ahead of them . A train that Gm Will never catch up to..At least Not with these mickey mouse Products Gm is putting out!

      1. deborah crazy train flower power says:

        I believe Tesla did the smart thing…

      2. Lol says:

        How much do they pay you? Shame on you

      3. Fool Cells says:

        exactly. The Bolt is a fugly, tiny speck of a car. GM is so clueless it is mind boggling. Where is the ATS sized car for this 200 mile battery? GM needs a ATS sized purpose built EV with 200+ mile range, higher performance, and more luxury for the same price. And no stealerships inbetween customers and the cars. And a world wide super charger network.

        Then and only then, will they be competing with Tesla.

      4. Brian says:

        Are you crazy?

        1. Brian says:

          The crazy comment was for evcarnut. Fool cells is only half crazy as I agree with the “Stealership” comment. (just having fun with the crazy comment so don’t get excited).

          I like the Bolt. Doesn’t look as nice as the 3 but I don’t care. Also, the supercharger network doesn’t matter to me for my driving scenario. As long as I get off gas I’m happy.

          1. Brian, I am curious as to how the Bolt demand will be, compared to the last Economy Car GM made years ago: The Chevy Sprint! That was a car that sold out, because it had the highest MPG of any car in the compact, or subcompact categories, and I had to get a Nissan Micra to even get close (20% less) fuel economy! I wanted one, but dealers were sold out!

            Advantage the Sprint had at the time was the same as any gas car: Gas Statisons everywhere; the Bolt has no such advantage!

            Still, while you are happier with the ability to drive the Bolt locally, and go a few days between charges, and get you and your family to the Airport so you can fly away on vacation- great!

            If GM partnered with Tesla for Supercharger access for the Bolt, I might even say it could be a winner! However, GM is trapped by silly Human Pride’, and woukd rather go down, than connect with Tesla, at least – at present!

            1. Brian says:

              I agree partnering with Tesla for the charging network would increase the number of driving scenarios this car could handle. But it’s not the end of the world if you have to just charge at home and maybe the odd level 2 when out and about. If I look at 10 people in my extended family only 1 drives more than 300 km on a regular basis and the other 9 don’t do it ever. I’m sure many other people drive much more than my family but we’re not talking about being everything to everyone.

              So, my point is that I think the Bolt would be good for many people even without a good charging network. Just plug in at home every night and you always have a full charge. When you need to go further than 300km see if you can manage the trip with level 2 charging. If not rent a gas mobile.

              Now, how much demand will there be for the Bolt is a slightly different issue. Will GM advertise? Will they compel people to think about their driving habits and see that this car could easily suit many? To be seen.

    4. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      GM is going to deliver real cars in few months, not a spot in an imaginary 3 year long line for imaginary car that so far only has some prototype shown. Just go to closest Chevrolet shop and drive off. No need to wait 3 years and so no need for preorders.

  2. Brian says:

    Because knowing dealerships in the North East will need more than the southern ones would be a bad thing?

    Why would a company NOT want to know where to bring the most cars so they sell faster?

  3. pete says:

    A poor response on preorders would be an embarrassment for GM. So why take a chance?

    1. David Murray says:

      That was my first thought when I read the headline. They know it won’t be an impressive number compared to the model-3, so why bother?

    2. Forever Green says:

      +1 Pete
      People will not pre-order the Chevy Bolt like they are pre-ordering the Tesla Model 3 because they have to do it through dealers and car dealers are Crooks in piece suits. Everytime I go into a dealership to buy or lease a car I go in there knowing I will be ripped off. The only question in my mind is, “by how much?” Just the fact that people don’t have to buy the Tesla Model 3 through a dealership is a huge advantage for Tesla. If Chevy was to start taking pre-orders for the Bolt their numbers will look pitiful and it has nothing to do with the quality of the vehicle,it is the process. If I see people lining up around a Chevy dealership I will call the cops, because they’re getting ready to burn the place down.

      1. Taser54 says:

        Dealers would love to sell you a Bolt at full MSRP, as Tesla does. Head on over and offer that- ignore that the dealer is selling at less than MSRP- just tell them NO, “I want to pay more”.

        1. floydboy says:

          What franchise dealer in his/her right mind would sell a ‘must have’ item for MSRP?!

          You don’t want to pay full price plus $4000, for the ‘green earth scented’ floor mats, they’ll just wait for someone who will.

          In the mean time, they have trucks to sell.

          1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

            It is called “market”. More demand for limited goods means higher prices. If you don’t want to wait some months for production to scale up, just pay few thousands more. If it is not so urgent for you, just wait few months and you will get the same with little or none mark-up from dealer. Do you really prefer waiting 3 years in line for goods like in some communist country but getting at exactly the same price as everybody else? Guess what, Tesla also stated very clear that people paying more for inflated price Model 3 “options” will be moved first in the line in any case.

            1. zzzzzzzzzz, If GM had 325,000 reservations for their Bolt, and plans for 30,000 – 50,000 of them per year, someone is still going to wait between 6-10 years to get a Bolt, weathey off the lot, or not, unless they at GM ‘rethink their production plans’ too!

              Sure GM might have the capacity to make more cars, and ramp up faster, but could they get 325,000 battery packs at 60 kWh each, all in one year, from LG Chem?

              Would LG stop sales to the other OEM’s they have contracts with, just to supply to GM more to handle the surge of so many EV orders if Bolt hit such an order streak as Tesla did?

              I think not! As has been said, the Gigafactory will be able to produce as many cells per year for batteries when it is done, as is currently the whole battery industries current annual supply from all sources (except Lead Acid Batteries, I presume – and no one is using those for powering an EV anymore)!

              Realizing that Tesla can not ramp up car production as fast as GM might be easy, but figuring out how fast LG Chem can ramp up extra cell production, just for GM’s Bolt, won’t be as easy!

              So, GM can just be glad they are nit caught with such a surprise demand for the Bolt! Yet!

              Even if GM had the first number of Reservations the Tesla Model 3 had by the time they were shown on stage, just 115,000 units – GM would now have a 2.4 to almost 4 year order backlog! At their suggested higher output of 50,000 Bolts per year, that is about 2.4 years production, and at their planned rate of 30,000 per year, it would take about 4 years to reach the last of those orders!

              Their is NO Automaker ready to make 100,000 EV’s each with a 50-60 kWh pac, per year, today, and most others have no hard intent to even suggest they do, let alone make 200,000 or more such vehicles per year!

              Only Tesla has announced plans to make as many as 500,000 per year, by 2020, and they know they need to be proactive and prepare battery production to match! All others are still following them!

              Tesla is well on track this year to make 75,000 plus, high range EV’s with an average each car battery pack of about 85 kWh, and has goals to make and deliver 80,000 to as many as 90,000! I expect next years Model S, and Model X, will be joined by Model 3 production- before they originally planned, so I expect an advance of 2-3 months earlier, minimum! So – end of Summer Holidays (early fall – August), to (late fall – September), instead of October-November or later as might have been first planned!

              *Note: difficulty with database connection might cause this to post twice!

              1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

                Refundable $1,000 reservations for imaginary car is a great idea to generate hype, raise stock price to new bubble level and get more money from naive investors. They are not so great for real production planning, who knows what will be conversion percentage. Tesla needs hype, GM not so much, they have their own money and established production lines.

                GM and LG can scale production as much as they want. LG doesn’t even need to build factories, they just need to add production lines in existing factories to utilize what they have. Sure, cell production lines are not done in a month time, but once you see demand, a year or a bit more later you can have all the production you need. Tesla fans are inventing some miracle gigafactory advantage all the time, but please look closer. Now we can see only 1/7 size of Gigafactory is being built and the rumors are that after all making cells in Asia is cheaper (what a surprise!), so this 1/7 Gigafactory will be just assembling cells from Asia into packs.

        2. Fool Cells says:

          The price is the price. The MSRP is a fake, artificially high value dealers use to lie to you about the “deal” you are getting. Keep believing you are getting a good deal. ROFL.

          1. Dan Hue says:

            With the Model 3 unveiling, Tesla is basically telling us that they can make a slightly smaller Model S for half the price. I personally don’t believe it, but what does it say about you if you do?

            1. Fool Cells says:

              35k before incentives is what Tesla said…numberous times. This is not a Model S. Two very different cars. You can believe whatever fairy tale you want to believe.

              1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

                Look how the story is changing:
                http://electrek.co/2016/04/08/tesla-model-3-features-safety-autopilot-supercharger/
                It is fine if they are going to charge for superchargers, after all it costs money and “free forever” is not sustainable in mass market. But it is not what has been promised before. When you will see real production around 3 years later, it is likely that we will see another Model S 40 story – crippled and useless basic version for $35k without supercharger access, autopilot features, basically useless econobox level car for local transportation only. Nobody will be ordering it of course and so it will be promptly canceled leaving higher level Model 3 for some $45k at least in useful configuration.

                1. Lou says:

                  Wow, talk about not wanting to deal with reality!!!! The fact that SC access was free before has nothing to do with what Tesla is going to offer on the Model 3. Tesla offers various options in its cars, they are not stupid and neither are those who put down $1,000. Everyone, EVERYONE knew that the M3 would likely not have FREE SC access. I can imagine a fair number of buyers who would PREFER to not have to pay a premium for a service that they might only very rarely use. Charging per use is probably the best option for them. Even a basic M3 is likely to be an excellent car. Again, plenty of people do not feel the need for Auto Pilot and the other add ons, they just want a well made, comfortable, attractive 200 mile car. I know in my case, I really have no interest in paying for those extras. But I’d still like a basic M3 at $35K. Too bad that I am not financially able to swing one of those. Same goes for a Chevy Bolt EV. Maybe I will buy one used in a few years. I am sure either car would fit the bill in my circumstances. But knowing that I have the potential to tap into the SC network, even for a fee is more attractive than GM’s non-involvement in any sort of QC network. Let’s stop with this silly ReTrumplican type of dialogue. Both cars look great, have different buyers in mind(long term). I would imagine a lot of Bolt EV buyers will sell their cars once the M3 goes mainstream, having had very nice experience with the Bolt EV.

                  Lou

  4. Big Solar says:

    They have a network of great dealerships? Where are these located? I have never seen one of these “great” dealerships

    1. Big Solar, there is at least One! It us in Quebec, Canada! They sell more Volts than any other, I hear, and have many people who have ordered a Bolt through them, as well!

      Happy Hunting!

  5. Anon says:

    It’s all “My numbers are better than yours,” for GM. They’ve already announced a longer range Bolt after Tesla declared Model III range would be 215 miles (epa cycle).

    So they know better than to enter a pre-order race they know they can’t win. Probably wise.

    1. Kdawg says:

      “They’ve already announced a longer range Bolt”
      ——-
      Where?

      1. fbj says:

        I think I read that too, or maybe it was just the Bolt would have a longer range than 200 miles. Something like 210 miles. Or perhaps both.

        1. CopperRoad says:

          Well, GM has always stated that the Bolt would ‘offer more than 200 miles of range’. Later they started to use the wording, ‘estimated more than 200 miles of range’ – which is currently on the Bolt site.

          There was reconfirmation of the ‘estimated more than 200 miles of range’ this week from a few sources.

          But, it’s not a ‘longer range’ Bolt since there has never been a confirmed range number, other than GM always stating it would have more than 200 miles of range.

          I’m actually surprised someone at GM hasn’t slipped and blurted out a number. They’ve been keeping the range stat close to the vest.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            They initially said 203 miles using epa methods.

            1. CopperRoad says:

              Where? That has never been spoken/printed by anyone at GM – that I can find at least. At every major Bolt announcement, 2015 NAIAS, and 2016 CES reveal, it’s been a consistent message of, ‘more than 200mi of range’.

  6. Texas FFE says:

    I’m sure all the Tesla fan boys are going to post every arguement thay think of why Tesla is superior to GM. The hard fact is that GM has a track record of building and selling car models in the hundreds of thousands and Tesla doesn’t. We will find out next year how popular the bolt is and until then I wish the fan boys would keep their bias,!volatile opinions to themselves.

    1. Michael Will says:

      GM could have sold hundreds of thousands of EV1. Believe.

      1. Taser54 says:

        That would not be reality.

        1. floydboy says:

          Partially not reality. GM’s political meddling in clean air mandates is quite well documented. As is its current meddling in preventing Tesla’s expansion, which of course makes enemies.(Although I think that may be a Trojan Horse to eventually unshackle itself from the ‘dealer only’ method of selling cars). As to the EV1 itself, it was a horribly expensive car to produce, so GM was anxious to get rid of it and prevent any possible ownership of it.
          So once they got the rules turned in their favor……

          1. SparkEV says:

            Ask yourself, why was it horribly expensive. It wasn’t made of gold. Fact is, they could’ve optimized by going all-in and spreading the cost over time, but they chose not to. They also had 4 seater and hybrid in the works which they canceled as well. Meanwhile, Toyota went ahead with their hybrid program.

            It would make an interesting “movie” as alternate reality if GM actually went ahead with EV1 expansion. Would Tesla exist today?

            1. floydboy says:

              You make some valid points SparkEV, but GM saw an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. Emasculate clean air rules and slow the adoption of cleaner cars. They were essentially able to pull off a ‘twofer’.

              1. Spider-Dan says:

                I have yet to see anyone explain GM’s supposed motivation for killing off a market that they would have been a leader in. GM is not an oil company, and has no logical interest in ruining air quality or the environment.

                Using this same logic, why did Toyota (a company even larger than GM) create the Prius in the first place?

                1. TomArt says:

                  Exactly, which is why GM’s decisions are so suspect! If all automakers canceled their efficient vehicle plans like GM did, then there might be a legitimate argument that the technology was not ready for prime time, so to speak (not profitable in the least).

                  However, the fact that Toyota went on with their hybrid program and became the dominant player clearly and unequivocally demonstrates that there were motives within GM that had nothing to do with intelligence, leadership or vision.

                  1. Spider-Dan says:

                    Ford Ranger EV
                    Ford Th!nk City
                    Toyota RAV4EV

                    All of these vehicles were cancelled at the same time as the EV1. Neither Ford nor Toyota thought BEVs were a profitable market.

                    Again: if these large car companies (Toyota and GM being among the largest) have always wanted to promote gas-guzzling polluters, why did Toyota make the Prius in the first place?

                    1. Bill Howland says:

                      People always say it was Tesla that got GM off the dime (true that Bob Lutz always mentioned them), but I think it was really Toyota’s fear of losing market share to what turned out to be an imaginary GM product that got the auto industry off the dime.

                      The Prius was too big to ignore, even now…..Plus CAFE standards – the most “VOLT” tech will be used in the Malibu.

                      The good news is it looks like it is here for good. Provided they don’t hire any more DeNyschens.

                    2. Spider-Dan says:

                      The part that everyone seems to miss about Bob Lutz and Tesla is that he originally wanted to make a car to compete with the Roadster; this car would have been a ~six-figure BEV Corvette sibling. One of his lieutenants convinced him that the real threat was not the Roadster, but the Prius, and they needed to make a car to fight Toyota, not Tesla.

                      That’s why the Volt exists. The Volt is clearly NOT intended to compete with a Roadster or even a Model S; it’s intended to beat the Prius in its own market.

            2. Benjamin says:

              Yep, GM really missed the boat on that. Sure the EV1 was a low-volume EV with bad range, but it was fun to drive and it’s owners loved it. Then the EV1 Gen2 came out, with NiMH batteries, and made for respectable range on par with most current electric cars. The Gen2 included multiple other improvements in the car. Then they and their auto and oil friends got CARB to reverse their mandates, gasoline got cheap as heck, and GM decides to flush a $billion and a half of development, and the clear global lead in electric car production, right down the toilet and instead spent another $billion on Hummer brand. Next step bankruptcy!

              Evolutionary improvement of the EV1 including making it a four-door, a station wagon, a CUV, and maybe adding a range extender, while avoiding the asinine Hummer brand … GM could have beat everyone to the punch.

            3. Nathanael says:

              “It would make an interesting “movie” as alternate reality if GM actually went ahead with EV1 expansion. Would Tesla exist today?”

              Definitely not. I saw an speech by Elon Musk. He was very clear about this. He did not consider financing Tesla until *after* GM and Toyota recalled and crushed the EV1 and RAV4-EV. He figured the big car companies had the process of switching to electric cars well in hand and would take care of it… until the recalls and the crushings.

              It was after the crushings that Musk decided that he had to make electric cars happen himself.

              *Very* smart — he knew he wouldn’t have any competition from the big car companies.

              1. SparkEV says:

                You’re assuming Elon Musk is Tesla, but that’s may not be the case. We’ll see if guys like Faraday Futures or even Dyson make EV.

                Then the alternate reality would have GM, etc making mass market EV while Tesla making niche EV like roadster and what not. In effect, they could become “Ferarri” of EV and I suspect there could be others becoming “Bentley” of EV. No such thing in this reality, at least not yet.

          2. Someone out there says:

            “As to the EV1 itself, it was a horribly expensive car to produce”

            which is most likely why they wanted to get rid of the CARB mandate. They realized that it wasn’t possible to make a profit with this car. If it had been they would have supported the mandate as the EV1 would have given them advantage over the competition. It turned out not to be.

    2. Rob Stark says:

      GM has a track record of going bankrupt,erasing all shareholder value and losing 2/3 of their market share from their All Time High to the Japanese and the Germans(at the premium end.)

      Then there is killing the EV1 after they gutted California’s ZEV mandate in the 90’s.

      I wish GM fanbois would just keep their opinions to GM fanboi websites.

      1. Taser54 says:

        This is a post about the Bolt on an EV- not Tesla- site.

        I wish Tesla fans could be happy for other EVs.

        1. Anon says:

          We are happy when someone makes an EV that does not suck. Unfortunately, that does not happen in real life very often, despite press releases from many companies to the contrary…

          1. ffbj says:

            A pretty good meme for an ad. Our EV does not suck, except for electricity.

          2. Bill Howland says:

            Bolt ev sucks? This sounds like the “NERD WARS” from 30 years ago.

            “My Modem is bigger than your Modem”.

            Percentage wise in most of the country their are so few EVs of any type that you would think there would be pleasure at seeing another model – especially the Bolt since it is mid-sized and good enough for many families.

      2. theflew says:

        If by track record you mean approximately every 100 years, then yes they have a bad history of bankruptcies.

    3. Bacardi says:

      I hear North Korea is a great place to live if you don’t like hearing others opinions…

      1. Anon says:

        TRUE.

      2. ffbj says:

        Or eat on a regular basis. Or not have the beloved leader sick killer dogs on you, or blow you apart with an antiaircraft gun from close range. Not a big fan.

        1. Spider-Dan says:

          All things considered, being disintegrated by an anti-aircraft gun is not a bad way to go. I’d think it’s certainly less “painful” than, say, a handgun.

          1. ffbj says:

            Depending on the culture. In some cultures being blown apart or beheaded means you can’t enter heaven, being without a whole body. So it’s also a spiritual execution.

            Similar to what the British, French, and others did when strapping someone across the mouth of a cannon, loaded with grapeshot, or just powder and setting it off.

            I would quick I grant you.

    4. Texas FFE says:

      It looks like I hit a nerve, good! Tesla is not the greatest thing since sliced bread. The Tesla fans boys need to realize that a lot of people don’t like Tesla and that has a lot to do with the posturing of the religious zealots that condemn anything non-Tesla.

      1. Anon says:

        Technology zealots would be more accurate. There really isn’t a better BEV on the planet that’s mass produced, than a Tesla.

        1. Kdawg says:

          The BEVs that Tesla makes are way too expensive for what you get. If I was forced to buy a BEV today, I’d buy a Spark EV, or maybe the 30kWh Leaf.

      2. rs_rwc says:

        I agree with you Texas FFE. Tesla people are very tiresome, as is Mr. Musk. S3X, SpacEX, shows you his mentality – there is little chance Tesla will ever build a product with families/women in mind with Mr. Musk in day-to-day control. Model X – the first time my wife saw one she said “it has a fat butt and the stupid doors won’t open in our garage with the camping gear we got tied to the rafters”. On the Model 3, you can’t put an infant rear facing in the back seat because it will be blinded/sunburned by the pointless glass roof. If you look at the pictures of the people lined up at the Tesla dealers for the Model 3 they are overwhelmingly men. Teslas are boy toys designed by men and mostly purchased by men. The Bolt is for a broader demographic (unlike that of many readers of this website who camp out to tie up $1000 on a product they have never seen – get a life) and it will sell very well. I am happy that Tesla is driving the industry forward in many ways, but zealots are always annoying, be it technical, political, religious or Tesla.

        1. TomArt says:

          In terms of physical appearance, the Model X looks just like all the current luxury CUVs.

          In terms of daily practicality, the Falcon doors would be awesome for effective egress, which is explicitly why those doors were designed. They made a design choice between roof use and getting in and out of the car – you get in and out of the car far more often than you use the roof.

          I don’t like the fact that the 2nd row seats don’t fold flat or are otherwise removable. It would have to compromise the useful cargo space. I would be interested to know what advantage(s) they thought they were trading that for.

          Also bear in mind that there are tinting options – slowly going bald as I am, I do not relish any glass in the roof of a car – thermally inefficient and a sunburn risk. However, I’ll be getting as much of the roof solid as I can, and tint the hell out of the rest of the glass roof.

        2. TomArt says:

          I cannot answer to what demographic Tesla was hoping to reach, but most car buyers in the US are men, so your observations are neither surprising nor is Tesla responsible.

        3. rs_rwc says “there is little chance Tesla will ever build a product with families/women in mind with Mr. Musk in day-to-day control.”, funny, because many earlier comments complained the Model X was made targeted to Women, Baby Car Seats, etc!

          Also, by Families, are you suggesting Tesla build a $20,000 Station Wagon EV with 500 miles range per charge? If so, then have patience, grasshopper, he will likely build a CUV, a new Roadster, and a Truck, first! He might even build his Electric Airplane before you get that price/performance combo!

          1. Bill Howland says:

            Robert:

            No argument there… We’ll see an all-electric Jumbo-Jetliner before we see a $20,000 family sized 500 mile Tesla.

            Couldn’t agree with you more.

      3. LOL says:

        Absolutely agree with you Texas

      4. Bill Howland says:

        Tiresome. Exactly. There aren’t that many “S”‘s around here – my area is too poor to afford them, so every time I see a Ford Fusion I mistake it for an “S” until I see the back end of the car.

        The 2 cars look very much alike, and one is much more affordable.

        The one that gets me here is the complaint that the BOLT won’t charge at a 150 kw rate.

        Since the S and X top out at 120 kw, and much less if the adjoining stall is also being used, I guess they must be thinking about some other imaginary tooth fairy car that charges at ‘at least 150 kw’.

        1. Lou says:

          Bill: I am with you on this. Most of us are never going to be particularly affected by charging speeds as alleged here. Yes, faster is better, and I can understand people wanting the faster charging to be integrated into the car, so that “..in the future…” drivers will be able to charge even faster than what we have today. But how many people need to SC every day? I am probably a typical driver, I drive on average 40-50 miles per day (at most), take 1 trip(if that)per year in excess of 300 miles round trip and make maybe 5-6 trips of around 100 miles round trip. My desperate need for faster SC or QC charging is minimal. Just being able to get to a QC or SC location is the most important factor for me if I am driving a 200 mile BEV. if I takes 60 minutes to full or 75 minutes is not a make or break situation with me. Down the line, yes, we will see much faster charging, but it’s a solution without a problem right now.

    5. WD says:

      You know Texas FFE, just coz’ people disagree with you, it doesn’t make them a fanboy.

      Why don’t you get over yourself and realize Tesla is more popular because they make better looking cars, they’re taking EVs ten times as seriously – Look at them, a fraction of the net worth, and they’re investing almost all their profits into R&D to make EVs better. And superchargers.

      How old are you, 10? People stopped calling people who had a different opinion ‘fanboy’ back in secondary school. Grow. Up.

      1. Rick Danger says:

        TexasFFE started whining about Tesla making their own supercharger network and he’s been whining ever since.
        Elon Musk stepped up to the plate, when TexasFFE’s precious Ford and GM had successfully (they thought) buried those silly battery cars 6 feet under.
        If not for Musk and Tesla, there wouldn’t *be* an FFE or a Volt or a Bolt. TexasFFE, too bad you can’t see past your own nose and see the facts for what they are, but please go whine outside.
        BTW, Musk just landed a rocket booster back on earth to be reused for the first time ever. NASA didn’t do it, nor China nor Russia nor Japan. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!
        You must have serious problems, to not get the significance of what Musk is accomplishing.
        Thanks for your post WD, +1000!

    6. Fool Cells says:

      GM sure can build lots of Volts, but for some reason they are not. I got my Volt over a month ago and my dealer has gotten _ZERO_ new Volts from GM since. And mine was the only one they got.

    7. Clive says:

      Mad words of a Texan. Mad because you casnot even buy a Tesla in your broken southern state. To bad for you. Chevy is a joke and so is your stupid comment.

    8. Priusmaniac says:

      Fanboy, religion, … what about simply an excellent EV from a dedicated company versus a must do from a foot dragging EV1 crusher company. GM is got a prisoner ball at its feet called history that is just impossible to ignore.

  7. Bacardi says:

    Yeah, unless they get more than preorders than Tesla, which they wouldn’t, it would be a fail…

    Take commercial fleet sales and GM’s own Maven and Lyft orders off the table and I’d imagine you’d have no more than 20K private ownership preorders IF gas prices remain low…$5/gal gas obviously would change that…

    1. theflew says:

      But you can’t take Maven and Lyft out of the picture. In the end for EV’s to be a success they have to move out of the upper middle class market. The average new car price is ~$33k, but the median price is closer to ~$20k. For a lot of people Maven, Lyft, Uber will be the only way they experience these cars.

      1. TomArt says:

        Exactly.

      2. theflew, I am aware of places starting Tesla Taxi services, but has anyone thought of getting ANY EV’s into Driving Schools that work with High Schools? The Smart ED, Mitsubishi iMiEV, would be good starters, and this Bolt could expand on that, as well as the Spark EV!

        I am still surprised there is so little market effort to bring Electric School Buses to market! First, who likes how dirty and smelly such buses are? Second, there are definitely powerful enough motors to put in them today, and lots of room under the floor for battery packs that deliver anything from 50 miles to 250 mikes range in the bus!

        Imagine just the Tesla 90D drive train, adapted to the bus suspension – that would make a nice ride! As to other things, such a movement could Lower bus height, AND put more mass lower, making them more stable! Most big School Buses could put double the 90 kWh the Tesla has, underneath – giving a 180+ kWh pack, and a very good range!

        I thought GM made Buses, so why have they not grasped this market? Buses mostly have fixed routes, so easy to plan a charging program for them!

        Plus, whoever starts making such buses in volumes big enough to satisfy whole School Districts, gets kids on the path to EV’s in their future!

  8. I got on several dealer waiting lists for the Honda Fit EV. Never got a single email or call back.

    There’s an opportunity for GM to do a better job with the Bolt. It will be interesting to see if they make process improvements or simply maintain the status quo, which from most posts I see, does not appear to be too popular.

    1. ffbj says:

      I had a similar experience with the Volt. I was told by two different dealers that I did not want to buy that car. I was confused, WTF, I said to myself and left, never to return.

      GM’s wonderful dealership network? Well I can’t say that there aren’t some decent GM dealerships, but in my experience they are ill informed, rude, high pressure, jerks.

      Still when the Bolt comes out I will check it out, maybe things have changed, but I doubt it.

      On an aside. I find it amusing that the one feature that I think many would prefer over the Model III, a hatchback, is shown in the above photo.

      1. Larry says:

        I inquired at three dealers about the Volt. Only one ever followed up, but they opened by saying they thought I was interested in a Spark (only ICE’s are sold in my state). I made an appointment to drive a Volt Monday, but there is no sign of a Volt in their inventory.

      2. TomArt says:

        I’m certain that the pic was chosen on purpose.

        Although it may be true that US markets are about 50/50 for preferring sedans vs. CUVs, they could have gone with the CUV first, if this is the best they could do with rear headroom – make that portion of the roof with no frame so that we can’t make a hatch. All for a hundredth or two of Cd…not a reasonable tradeoff IMHO.

        I also noticed that many sedans have terrible trunks – some have a decent amount of room, but the openings are comically small. It may very well be possible that the trunk opening on the Model ☰ might be slightly above the industry average for US cars. But still, they could have made it better – that’s what they claim – it’s the best car, and the Model S was made to be useful with that rear hatch…but not the Model ☰…

  9. Ian says:

    Last century’s business model. Stock pile large amounts of vehicles and hope you sell them. Fiat Chrysler is laying people off right now because they have too many cars stockpiled on lots. Taking orders makes sense. Then you ship cars where customers want them.

    1. Anon says:

      Yup. And because Tesla understands providing an ecosystem for their product is important too, it tells them where they need more service, sales and SuperCharging Facilities.

      It’s a win-win-win. 🙂

    2. theflew says:

      Most people don’t want to order a car and wait weeks/months for it to be delivered. Given statistics a manufacture could determine the options people are most likely going to add as well as color. There is no way Tesla is going to build 300k vehicles without an inventory. To get the efficiencies in manufacturing you need to build batches of almost identical cars.

      1. Anon says:

        Most people in Europe are highly familiar with custom ordering their cars. The US isn’t the only place people buy vehicles…

      2. > To get the efficiencies in manufacturing you need to build batches of almost identical cars

        That is not true in the era of the flexible work station.
        (It is still true for the paint booth)

        Have you seen Tesla’s factory?

      3. Will Davis says:

        Well that’s kind of what Tesla already does. Why else do you think they manufacture the initial rush based on option and trim levels first? Not only to reward people who spend more; also for the very reason you stated: Efficiency.

  10. Bill Howland says:

    The thing I like about the dealer franchise model, is that it is much easier to get the car fixed when inevitable problems result.

    It is possibly different in my case since I am hundreds of miles from a service center, even at this relatively late date.

    Another advantage is I can negotiate pricing, as opposed to Tesla’s to date ‘take it or leave it’ offering.

    And of course, another advantage is I can actually look at the car prior to purchase.

    Others who have had bad experiences with dealerships – I’d include myself in that group several times in fact – may view things differently.

    Now me, I’d want to see how a car performs before fully comiting to it. Perhaps that also applies to ‘3’ depositors since they figure they can always get their $1000 back.

    1. Foo says:

      Who says another business model (than the dealership model) couldn’t make it even easier to get your car fixed?

      Why is negotiation necessary if the price is fixed? If I know that nobody else is getting a better price than me, then I would be far less concerned about “negotiating a good price”.

      And who says another business model can’t allow you test out the car before you buy?

      1. Bill Howland says:

        Who says? I do , since I’ve been through it.

        I’m more than willing to do ‘direct sales’ again with some other person’s money other than my own.

        In NY State, I had to purchase my Tesla Roadster through a Manhattan dealer (whom I never heard of – Yes, in 2011 Tesla did have a DEALER in NY State since that was the state law.)

        It was the typical experience. The salesman falls in love with you and calls you all the time – until the check clears – then you can’t ever talk to him period no matter what you do, other than drive 400 miles to NYC.

        I’d rather do that locally. More competition amoung the 3 piece suits.

        I found a dealer locally with my ELR where I can actually talk to them – and another Cadilac dealer’s salesman also told me that I would be treated well at a dealer at an adjoining town, – which didn’t go so well, but not due to anyone’s fault.

        The reason for these 2 postings is that it is constantly said here the people MUST get a bad deal at a dealership. This ignores the reality I went through.

        My best car buying experience so far has been the day I traded my Roadster for a new Cadillac ELR. And all the sales people still talk to me and ‘level’ with me. I enjoy that. Even when I violate their policy in their service shop (by insisting at looking at the car), the Service Manager (one of the family of this privately owned dealership group) is careful to say that I will certainly be allowed to look at, and have access to my car at anytime during service.

        I like intelligent bending of the rules in the customer’s favor.

        Incidentally, my Salesman gave me pricing info I’m normally not supposed to have access to; I like that also.

        1. Someone out there says:

          You make good points. I just don’t see why there needs to be a law to _ban_ direct sales. It dealers really are preferable then they would have nothing to fear. In fact, if the law wasn’t there they would have to step it up to compete.

          1. Larry says:

            You must be nuts! That sounds like “free enterprise” – a subversive concept if ever there was one!

          2. Fool Cells says:

            because stealerships are so good, they need a law to protect their business from competition. Don’t you understand?

        2. Nemo says:

          “Incidentally, my Salesman gave me pricing info I’m normally not supposed to have access to; I like that also.”

          Well, that’s what he told you. Mine told me that, too. I’m pretty sure it’s what they tell everybody.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            You might have a point if you got more than the $27,000 off list price as I did.

            They also gave me $14,000 more for my Roadster than the next nearest offer.

            So before you belittle this salesman, the next best deal I could get was $21,000 more cash. Including $7,000 more for essentially a similiar car.

            I’m satisfied with my savings, but then I guess you’re just impossible to please.

            The dealership has expenses also. And no coercion was involved, other than possibly me putting ‘verbal pressure’ on them to give me a better deal, which ultimately, they did.

            Now do I always make ‘fantastic deals’?

            No. In fact at another dealership – where I thought my 2011 volt would be covered under a voltec warranty – I had to pay $1835 to get a radiator changed out – they had the car apart before I realized its not a warranty item. So I got screwed but I can’t blame the dealer – other than I think they unnecessarily also changed out the condenser and charged me for that and the related AC work.

            In this case I blame the arrogant engineering of the Volt – saying there was a problem with the charging system when there wasn’t. I’m not shy about criticizing GM when it is warranted.

            But, I did get a $604 charging cord for free (when I really shouldn’t have, since it is the one VOLTEC part that isn’t covered under warranty – the dealer will have to end up reimbursing GM for something they gave me for free) – this makes me feel better about the $1835 I did spend with them – narrows it down to $1231 which is more like it.

            1. Lou says:

              Bill: I too had a replacement Voltec charging cable replaced for free, ostensibly under warranty. I have an extended warranty and maybe that was the difference, but I still got it. However, if not covered under warranty, I would have bought a 110/220 combo unit from Clipper Creek. These things are so overpriced.

  11. Rick says:

    There you go, more gm insecurity. I bet they regret rushing that product now that it looks so lame compared to the Model 3… More of the same gm, that uninspired me too wanna be mentality. But hey, at least they’re selling the right technology this time.

  12. Rick Danger says:

    “…we’ll work through our great network of dealerships to get them to customers.” – Fred Ligouri, GM spokesman.

    “Humor! I love it!” Lt Cmdr Data, Starfleet

    1. Dr. ValueSeeker says:

      When will the Model 3 prototype be ready? What was shown on Mar 31st is obviously some real ugly half car, with no face, no trunk, no roof and no dash. When will Tesla complete the prototype design with help of the suggestions sent to Elon via tweets?

      1. Get Real says:

        Dr.FudSpreader said the Model 3 is “ugly’, LOL!

        So that explains why 325,000 people put in pre-orders with $1,000 deposits to wait for 2 years?

        Right…FudSpreader, dream on and go back to Seeking Liars so you can hang out with Mark Speigel and the other leeches that are obviously getting pretty desperate that their lies aren’t working.

        1. Dr. ValueSeeker says:

          My friend, your REAL ugly nature is spilling out 🙁 I asked a simple question. If Elon is still seeking design help on twitter, when will the prototype design be finalized?

          Those reservations are not very reliable. People who reserved one without seeing the car are like on a blind date. It’s exciting, but often doesn’t lead to a more permanent relationship.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            Well, the ‘3’ seems to me as though it is very similar to the actual product that will be delivered in 1 3/4 years.

            If they seriously stick to the $35K price tag, it seems like a great deal.

            For that money, you get a reasonably good looking car: ‘ a Little Tesla ‘, so to speak.

            For such a low cost, you don’t get everything: the grille or lack of it may not be pleasing to some people, the prius’ like lack of instrument panel may turn off some, and just a tiny trunk, but you DO get a perfectly fine 200 mile EV, with more than adequate power.

            Most people will find the ‘3’s pickup more than adequate. We’re not all race car drivers.

          2. Get Real says:

            No FudSpreader, you didn’t simply “ask a question.

            You wrote: “What was shown on Mar 31st is obviously some real ugly half car, with no face, no trunk, no roof and no dash.”

            That is your opinion and it doesn’t appear to be shared by the 325,000 plus people who put in $1000 apiece to reserve an M3 which does have a face, trunk, roof, and dash, but maybe you are too blinded with fear and loathing to see this?

            As Bill (who is not a big fan of Tesla BTW) points out, the M3at $35,000 will be an incredible value so you may want to recalibrate your moniker and opinions somewhat.

          3. Dr. ValueSeeker says “When will the Model 3 prototype be ready?” I am confused! Who buys prototypes?

            The question you likely meant, was – “When will they reveal the final design?” Or, “When will they start delivering the Model 3?”

            Reveal part 2, will likely show a finalized design, or Tesla also will have a Roll out day, like for the Model X, and I would say they originally planned for that to happen in October or November, 2017, but they are now accelerating plans, and will push for sooner, so sales/delivery may be as early as July, 2017, or as late as September, 2017 – just 2 years after the Model X roll out!

          4. Dr. ValueSeeker says “People who reserved one without seeing the car are like on a blind date. It’s exciting, but often doesn’t lead to a more permanent relationship.” So, you do know that ‘only’ 115,000 reserved a spot in line to buy this car, sight unseen, but now over 210,000 who have seen it have also reserved at least one for themselves as well? Funny you missed that in your “blind date” reference!

            Can you tell me the difference between now and 3,600+ Superchargers plus some 3,800+ Destination Chargers, and by the time the Model 3 comes out for delivery, and the target of 7,000 Superchargers AND 14,000 Destination Chargers?

            Preparation! That’s what! GM is doing Nothing like that, to prepare the marketplace to move to EV’s in general, and the Bolt in particular! Nothing! (And, they actually committed to doing Nothing, when they keep saying that “They are not in the Infrastructure Business!”)

        2. Mark says:

          About half those people put down deposits on the car without seeing it.

          It’s still an impressive number, but it has more to do with fanaticism than producing a quality product.

          The car is borderline unattractive.

    2. ffbj says:

      That hit me in the face like the hot kiss at the end of a wet fist, too.

      1. Rick Danger says:

        I see what you did there 😀

  13. floydboy says:

    GM’s best bet, since it’s not allowed to do preorder sales itself anyway, is to simply put the car out there as quickly as possible to the dealers to gauge interest. As some dealers are disinclined to sell electrics.

    Once butts are in seats, even if they’re lessees awaiting Model 3, GM (if they’re serious about BEVs) can use first-mover advantage to try and win over those people.

    1. floydboy says:

      Oops, ‘leasees’

  14. evnow says:

    For anyone thinking GM can’t take bookings because of franchisee laws – remember Nissan did it for Leaf.

    1. Ian says:

      I put a deposit In late 2013 on a 2014 LEAF when Nissan was pushing 2014 LEAF deliveries from late October to November to December. It eventually delivered in February 2014. I ordered it, they built it and I got the car I wanted. Kind of sounds like how Tesla does it and I did it with a franchised dealer.

      (Franchise laws are good because dealers can negotiate price?) That means they are screwing half their customers who can’t negotiate. What car dealers really do is negotiate the monthly payment over longer times. Taking orders for the Bolt EV make sense. Free instant advertising as thousands of owners hit the road at the same time, and it gauges sales demand for each area.

      1. Taser54 says:

        By your reasoning, Tesla screws everyone because it does not negotiate.

        sheesh, you guys never think this price thing through.

    2. theflew says:

      Once ordering is available for the Bolt you can walk into a Chevy dealership and order a Bolt with the options and color you want. The order becomes part of the dealers allocation. You order from the dealer and the dealer orders from GM.

  15. MDEV says:

    GM has a great plan to compete with Tesla, they are investing millions in lobbying Politicians to stop Tesla sales.

    1. Mister G says:

      That’s right, they want only Republicans to control government.

  16. Three Electrics says:

    Do dealership agreements even allow GM to offer preorders? I would expect all orders to originate from dealers, which makes it hard to organize a coherent national strategy. “Preorder with your dealer” is a joke when most dealers can’t even operate their websites correctly. Half the dealers would abuse such a program for lead generation. A call from a salesman is the last thing I want.

    1. EVA-01 says:

      You’re absolutely correct. The dealership contracts prohibit General Motors from doing business with consumers. It would most definitely have been a half assed dealer deposit system.

      I really hope, very soon in fact, automakers fight for the right of direct sales. This isn’t even about buying specifically an EV a different way. Even the regular cars like a Chevy Cruze. I don’t want to deal will a 3rd party that makes money off of my transaction! If I want to buy a car from Chevrolet, I want to buy it either from their website or a Chevrolet store.

  17. Texas FFE says:

    When I bought my Ford Fusion Energi, first I selected the options I wanted then I searched with the dealer to find a Fusion with those options. The car had to be transported several hundred miles but it was a beautiful car. I haggled on my trade in but knew the cost of vehicle plus the dealer incentives up front.

    The point is I felt in control. I didn’t have to put money down and wait for the car to be built. I bought the car I wanted when I wanted to buy it.

    I don’t know what my life is going to be like three years from now or even one year from now. I find the idea of giving someone $1000 for a car I won’t see for three years revolting. I have better things to do with my money than give an interest free to someone for three years.

    I understand that the people that did pay the money felt like they’re part of something important. The preorder definitely made history but I don’t think the Model 3 is all that important, not with the Bolt becoming available at least a full year before the Model 3 does. I can find nothing about the Model 3 that’s compelling enough to make me want to buy it over the Bolt and there some features, like the fifth door, that I prefer on the Bolt.

    It’s not about brand, it’s about technology. I currently drive Fords and I love my Fords but Ford currently makes nothing like the Bolt. The Bolt has the combination of EV technology that is most appealing to me.

    1. cmina says:

      ” I find the idea of giving someone $1000 for a car I won’t see for three years revolting.”
      .. and that would mean something if someone held a gun to your head and forced you to do it.

      “I understand that the people that did pay the money felt like they’re part of something important.”
      ermm .. no. There are indeed reasonS for paying up (one of them being ownership of a really nice EV, sometime into the future) but you are delusional if you think the main reason was “to be part or something important”.

      “I can find nothing about the Model 3 that’s compelling enough to make me want to buy it over the Bolt and there some features, like the fifth door, that I prefer on the Bolt.”
      Good! So stop complaining about an unfinished product from Tesla and go for the Bolt when it’ll be available.

      “It’s not about brand, it’s about technology.”
      .. ok .. consider me trolled ..

  18. EVA-01 says:

    I don’t consider the deposits for the Model 3 as preorders at all. A preorder a buying something a head of time before the release.

    The deposit is more so paying for a “place in line” sort of speak. Whoever reserved the Model 3 the earliest will get to trully order it then.

    This system is more so like paying a fee to wait in a line for an amusement park because it was very hyped up. After waiting, you pay for the ride when it’s finally your turn on line.

    1. Spider-Dan says:

      …except that in this case, if you were the 10th “person in line” but you only want to buy a $37,000-optioned Model III instead of a $50,000-optioned Model III, you get to stay “in line” while all the people who want to buy more expensive Model IIIs (but reserved their place after you) cut in front of you.

      1. ffbj says:

        Right. Or you already own a Model S or X, (Roadster)? and then you go to front of the line regardless of the cost configuration.
        Also West Coast is first. 25% of pre-orders were from current owners of Tesla’s.

        At least that is my understanding.

      2. EVA-01 says:

        I’m assuming Tesla does this because they make more money off of options. This isn’t a trade secret really, all manufacturers make more money off of packages and options. Same thing like dealer add-on.

        1. Spider-Dan says:

          Yes, it’s obvious that Tesla makes more money off of higher-optioned cars, just like every other automaker.

          But nobody seems to mention the fact that of these 300k+ reservations for this “$35,000” car, no one will be able to actually buy one for $35,000 until everyone who wants one for $50,000 has theirs delivered. This is not quite the vision of “EVs for the masses” that most expect.

          Say what you want about Nissan and GM, but at least they aren’t prioritizing the richest buyers in their delivery order.

  19. James says:

    “Great network of dealers” LOL LOL LOL.

    What a joke. I just dealt with one of those stellar dealerships today. It took us three and a half hours to purchase a used Volt today at one of those great dealers. And they wanted $1000 dealer prep, $450 for lifetime window tint and $150 for nitrogen. That will be my last visit ever to buy a Chevrolet product, and hopefully the last time I step into any kind of dealer.

    1. Taser54 says:

      Tesla wants you to wait 2 plus years for a model 3. Seems a bit more than 3 hours.

      1. Will Davis says:

        There’s more to life than rushing around, and some people are prepared to wait a year or two for a product they prefer. So what?

        1. Spider-Dan says:

          If “there’s more to life than rushing” and waiting 2+ years isn’t a big deal, then waiting 3 hours must be an infinitesimally small deal. Q.E.D.

  20. Peter says:

    Based on the articlle picture I can see the rear seats in the Bolt can’t be laid down flat, but only at a 30 degree angle or so. That’s a bit disappointing.
    Anyone know if this is the case with Model 3 too?

    1. Clive says:

      Model 3 rear seats fold completely flat. Not a problem.

    2. Jacked Beanstalk says:

      Agreed, the rear seats should fold flat and it could use about an extra foot of cargo space in the rear. It’s still an impressive car but there is room for improvement.

  21. Benjamin says:

    The Bolt looks like a sweet little ride. Probably a bit pricey at $29,500 after tax credit, for a sub-compact, but still a compelling green car.

    Once the Model 3 comes out GM will definitely have to drop the price to compete, probably all the way to base retail price of $29,500 or thereabouts.

  22. Spider-Dan says:

    By the time you can actually purchase a Model III for $35,000 (and not a Benefactor’s Insignia Ridiculous version for $50,000), Bolt will likely be on generation 2.

    1. Paul Stoller says:

      Or at least it’s mid-cycle refresh. And if the demand is there I can imagine a second EV model could be produced by GM by the time the Model 3 is available in volume at the 35K price point.

  23. Brent says:

    A friend of mine tried to pre-order a Bolt, he had a very hard time getting any dealer to do anything (he tried a few), eventually they put him on a list, but he said he didn’t have high confidence that it meant anything.