GM’s Future Rides On The Chevrolet Bolt

Chevrolet Bolt (orange, blue, and black)


Chevrolet Bolt

The Chevrolet Bolt is just the beginning of GM’s long line of electric vehicles.

General Motors has pledged to bring at least 20 new electric models to market, and the Chevrolet Bolt has paved the way.

When GM CEO Mary Barra first introduced the Bolt, she talked about it being a platform for the future in more ways than one. At that time, no one knew if it would be successful or if her words were just fluff. However, now it’s clear that GM has a plan, which would live on through the Bolt. Barra said at CES 2016 (via Automotive News):

Chevrolet Bolt

GM’s Self-Driving Chevy Bolt (Photo by Steve Fecht for General Motors)

“We see the Bolt EV as more than just a car. It is an upgradeable platform for new technologies … everything from car-sharing apps to new ownership models and, one day, self-driving cars.”

Not long after the Bolt made its debut, it wasn’t selling all that briskly, and many news stories still seemed to point to GM continuing down a road filled with ICE vehicles. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, the automaker was spreading news of its electric future.

GM’s new vice president of global EV programs (a brand new position created mainly due to the Chevrolet Bolt), Pam Fletcher, shared:

“It’s [Bolt] helped us to see what is possible from full battery electric vehicles.”

GM has been hesitant to adapt in the past. But, the Bolt seems to have changed that. The Bolt just arrived this January, and the automaker is willing to plan its future around it. GM has its second-gen EV platform, battery pack, and propulsion systems already developed. Automotive News writes:

“Simply put, the Bolt EV is the symbol of General Motors’ future. It is the start of a new journey for the 110-year-old automaker, which plans to launch at least 20 new all-electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles globally by 2023 as part of a two-pronged approach to a zero-emissions, autonomous future.

The company hasn’t put a timeline on when it will exclusively offer zero-emissions vehicles. But its bets on technology appear to have finally put it in Wall Street’s good graces. Following years of stagnant shares and doubts that GM could keep pace with Silicon Valley disruptors such as Tesla Inc., the stock has gained roughly 30 percent in 2017.”

An InsideEVs reader (who wishes to stay anonymous) was at a focus group this Summer, and confidently states THIS is GM’s next all-electric vehicle – a Bolt EV based, compact utility offering to debut under the Buick badge

The automaker has started to make major changes in order to secure the future, while still being able to live in the present and maintain sound financial decisions. Currently, most OEMs are facing the same struggle. It’s difficult to bank on costly future technologies in hopes that it will pay off. GM has already dropped unsuccessful operations in Europe and India to begin trimming the fat. GM President, Dan Ammann, said in an interview with Bloomberg TV (via Automotive News):

“All of our focus right now is on moving as fast as we can to get to commercial deployment of this technology in the safest way possible. We believe the best way to do that is having all the capability under one roof.”

Added to all of this, GM has acquired Cruise Automation and is already deploying third-generation self-driving Bolt fleets for testing. The automaker has its own mobility brand, Maven, which leases Chevrolet Bolts to use for ride-sharing. To further the cause, GM has invested $500 million in Lyft to serve as its ride-sharing partner.

The Bolt has brought a significant amount to the table for GM in a very short time.

Source: Automotive News

Category: Chevrolet

Tags: , , ,

196 responses to "GM’s Future Rides On The Chevrolet Bolt"
  1. Ian says:

    You can’t find a bolt in Ontario and dealers say they can’t get them.

    1. Kdawg says:

      Maybe w/the Gen 2 design, the are going to go more gangbusters on qty’s built?

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Where are they going to get the batteries? Regardless of whether or not GM actually wants to build BEVs in large numbers, it’s not going to be able to do so until it takes control of its own battery cell supply.

        We don’t need any crystal ball here: GM will signal very clearly when it’s about to get serious about building and selling long-range EVs in large numbers when they move to partner with a battery maker and build large-scale battery cell factories whose output is controlled by GM.

        Unless and until that happens, all GM’s talk about putting large numbers of EVs into production is nothing but meaningless noise.

        1. F150 Brian says:

          Did you miss the news that LG Chem is building a factory in Michigan?

          1. Tom says:

            Set to open for business late 2018. That will improve margins and supply. Until then GM seems to have taken its executives by surprise. ‘Hey this thing is really good.’ Their engineers outperformed and at least it finally caught the execs’ attention and they are correcting course. GM’s engineers should be proud off their product.

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            No, didn’t miss that.

            Did you miss the report that Volkswagen has put in a future order for LG Chem battery cells which utterly dwarfs what GM is ordering?

            Also, did you miss that LG Chem’s list of customers is growing much faster than the surprisingly slow rate at which they’re building out new capacity?

            LG Chem’s timidity in increasing its battery supply, year-on-year, is something I find surprising, if not appalling.

            1. Asak says:

              The Chinese are building out battery capacity too, and they’ll probably undercut everyone on cost with their lack of any sort of environmental controls. LG is probably afraid of building out too much capacity only to have the Chinese cut the legs out from under them.

            2. Spider-Dan says:

              Excluding Tesla (who may have other issues preventing the Model 3 from being produced on schedule), the only company I know of that had been production constrained by batteries is Mitsubishi. Mitsubishi is a joint-owner of their battery supplier.

              There has been far too much irrational exuberance when it comes to predicting future EV sales. When LG Chem actually fails to meet demand for once, then we can have a reasonable discussion on how their outlook is too pessimistic.

              1. Bryan says:

                Look up titanium dioxide batteries. They have combined these Technologies for now but will move over to full titanium dioxide batteries in the near future

        2. James P Heartney says:

          I agree. Batteries are the key to BEVs, both from the production point of view, as well as from the user’s point of view. The batteries are the hard part; otherwise an EV is just another vehicle with most of the complexity removed from the drive train. If you want to see if a given automaker’s EV plans are just talk, look at their battery strategy.

          If you notice, both the Tesla Semi and gen2 Roadster count on having a ton of batteries in each unit. If you have batteries sourced, you can plan to build no-compromises vehicles that go the distance, can be charged fast, and whose battery capacity is robust over time. Otherwise you’ll be doing city vehicles and making excuses.

        3. DJ says:

          Hey, look folks. The FUDster in Chief is bashing GM. Who woulda thunk!?!?

        4. Marcus says:

          The long string of ‘evidence’ by its critics that GM couldn’t, wouldn’t, ‘didn’t want to’ is now getting fantastically long! And yet it was clear what GM’S pathway was going to be when the Volt was introduced …… with pure electric drive! It’s absolutely udeniable! And each car has been impeccably engineered! No denying that either! Yet still there are pundits who irrationally pronounce that GM can’t do it! AND …. won’t admit they’ve been consistently wrong! Again, undeniable.

          So, what gives? It comes down to the critics brand ideology rather than GM’s technology.

          1. Spider-Dan says:

            “But what about the EV1?!?”

        5. Dav8or says:

          You know, when anybody posts anything negative, or critical of Tesla, the words “Troll”, “FUD”, “Fudster”, “Serial Fudster”, “Shorter”, “Hater”, etc, come up. The same applies here. Are you shorting GM stock to make millions?? If not, why not?

        6. David M Norris says:

          you have obviously never worked in the auto industry. First, I can guarantee that LG Chem has very restrictive long term clauses in its agreement with GM. Secondly, GM developed a lot of the tech that goes into the Bolt and though LG Chem may make it, GM has the rights to it. With the cost of GM labor why would you want to make it? Third, GM is lining up more suppliers. GM is not going to make itself so vulnerable to one company.

    2. F150 Brian says:

      There are 3 of them in our parking lot at work (Ottawa).

      Probably another case of Sh!tty dealers that don’t care so they don’t try to get them.

    3. Justin says:

      They’re still trickling into BC… I see posts from new owners on surprisingly often

    4. Marc says:

      Went to buy one last wknd, local dealer (N. Ontario) told me they were allocated one Bolt per year.

      The 2017 one was sold to a guy down in Toronto… the dealer drove it 500 miles south to T.O. and loved the ride. (Obviously)

      I told them to give me a call when they receive their 2018 model.

      Here’s my suggestion: call remote dealerships. Give them your phone number… chances are, with so few public chargers available up here, no Northeners will touch any allocated Bolt.

  2. Ziv says:

    If the Bolt is to be the future of GM’s electric drive program, why did they make it look so dorky? It looks more like the Sonic
    than anything else. It is a great car, it deserved to look a bit more sporty, not clown car’ish. Utility is a good thing, but it doesn’t need to eliminate every other aspect of car design.

    And putting uncomfortable front seats in it that are a point of contention for half the people that sit in them didn’t help either. Though it probably did save GM at least $2 or $3 per seat. So there is that.

    GM builds great electric cars, both the Gen 1 Volt and the Bolt are outstanding vehicles. But they always seem to be held back by GM’s upper management, one way or another.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Compare it to a Leaf, i3, or (now dead) Prius V. I’ll take the Bolt’s looks any day over those 3.

      1. Ziv says:

        Comparing any car to a Leaf or an i3 guarantees that the former will always better than the latter. I will agree with you that the Bolt looks a lot better than the Leaf and the i3, but the prototype/teaser image of the possible Buick shows what GM could have done that would have been a lot more popular. Yeah, the larger vehicle would have had a slightly shorter AER, but it would have been worth it.
        Hopefully by the time the Buick BEV hits the market the AER will be over 250 miles and the max charge rate at least 100 kW. 150 kW would be much better given the chargers that are going to be showing up in the next 2 years.

      2. Aaron says:

        9000 Leafs sold in the first two months says that others don’t agree.

        Enjoy your Bolt, though.

        1. Ziv says:

          The new Leaf isn’t as ugly as the old Leaf. In fact, the new Leaf is kind of ok when it comes to looks. AER is a problem for this years Leaf, but next year that won’t be as big an issue when the bigger pack arrives.
          Given the small increase in real world price for a Bolt over a Leaf, you have to be pretty set in your ways to choose a Leaf over a Bolt this year.

          1. Aaron says:

            The Leaf being $7500 cheaper MSRP is pretty significant, and with the Leaf you have access to Pro Pilot…where Supercruise is completely absent on the Bolt. Not to mention Nissan will actually make significant amounts of the LEAF.

            At least Nissan supports the Chademo charging network, GM couldn’t be bothered supporting their customers.

            1. Ziv says:

              I think the fact that Nissan sold just 213 Gen I Leafs in the US last year shows that a lot of people are waiting for the Gen II Leaf. Whether GM’s discounting the Bolt $4,000 in most markets will be enough to stem the tide of Leaf sales remains to be seen. The Bolt is quicker with 33% more horsepower and 11% more torque, but neither car is a looker though I have to admit that the new Leaf may earn the “Less Ugly” award in this car show.
              238 miles of real world range is kind of important in a BEV. Nissan loses hugely in the range department.
              CHAdeMO, meh. Fast charging is in its early days.

              1. William says:

                Last year, should read last month,
                Nissan sold more than triple digit Leaf Gen 1 in 2017.

                1. Ziv says:

                  Argh! You are correct. “last MONTH!”

              2. Aaron says:

                When both vehicles are essentially relegated to commuter vehicles, due to the poor charging network for both, then the advantage of range is lost when one has 3x more than required, while the other has 7x more. I would think most would go after the cheaper cost in that instance…but time will tell.

                My opinion may be colored by my midwestern bias.

                1. EVShopper says:

                  The long range can help city dwellers without access to at home charging. So they only have to charge 1/wk at a public DCFC.

                  1. Aaron says:

                    Good luck selling that to the consumer.

                    While it’s doable, it isn’t particularly practical. I don’t know many people that would purchase a Bolt without access to some sort of daily charging, be that home or office.

                    That doesn’t mean no one would consider it, but I am saying they’re aren’t enough to keep keep the lights on at the factory.

                    1. Bryan says:

                      They already have a huge backorder. Where are you getting your information.

            2. William says:

              GM absenteeism on current FastCharge support and implementation, speaks volumes to those of us who have been using the existing infrastructure for the last few years. This is getting really lame here in LA as Sparky can attest to down in OC.

              It’s bad enough when I see my friends in their i3 REx charging up to 98% on Level 3, while fast charging, when I am patiently waiting in the line up.

              1. Spider-Dan says:

                I find it a bizarre idea that what people really want from their EVs is to pay more than gasoline prices to refuel at 1/100th the speed of a gas pump.

                Outside of ultra-expensive luxury cars where you pay for the charging up front, DC fast charging should be like jumper cables or a spare tire: something to be used in rare circumstances, not an everyday occurrence.

          2. Klaus says:

            Clearly some either don’t mind the looks or don’t care as much as you appear to about it given October’s sales numbers for the Bolt.

            Yes, a “sexier” product from GM would be nice for those who place high value on it, but with the plethora of boring ICE hatchbacks, minivans, and sedans on the roads every day, plenty of people are putting the money on less-than-beautiful cars.

            1. Ziv says:

              Klaus, Bolt sales are slowly trending up but they only sold 7520 Bolts over the last 3 months! That is not a lot of cars. The Volt, on the other hand, sold 8643 in 3 months back in 2012! And then inventory tanked and sales dropped but that is a different story. LOL!
              GM sold 23k+ Volts in both 2012 and 2013, had a few slow years than sold 24k Volts in 2016.
              For 2017 it looks like the Bolt will sell 23k and the Volt will sell around 22k. That is not a healthy growth rate for GM.
              The Bolt isn’t taking off, it is leveling off, sales-wise.

              1. Klaus says:

                Bolt sales have nearly doubled from 4 months ago and they are selling at over twice the rate of any other EV mode in the U.S.

                The Volt is a great car for many, but in terms of pure EV’s any sentiment that the Bolt sales are poor (at least in the U.S.) must ignore that no other EV is presently outselling it and be setting expectations no EV has yet to meet.

                Just think what sales could be if GM had properly managed the rollout and marketing of the Bolt.

                1. Ziv says:

                  Bolt sales appear to be plateauing below 3,000 a month. The Volt did better 5 years ago. The Bolt needs a lower MSRP or some secret sauce. I bet it gets neither.

                  1. ModernMarvelFan says:

                    5 years ago, gas cost $4.50/gallon around SF Bay Area and PG&E base rate was $0.12/kWh. Today it is less than $3/gallon and base rate is $0.18/kWh.

                    Also, 5 years ago, almost no competition. Today, tons of competitions with lots of compliance car super cheap discounts.

                    It is known that some programs allow buyers to get a brand new E-Golf or Gen 1 LEAF for less than $10K when all incentives are included. That is hard to beat!!!

                    Bolt sales have been a steady rise since February this year.

                    1. Aaron says:

                      So, the Bolt needs to be more competitively priced?

                      I agree.

              2. David Whitfield says:

                Tried to lease another Volt for the last 3 months, for the same monthly payments as previous Volt (2015 Premiere with all options). Could not even find a LT base model that was less than old Volt. Finally gave up and ended up leasing a BMW i3 Rex 2017, with lease payments less than Volt 2015. Really liked the Volt, but they have to be more competitive with other car makers.

      3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Only a GM fanboy would claim the Bolt EV is better looking than the new Leaf.

        The new look for the Leaf is light-years better than anything that looks like a Prius clone, and that includes the Bolt EV… altho the S. Korean designers who designed the Bolt EV certainly managed to uglify the Prius shape quite a bit!

        2018 Nissan Leaf

        1. William says:

          Beauty is in the eye of the “Bolt Holder”

          Gen 2 Leaf still “Leafs” much to be desired, in comparison to the Tesla Model 3, for those design savvy individuals.

          1. bro1999 says:


            I give you internet props.

            Beauty is NOT in the eye of the beholder comparing a Gen 1 Leaf and a Bolt. That Leaf is freaking UGLY as sin.

            1. says:

              You are full of bs, Bro. You probably meant Bolt was better looking than Leaf 1. Compared to Bolt the Leaf 2 looks like a superstar. You need your eyes checked if you don’t see that much. Fanboi much? On the tech side, the Bolt definitely has the edge.

              1. bro1999 says:

                That’s exactly what I said. Fail at reading comprehension much?

            2. Lawrence says:

              The Gen 1 Leaf was so ugly that I didn’t even consider it at all and went with the eGolf. Model3 for me, no. I need a the hatchback. The Leaf2 works better for me for its utility and I like how it looks in RL. For my wife who at most buys groceries and goes to the mall, the Model3 will work fine.

              1. Asak says:

                Having both, I can tell you that the e-Golf is the better car overall, so you made the right choice.

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            “Beauty is in the eye of the ‘Bolt Holder’ ”

            Here’s another saying: “Beauty is only skin deep, but ugliness goes all the way to the bone.”

            That certainly applies to the Bolt EV! Sure, we all have different opinions about what’s pretty or ugly or sexy or plain-Jane, but the style of the Bolt EV is turning off a significant portion of potential American buyers. GM would do better trying to sell it overseas… but it is deliberately limiting shipments to countries where that style is better received!

            Maybe someone should write a book about how GM is badly handling the promotion (or absence thereof) and sales of the Bolt EV, entitled How to Not Sell an Electric Car.

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              Ugly to the bone?

              Have you seen a Gen2 LEAF in person yet before you make this claim?

              I have seen it at SF Autoshow and compared with the Bolt, it isn’t much better looking at all. But that is just me.

              At least I have seen it in person. Now, where have you seen it in person in your fly over states?

            2. ClarksonCote says:

              Yeah, they outsold every other EV last month. They’re really bad at it. And your idea of looks is SUBJECTIVE

            3. terminaltrip421 says:

              the CEO admitted they are effectively losing money on the bolt, so unless losing money is the name of the game then I think they’re just doing what they have to do.

              1. David Whitfield says:

                Sometimes you have to loss money to gain market share, to create devoted owners.

        2. Klaus says:

          The new leaf does look better than the Bolt imo. But it’s just my opinion and the range is disappointing (also my opinion). With EV’s I feel always buy as much range as you can afford, but I can see where the Leaf might be a better choice than the Bolt for some. The more choices the better to get people to ditch their ICE cars right?

        3. EVShopper says:

          If you like boring and average, then I would agree. But the Bolt in person looks a lot better than the photos would convey. It is youthful and spunky looking. The LEAF looks like any other wagon on the road.

        4. WadeTyhon says:

          Ehhhh the new leaf and the Bolt both look just… like cars from their respective car makers.

          They’re neither beautiful nor ugly. They’re both just every day cars. The type most people drive.

          I don’t really like Nissan’s current design cues. I’d rather drive a Cruze or Malibu than an Altima or Maxima.

          But like those cars, the Bolt and Leaf are inoffensive looking.

          “S. Korean designers who designed the Bolt EV certainly managed to uglify the Prius shape quite a bit!”

          Do you really think the BOLT is uglier than the PRIUS? :O Or are you just trolling bro? Because if you do then man what you’re smoking! Lol

        5. VFanRJ says:

          Call me a Bolt Fanboy. The 2018 Leaf is such a disappointment. Now it looks like all the other Nissans, which I’m not a fan of.

          Worse than that, the 2018 Leaf still has the same passive battery pack and slow L3 charging. Maybe Nissan will update the internals in 2019.

          1. Aaron says:

            Supposedly the “internals” will be updated on the 60kWh model coming out Q3 2018.

            That said, while you my be disappointed with the new LEAF, it’s vastly outselling the Bolt on a per month basis. So, I’d say that the public at large seem to consider the LEAF a superior option. Granted, Nissan is going to produce a lot more of them than GM will produce of the Bolt.

      4. Stimpy says:

        That’s interesting considering the Bolt design is a poorman’s clone of the i3. From the windshield to the C-pillar, the influence is very obvious.

        1. Dav8or says:

          Well, the poor man got it right! BMW was seriously on LSD when they took pen to paper.

    2. GreenMD says:

      I think the Bolt was engineered to be affordable, efficient, and practical – dorky is an unfortunate side effect. I suspect these next vehicles based on the Bolt will sacrifice 1 or more of the above to make it look better or be more comfortable and luxurious. No car can check all the boxes, not even Tesla.

    3. Dan says:

      Chevy understands the needs and tastes of the average car owner quite well. The average car driver is not interested in driving a car that looks like a Porsche even if they could afford it – in most parts of the US, it’s just not what you do. With the Bolt, they could have gone the Sonic route or they could have gone the Trax route. With their gas cars, they have 2 models to play with and they could split that demographic. With the Bolt, they had to pick somewhere in the middle. If current car trends hold though (2017, the year of the small car bloodbath), I wouldn’t be surprised if the Bolt migrates to a more Trax like look in future years.

    4. God/Bacardi says:

      The ICE Spark was sent to Korea to become an EV Spark and the ICE Sonic was sent to Korea to become the Bolt EV but it evolved into it’s own platform in an effort to create more interior volume…Look at the battery, modules double stacked where the gas tank is which allows GM to build EVs on ICE assembly lines…Unfortunately what we get isn’t a “normal” looking Cruze hatchback, we get what looks and feels both inside and out like a minivan…

      1. Ziv says:

        The Cruze hatch is an attractive car, I wish the Bolt had been designed to look a bit more like it. With the Bolt platform (and a relatively small electric motor) giving it more space inside, it would still have been relatively roomy instead of sub-compact cramped. And since it isn’t as tall it would have had a better CdA, and possibly more HWY AER.

        1. wavelet says:

          IMO, the Bolt looks very much like a cross between the Sonic hatch and the Spark — the dimensions are basically that of a slightly longer Sonic, and slight taller to make room for the skateboard battery pack.

          1. Ziv says:

            I agree, the Bolt does look like a slightly taller Sonic and I guess I can see some Spark in in it. But if GM kept the Bolt platform but had built the Bolt to more closely resemble the Cruze hatch it would be a much better looking car and would probably have a better CdA as well.

    5. Jim Struckel says:

      The uncomfortable seats stopped me from considering the Bolt. I hope the apparent upcoming Buick electric crossover will be better.

    6. Asak says:

      The seats are really bad and inexplicable. There’s a good chance I’d be driving a Bolt right now if it weren’t for the abysmal seats.

      Interior styling does seem sort of cheap also. I actually like the white bordering but somehow the whole presentation comes across as cheaper than in the Volt.

      Outside appearance is fine in my opinion.

  3. jelloslug says:

    I still have not seen a Bolt on the road around here.

    1. bro1999 says:

      I see more and more every day where I live.
      Used to be for a long while I’d only see a couple every week, but now I literally see at least 1 a day. Saw 4 in one day last week.

    2. ffbj says:

      Lucky You.

  4. bro1999 says:

    The GM haters must especially despise the fact that the company that supposedly “killed the electric car” is now the leader.

    1. Vexar says:

      Sometimes, I need people like you to make me laugh the whole day. Sincerely, thank you. Gotta love those all-electric Camaro’s and Tahoe’s that GM is releasing in two years that outperform the Tesla Gen2 Roadster or Bollinger B1.

      GM issued a stop sale in europe of the Opel Ampera E:

      then GM sold off Opel to PSA (Peugeot / Citroen) after causing the remaining orders to jack up by $5500 USD:

      What does PSA do? They say screw where GM failed, they are all in for all-electric. And more importantly, they will make money selling the Ampera E, where GM has failed on that or the GM Bolt. So says the head of PSA:

      Sidenote: this is not Pacific Southwest Airlines, or American Eagle as it is now known.

      1. bro1999 says:

        GM pulled out of Europe and sold off Opel because it was a money sink. Why would GM continue to supply Bolts/Ampera-E’s to a money losing market? They don’t operate a cash incineration engine like Tesla afterall. 😀

        Name me another traditional manufacturer that is doing more than what GM is doing with EVs currently, and in the future. Don’t make me laugh by saying BMW. I could maybe understand a Nissan argument, though they couldn’t even be bothered to develop the new Leaf on an all new platform.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          The Leaf is outselling GM’s EVs by leaps and bounds internationally. You’re trying very hard to obscure the fact that GM has had a more or less complete failure to sell cars (not just EVs) in Europe, and it’s understandable why a GM fanboy like you is too embarrassed to admit that.

          As far as future prospects, VW is clearly charging ahead of GM. VW has placed a future order for EV batteries with LG Chem that completely dwarfs GM’s orders.

          If the EV revolution is a game of musical chairs, GM is going to be the one left without a chair when the music stops!

          1. Klaus says:

            It’s amazing what fraud, lying, and getting caught has done for VW’s motivations. VW certainly intends to be a leader. Let’s hope they realize it. I’d rather give GM my money that VW, but we all have different priorities.

          2. WadeTyhon says:

            “As far as future prospects, VW is clearly charging ahead of GM. VW has placed a future order for EV batteries with LG Chem that completely dwarfs GM’s orders.”

            Until they prove otherwise, I will assume all VW statements are PR damage control and nothing more. I feel about them the same way I felt about GM a decade ago.

            Do we know what the size of GM’s battery orders actually are? Or VWs?

        2. VFanRJ says:

          Yep, today China is the happening market. Not Europe.

      2. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

        GM also fights Tesla sales model because the current garbage model GM is in is a “disadvantage”.

        They also have their Lawyers fighting to lower emissions standards so we can breathe polluted air so GM can sell more sloppy OPEC swallowers…

        Bro’s proud of giving his money to GM for their Lawyers to fund those endeavors.

      3. EVShopper says:

        Opel pulled the plug on ampera orders Not GM.

    2. Paul K says:

      Well bro don’t forget how GM ended the EV1 program with the destruction of fully functional vehicles. AND don’t forget that GM bought the patent rights from the inventor of a better battery and promptly sold the patent to Chevron an oil company who forbid Panasonic from making more.

      But that was then. It was Tesla who whipped up the public appetite for electric cars by showing their potential. GM has tremendous engineering talent and it shows in how long their gassers can last.

      The good thing about all this is that there will be serious competition for more affordable EVs. I just hope Tesla survives.

      1. Asak says:

        The Chevron thing wasn’t only infuriating it was also shortsighted on the part of Chevron. They could have tried to make the transition to being more of an energy company and not just an oil company. But they decided to try to stifle the market, and now where is NiMh?

    3. Aaron says:

      GM apologist calls out the haters. News at 11.

      1. ModernMarvelFan says:

        LEAF/Model X driving, GM hater reporting on all the EV sites…

        Why am I not surprised?

        You troll here and GCR with your GM hater news. Do you really have to comment on every GM related article to bash it?

        1. Aaron says:

          Yeah, not everyone critical of GM is a hater…just tired of GM being white knighted by owners who then diss Tesla. Despite Tesla doing far more for EV adoption.

          Pick your kool-aid wisely, sir.

          1. Aaron says:

            To add, I comment on a wide range of articles. And you seem to be defending a person on this site that does the very thing you’re accusing me of, only against Tesla.

            Pick your cause wisely, as well.

    4. ffbj says:

      Maybe like 3rd place, but if that’s leading to you, well fine.

    5. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      bro1999 wrote a laughable GM fanboy post:

      “the fact that the company that supposedly ‘killed the electric car’ is now the leader.”

      LOL! What a clown!
      ? ? ?

      There isn’t any way that GM is the “leader” in the EV revolution. In the USA, the Tesla Model S is leading in annual sales, and internationally the Bolt EV isn’t even a contender!

      Plus, of course, Tesla is far and away the leader in technology. GM actually farmed out the entire Bolt EV drivetrain to LG Electronics & LG Chem! Panasonic/Tesla and BYD lead in battery cell production; GM has not even entered that field yet.

      So exactly what part of the EV revolution does GM lead? Maybe it’s in farming out its EV production to others!

      😆 😆 😆

      1. Klaus says:

        Maybe credit for brining a sub $40k 200+ mile range EV to the U.S. market. Given that all it takes is farming it out, it’s nice that all manufacturer’s did that. Oh, wait.

    6. WadeTyhon says:

      You guys just hate each other because you’re so much alike but root for different ‘teams’. 🙂

      Otherwise you’re no different towards Tesla than a GM hater is towards GM. Or Silverado drivers toward an F-150. Like the GM haters here are doing, you pick your facts to form your opinions rather than letting facts form your opinions.

      Personally, I don’t know how any EV advocate could root against either GM or Tesla. It’s baffling to me.

  5. BillT says:

    We will know the legacy OEMs are really serious about EVs when they build models that compete head to head (interior space, cargo space, styling etc.) with their “top 10” ICE models (Equinox in GM’s case, Escape in Ford’s case, RAV4, CRV etc.) GM does seem like they are heading in that direction faster than most mainstream OEMs but we will see. The next 24 months seem like they will be very interesting for EVs.

  6. Tech01x says:

    It is puzzling that GM hamstrung the DCFC on the Bolt. And apparently it still isn’t fixed in the 2018 model. Limitations in battery chemistry? Pack cooling capacity issues? They need to clear this up for wider adoption.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Did Nissan also “hamstring” the new Leaf by not beefing up the DCFC capability as well?

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Maybe Nissan wisely chose not to provide a way to charge the Leaf battery pack very fast, since that would lead to overheating in a pack with no active cooling system.

        The frustrating thing about the Bolt EV is that with a couple of tweaks (better front seats and standard DCFC charging), it could be a compelling EV… if it was sold in countries with high demand for that style of vehicle! Instead, GM has chosen to lopsidedly limit sales to the U.S., where many or most potential buyers find the style unattractive.

        It certainly looks like GM is deliberately sabotaging sales of the Bolt EV. In fact, GM isn’t even fixing those front seats in the new model year! Now, why would that be? Hmmm?

        Of course, everyone who has been following the events of the EV revolution knows why: It’s because GM doesn’t want to make or sell compelling long-range EVs.

        1. VFanRJ says:

          2018 Leaf still uses the same slow charging technology. So far has made very little progress. Perhaps 2019 will be a better year.

    2. HVACman says:

      Hamstrung? When one plots the 0-100% charge rates measured for the Model S 60 vs the Bolt on a full 150 amp-rated CCS charger, the Bolt charges faster at all charge levels and almost as fast on a 125A CCS charger.

      What the Bolt needs is a CCS network with adequate amps, not internal upgrades. And in GM’s recent presentation, they changed their tune and made the commitment to work in partnering and/or investing as needed to help create that more robust CCS network for their customers.

      1. Stimpy says:

        I’ve believe GM is committed to a CCS charging network when I see it actually happen and not a day before. The common number of CCS plugs PER STATION in the US is holding at 1. ONE PLUG!!!!

      2. Tech01x says:

        Prove it.

        Show us a charge session on video. There are plenty with Tesla’s Model S and X.

  7. s says:

    So GM’s future rides on LG? If this is so central to their future, why don’t they try to bring the expertise in house?

    1. ffbj says:

      Pretty much the way I see it. LG builds the battery pack, the drive train, and GM puts it together.
      20 evs, that’s a load of quality stuff to make the wheat grow.

    2. JeremyK says:

      What internal expertise is GM lacking that you think they should have?

      Just at the two engineering centers in MI, they employ almost 30K people.

      One of those facilities, GM Global Powertrain Engineering, was recently renamed Global Propulsion Systems to reflect the transition to alternative powertrains, such as battery/electric. According to this, nearly 50% of the 8600 person workforce is involved in alternative or electrified propulsion systems.

      A large portion of the 710 acre Tech Center campus in Warren MI is dedicated to battery research, development, testing and validation. The largest battery lab in the United States is HERE.

      GM has a battery manufacturing facility in Romulus, MI where it builds batteries for the Volt.

      GM has an electric motor manufacturing facility in Baltimore.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        And yet, GM farmed out the entire EV powertrain, not only the manufacture but the development, for the Bolt EV, to LG Chem and LG Electronics’ brand new automotive division.

        If GM’s expertise and depth in its EV engineering is so good, then why aren’t they doing assembly of the Bolt EV powertrain in-house? Why isn’t GM making at least some of the powertrain parts?

        It’s not that we are asserting that GM’s ability to manufacture compelling EVs is inadequate; it’s that GM itself is signalling exactly that!

      2. Klaus says:

        Shhh, you’re hurting the narrative! I had a friend tell me he would’t get the bolt due to the seats. Yes, they should be improved, but you can (and some have) improve them yourself pretty easily. He’d then have a great performing, fun to drive EV that results in much less pollution, needs nearly no maintenance, etc. Instead, he complains and keeps driving his ICE and pines for an EV. But it’s the seats that are a problem. 😉

    3. bro1999 says:

      Sorta like how Tesla’s future depends on Panasonic then?

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        No, not like that. Panasonic isn’t in control of the output at Gigafactory One; Tesla is.

        Contrariwise, GM isn’t in control of production of Bolt EV powertrains; LG Chem/Electronics is.

    4. VFanRJ says:

      You don’t understand GM’s business model. GM no longer makes most of it’s car parts, they outsource them. In fact GM produces 20% of the parts for a typical ICE car, 80% from suppliers. GM’s focus is developing and owning the IP as well as the go to market. GM produced 40% of the Bolt’s parts, LG Chem 60%.

      GM is using Bolt to expand into to taxi service with Lyft as well as ride sharing through their new startup Maven. GM is into transportation, not just making cars.

      BTW, GM is a public company which means they are tasked with maximizing shareholder value.

  8. Bill Howland says:

    That’s a point. I don’t understand why – given the price increase of the Ampera-e in Europe, why everyone there who wants one cannot obtain one NOW, since both GM and PSA Citroen will be making money on the sale.

    I think the situation would change over night there if prospective buyers walked into their dealerships and said, “No Ampera-e’s? Well, don’t call me, I’ll call you.” and walk out the door.

    In Canada, either the base price and/or the standard equipment on the car (or both) were too generous. Effectively raising the price there slightly will keep the car profitable for everyone and keep prospective customers satisfied.

    As far as ’20 new all-electric and Hydrogen vehicles’, that kind of statement leaves me just cold. Seeing as the only ‘NEW’ electrics I’ve seen have been newly-wallpapered versions of a BOLT ev, (in other words – a SubCompact Station Wagon and that’s it) – I hope GM’s marketing hype doesn’t mean in ENGLISH:

    1). 2 new ‘badge engineered’ Bolts.
    2). 18 new “ALL ELECTRIC” Hydrogen large vehicles that ‘plug in’ to a 15,000 PSI hydrogen hose.

    1. Tech01x says:

      Remember, most of that GM effort, like VW’s is centered on China. The mandate right now in China is 12% of sales must be EVs in 2020. For GM, that’s about 450,000 vehicles and many of those are not vehicles sold in more developed countries.

      Yeah, GM will badge engineer the Bolt and the “real” effort appears to be kicked off with a 2021 platform. Until then, GM will have its hands full just to meet the Chinese mandate. That’s why the 1,000,000 in 2026 seems so paltry when China is saying 450,000 in 2020 for GM.

      1. bro1999 says:

        Ain’t just those companies. ALL manufacturers are targeting China. Even Tesla is supposed to be building a factory there.

        1. ffbj says:

          Thanks for the news flash.

          1. bro1999 says:

            You’re so very welcome, friend.

      2. Asak says:

        Yeah, but the truth is “badge engineering” is all the Bolt really needs. Under the hood the car is solid. It’s the interior and exterior that’s lacking.

  9. God/Bacardi says:

    Let’s look at GM’s press release, page 15:

    So two new CUVs by 2020, we know one is the Buick Encore (subcompact) so most likely the second vehicle will be another subcompact…Page 15, GM is touting an all new battery platform, no more double stacked modules by the gas tank, more a true skateboard design and the article states:

    “>30% cost
    Improved DC Fast
    Higher energy
    Larger footprint,
    lower height
    Flexible, modular

    The way I interrupt this, Bolt EV battery is limited to subcompacts (very unpopular segment), limited charging speed, limited density/range and the rear modules are double stacked to fill in the gas tank voids.

    Therefore GM’s futures rides on their future battery system which is the polar opposite the Bolt’s EV core values (relatively slow charging, tiny segment, double stacked rear modules to fill gas tank voids which gives GM flexibility to switch from EV to ICE on the fly)…

    1. Ziv says:

      Spellcheck is a curse sent to bedevil us.

    2. bro1999 says:

      Don’t gloss over the fact GM stated it is going to commit to investing in charging infrastructure finally.

      1. bro1999 says:

        Page 18: “We are committed to a robust EV infrastructure to accelerate adoption of electric vehicles:
        – We will partner, incentivize, and/or invest when necessary
        – We are using OnStar and Maven data to optimize charger locations and how customers use them
        – We are working with utilities on how to optimize electric grid usage (intend to deploy API’s for use by utilities/charging companies Q1’18.

        1. Aaron says:

          “When necessary”

          Ha. They haven’t seemed it so, yet.

          1. ffbj says:

            Everything is going to made from the
            ground-up, since in regard to evs GM has had lots of experience in that area.
            Having them ground-up that is.

          2. bro1999 says:

            First it was “GM doesn’t invest in charging infrastructure! They suck!”
            Now it’s “GM doesn’t (do enough) to invest in charging infrastructure! They suck!”

            Then when GM does start investing in earnest, the haters will move the goal posts again and cry “GM sucks at investing in charging infrastructure! They suck!”

            The haters will never be pleased.

            1. Aaron says:

              They haven’t invested at all, you’re quoting forward looking statements and calling that an investment…

              The mental gymnastics employed by GM apologists never ceases to amaze.

              1. ffbj says:

                Yes, and every time Tesla misses on something, they are just jumping up and down shouting it out.
                GM Apologists is a perfect way to put it.
                GMA-Just look at the chickens we have.
                Me-Those are eggs.
                GMA-No, no, no, they are chickens to be.

                1. bro1999 says:

                  Replace GM/GMA with TSLA/TSLA-A and it makes even more sense.

                  1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                    Again with the false equivalence from a Tesla hating troll.

                    We Tesla fans don’t make up and post lies about GM’s actions or its cars, nor do we go out of our way to repetitively post attacks on GM and its cars even in discussions completely unrelated to GM’s cars.

                    And speaking for myself, I don’t hope GM will fail, as you clearly hope Tesla will fail. I keep hoping GM will turn around its anti-EV attitude, and start making and selling them in earnest. It worries me that GM is dragging its feet on doing so, because sooner or later it will have to, or go out of business just like Eastman Kodak did. I truly hope that GM doesn’t wait until it’s too late, as Kodak did. There is a reason the government bailed out GM; it would be disastrous to our economy if it went bankrupt, and I don’t want the U.S. Government to have to bail them out again.

                    We Tesla fans find Truth and actual facts to serve our needs quite adequately. Too bad about you and the other Tesla haters!

                    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

                      “We Tesla fans don’t make up and post lies about GM’s actions or its cars, nor do we go out of our way to repetitively post attacks on GM and its cars even in discussions completely unrelated to GM’s cars”

                      Seriously? Do we need to go back to rehash all the craps that you laid on Voltec complexity when you didn’t even understand how complex a typical transmission is? Geez, seriously, it seems that it is a freaking membership requirement for any/all Tesla fan bois to hate GM as part of the entry to the cult.

                      If you truly want GM to commit to more EV sales, then there is NO reason for you to bash GM on this particular article.

                    2. ModernMarvelFan says:

                      “I don’t hope GM will fail, as you clearly hope Tesla will fail. I keep hoping GM will turn around its anti-EV attitude, and start making and selling them in earnest. It worries me that GM is dragging its feet on doing so, because sooner or later it will have to, or go out of business just like Eastman Kodak did”

                      Yet, as everyone can see with the time stamp of the messages posted by you here that NOT A SINGLE MESSAGE FROM YOU was positive about this news. In fact, your first message posted here was criticism and then continued with other bantering with other GM car owners who tried to defend against your bashing for much of the rest of the messages…

                      Seriously, don’t you have something better to do than to bash GM on every GM related articles?

                  2. ffbj says:

                    Yeah, I thought of that, and it’s true. Though it’s a question of scale.

              2. bro1999 says:

                I’m sure the CCS stations GM required Bolt certified dealers install don’t count, right?

                1. Aaron says:

                  Since there is no requirement that they be public stations, and that dealerships finance the stations…not really.

                  Of course, if you want to talk that up as charging investment for owners to be able to use their Bolt to travel, by all means. You’ve managed to justify your stance on other issues with even less relevance.

                2. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

                  Are they open 24/7?
                  Do they count when you pull up an the gates are closed at 11:30pm?
                  Do they count when they have their cars plugged in not charging and no space for you and you have to ask if you can charge your vehicle that’s not of the make and model of their product lines and ask them to move it?

                  Nope, they don’t count……..DUHHHH!!!

                3. Nix says:

                  When they consistently park a Silverado in front of the charger to keep anybody from using it, no, it doesn’t count.

                4. Recoil says:

                  Bro, you mean like the one that has been broken for over 6 months on one of the largest bolt dealers lot? All it says is you have to have them. It says nothing about keeping them operational or letting the public use them.

                  1. Get Real says:

                    I think GM is feeling the pressure in this segment that Tesla has skillfully applied in this soon to be growing segment and hence GM’s “we screwed up on charging” faux pas.

      2. God/Bacardi says:

        The overwhelming majority of people whining about GM’s lack of infrastructure simply want GM to install a FREE for public use DCFC at their dealerships…

        As you and I discussed before, despite the Bolt EV being a highly subsidized lease where folks are leasing them for $0 down and an effective monthly payment under $150, people still feed “cheated” that GM doesn’t offer the “full tax credit” in lease cash…

        1. SparkEV says:

          I don’t think so. I think most people (at least in CA who suffer through free charging) recognize the negative consequences of free charging. In fact, GM indirectly gave free charging to few Bolts via Lyft/Maven, and that made entire city’s worth of DCFC practically unusable. “Free” is a powerful tool to destroy charging infrastructure.

          If Kochs really wanted to kill EV, they’d make all public charging to be free. Then just for few million dollars, using public charging would be practically impossible.

          Free charging SUCKS!!!

          1. God/Bacardi says:

            This is what I’m reading on Bolt forums; people have their expectations and probably wrongfully believe they’ll be empty…

        2. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

          No, Free charging suckz Azz.
          At the dealer means those chargers are gated off after hours and as noted many time before, those dealers will have their cars parked on the chargers not charging to prevent freeloaders.

          The expectation is a DCFC you pay for that’s openly accessible 24/7 because free charging Suckz!!!

        3. Klaus says:

          I think you’re wrong on that. But, like you, I don’t have any numbers to back that up. I do, however, want to see GM invest in DCFC chargers and am happy to pay to use them.

          1. Bacardi says:

            There are multiple posts on Bolt EV forums requesting this…

            1. Klaus says:

              And that’s enough to assert “The overwhelming majority of people whining about GM’s lack of infrastructure simply want GM to install a FREE for public use DCFC at their dealerships”?


          2. SparkEV says:

            “But, like you, I don’t have any numbers to back that up. But, like you, I don’t have any numbers to back that up.”

            I do have the number to back it up. I ran an experiment for couple of months, stopping at every DCFC in my route at least once a day just to see if I had to wait (I didn’t alway need charge). Bolt with Lyft/Maven sticker was on it every single time, 100% chance of waiting for them.

            There used to be some Leaf/i3 waiting for Bolts, but as time went on, I saw fewer and fewer of them, but just as many Bolts. I think they discovered Free charging SUCKS!!!

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      God/Bacardi said:

      “GM is touting an all new battery platform, no more double stacked modules by the gas tank, more a true skateboard design…

      “Therefore GM’s futures rides on their future battery system which is the polar opposite the Bolt’s EV core values (relatively slow charging, tiny segment, double stacked rear modules to fill gas tank voids which gives GM flexibility to switch from EV to ICE on the fly)…”

      I love your scenario! Let’s hope you’re right, and furthermore hope that GM develops this new, larger skateboard design in-house, instead of farming out the entire development and production of the powertrain to one supplier. Especially a new and unproven supplier like LG Electronics’ new automotive division!

      Furthermore, if this is GM’s plan, then farming out the entire EV powertrain for the Bolt EV to LG Chem/Electronics would be much less significant. That would relegate the Bolt EV platform it to a sideline, one for which indeed it might be appropriate to farm the whole thing out to a single supplier.

      But of course, if that’s the case, then the entire premise of this article — that the Bolt EV is the “gateway” to future EVs from GM — that entire premise is fundamentally wrong.

      Bacardi, I really hope that in another 2-3 years we can look back and say “By Clerk Maxwell and Nikola Tesla, that Bacardi had it right!” 🙂

  10. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    “Simply put, the Bolt EV is the symbol of General Motors’ future.”

    GM’s future is using suppliers to build entire powertrains for its cars? If so, then GM’s future looks pretty dark. Sooner or later those suppliers will figure out they don’t need GM; they can build their own auto assembly plants. Talk about cutting out the middle-man!

    It’s difficult for me to believer the Bolt EV is the linchpin of GM’s future plans. If it was that important, then why didn’t GM develop the EV powertrain in-house? The answer, of course, is because they did develop the Volt (Voltec) powertrain in-house, at great expense… an expense which has arguably not paid off, because sales of the Volt (and the Cadillac ELR) have been disappointing.

    Looks to me like GM should have developed the Bolt EV as a concept car, or at most a limited production compliance car, but producing the EV powertrain in-house.

    We’ll know that GM is serious about building and selling BEVs in large numbers when: (a) GM moves to build its own high-capacity battery cell factories, so it can take control of its battery supply, and (b) GM starts assembling BEV powertrains in-house, rather than farming it out to LG Electronics or other suppliers.

    And not before.

    1. JeremyK says:

      “GM’s future is using suppliers to build entire powertrains for its cars? If so, then GM’s future looks pretty dark. Sooner or later those suppliers will figure out they don’t need GM; they can build their own auto assembly plants. Talk about cutting out the middle-man!”

      After watching Tesla struggle for years with vehicle production, I think those suppliers will think twice about getting into automobile manufacturing.

    2. JeremyK says:

      “Looks to me like GM should have developed the Bolt EV as a concept car, or at most a limited production compliance car, but producing the EV powertrain in-house.”

      In case you missed it, that was called the Spark EV.

      1. bro1999 says:

        PuPu misses a lot of things. 😉

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Oh, please. The Spark EV was a mere conversion car, as well as nothing but a compliance car.

        Cars with two strikes against them don’t go on to becoming best selling cars, nor do they have much influence on later models.

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          “The Spark EV was a mere conversion car, as well as nothing but a compliance car.”

          So, a compliance car had its powertrain built in-house but a wider distributed car had its powertrain done by a major supplier. Does that poke a hole in your claim that somehow in house powertrain is a requirement or just shows that isn’t really the key to it all?

          Bolt motor and controller are GM design. Even if GM wants to leverage the technology forward, they can still use similar but different motors (need to) for a larger car that can be built in house or others. The outsourcing is all about price/cost point that Bolt needs to reach.

          GM has done similar approach with its ICE vehicles too. It sourced Engine from Honda before but that doesn’t mean GM wasn’t about to make its own engine.

    3. WadeTyhon says:

      “Looks to me like GM should have developed the Bolt EV as a concept car, or at most a limited production compliance car, but producing the EV powertrain in-house.”

      How would this make the Bolt EV’s development better for you?

  11. Jim says:

    Until someone, other than Tesla, does something about charging infrastructure BEVs will always be a “second car”. Tesla saw that and moved immediately to fix it for their cars. Chevy and others will have to do something similar and soon.

    1. F150 Brian says:

      Wrong answer. Car manufacturers should not integrate into the charging business.

      We do not need more charging stations that cater to s specific brand. Sure Tesla was doomed without their network due to the chicken and egg scenario, but this is not the model to use going forward.

      Look at the Shell announcement. We need more like that.

      1. ffbj says:

        Yes, Chevy is saying once you buy it, that’s all we car(e) about. No standard DCFC, no charging infrastructure, yes that’s really leading the ev revolution.

        1. bro1999 says:

          Page 18: We are committed to a robust EV infrastructure to accelerate adoption of electric vehicles:
          – We will partner, incentivize, and/or invest when necessary
          – We are using OnStar and Maven data to optimize charger locations and how customers use them
          – We are working with utilities on how to optimize electric grid usage (intend to deploy API’s for use by utilities/charging companies Q1’18.
          So much for that one point you so love to cling to.

          1. William says:

            ” when necessary “, sounds like a future commitment at some point later in time.

            So, “someday”, is something to look forward to, I suppose.

            1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

              A future statement with no criteria to define what is “necessary”.

              That’s an empty promise but those are perfectly fine for Bro.

          2. ffbj says:

            They should be committed.
            Just because you merely repeat all the bilge that GM is spouting, like your defense of the shut-down this Summer for retooling, just what GM spokespersons were saying.

            You are the last person I would view as an authority or anyone with any kind of insight.
            I can read the GM blurbs myself.

            1. bro1999 says:

              GM is definitely committed to working to preserve the federal EV tax credit, something Tesla is NOT committed to for whatever reason. They haven’t said a peep since the GOP House introduced the bill to kill the credit at the end of this year. Why is that?

              Afterall, Elon was the one that tweeted Tesla wouldn’t be against sacrificing short term profit to make sure as many Tesla customers as possible could take advantage of the full $7,500 credit before it sunset.

              1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

                There’s nothing for them to say because Elon has stated many time in the past they don’t need the tax credits and is bad for the industry. GM is who needs the tax credits.
                Take a look at the Volt. The tax credit had the minimum traction battery size of 16KWh to get the full credit. So guess how big the battery pack was on the Gen1 Volt?
                Yup 16KWh but used only ~56% of it. Talk about gaming the system!!!

                1. Ambulator says:

                  Wrong order. The maximum rebate was available on 16 kWh batteries because that’s what the Volt had. It was Congress gaming the system, not GM.

          3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            So much for that one point you so love to cling to.

            Let me get this straight: You’re actually trying to equate a bullet point in some GM press release as being equal to the actual progress other companies have made in installing DC fast chargers?!?!

            WOW!! Calling you a GM apologist is entirely inadequate. The level of fanaticism and wishful thinking on display here brings to mind a word that Tesla haters like to throw around rather carelessly: Cultist. Ordinary Tesla fans are not cultists, not by any stretch of the term. But you actually are a GM cultist!

      2. William says:

        All Shell is doing is doing is hedging their business model. It has first mover advantage in this EV charging space among Big 0il. But, some of us EV-advocates, would rather pass on their “business proposition”.

        Shell and the other 4 0il behemoths, still have some work to do, in a few areas, to earn my non-emergency charging business, at this point in time. That can change, hopefully.

    2. Texas FFE says:

      This “second car”/”first car” anology no longer make sense. I have an SUV that I use for loads and towing and as backup for my FFE but I use the SUV so seldom that the battery is usually dead when I try to use it. Since I use the SUV so seldom I’m planning on selling my SUV and just renting a SUV through Turo when I need one.

      I think the time has long since passed when people considered their BEVs their secondary vehicles. My FFE is definitely my primary vehicle. My FFE has limitations but I no longer feel the need to have another car sitting around for trips my FFE can’t handle.

      Besides, I can always rent a car or truck through Turo for trips my FFE can’t handle.

      1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

        “I use the SUV so seldom that the battery is usually dead when I try to use i”

        lol, yeah happened to my truck too. 99.999% is driven in my EV. I bought a small 15W solar charger on ebay for the truck and leave it plugged in and on the dashboard to keep a trickle to it. Works like a charm. 3 months later and the truck fires up fine. Problem now is the bugs are starting to live in the engine bay.

      2. MikeM says:

        Same story here.

        It took no time at all for our second car (Leaf) to move into first car place, getting used daily for the almost everything!

        A 12 y/o Subaru sits around for occasional use on long trips and hauling jobs. Also does a run every 10 days or so, just to keep it healthy.

      3. Sans Ice says:

        Yup – same here. Although my FFE only gets 74 miles it is my daily driver. My wife drives our Tesla and the Ford pick-up is rarely driven – just to the lumber yard or dump every few weekends.

    3. JeremyK says:

      I guess I don’t understand what is wrong about a BEV being a second car. That “second car”, at least in my household, accumulates more miles per year than our “family/primary car” that we use for road trips.

    4. Someone out there says:

      There are tons of other charging networks than Tesla’s

  12. Texas FFE says:

    I test drove a GMC Arcadia Denali AWD with Adaptive Cruise Control yesterday. It was a very nice car but I couldn’t get past the gasoline motor. Until someone starts selling a BEV with capabilities and performance similar to the Arcadia at the price range of the Arcadia I seriously doubt I will be buying another car.

  13. Pantarei says:

    Gm can’t make a profit selling smaller cars. This is an enormous problem and instead of trying to fix that, it seems they have just giving up. It’s why they withdraw from all those markets where small cars dominate, and it’s partly why GM filed for bankruptcy in 2009. I mention it because it may also bleed into their attempts to sell EVs, since they too have a smaller profit margin. Improving efficiency and cost effectiveness should be GM’s main focus, even more than electrification and autonomous drive, since it effects everything. Toyota has been on a continuous cost-cutting spree since 2008, and they didn’t even went bankrupt. Excellent engineering doesn’t mean anything if you can’t sell at a competitive price point while making a profit.

    1. Someone out there says:

      Funny then that GM just recently came out and said they are profitable in every segment!

      1. Pantarei says:

        By segments GM means in this case North America, International Ops, South America, and GM Financial. South America is profitable for the first time since Q4 2014. So they are not talking about car segments. Sometimes it pays to read more than just headlines.

      2. Nix says:

        This just shows the need for GM to finally put out a crossover EV or PHEV, sooner rather than later.

  14. Warren says:

    Love our Bolt. Wake me up when the next affordable, 200 mile range EV actually arrives in a showroom near me. ZZZZZzzzzz

    1. William says:

      You won’t be bothered anytime soon! Rest easy!

  15. cab says:

    Honestly, having leased a gen 1 Volt and now in a Model S, I think GM is really doing a great job here balancing EVs with their traditional Ice offerings while maintaining profitability.

    Other than Nissan, which of the other big OEMs is e enough in the race? Yes, I agree the Bolt should have been introduced as a small SUV vs. The CUV it is, but it’s still a huge step forward, and I suspect as demand grows GM will be VERY WELL positioned to fill out their line-up. Here in the Inside EVs bubble it all seems too slow, and too little to many, but relative to the overall car market, that just isn’t true. Indeed, owning a Model S and a small SUV, I can’t help but think the upcoming electric Buick SUV would make a better replacement for the SUV than a Model 3.

  16. ffbj says:

    I think the behemoth is stirring.
    20 evs, that won’t happen.
    They will still rely on truck sales and suv for years to come. They have made some good moves branching into mobility, but they won’t be the Grand Marshall, leading the ev parade. Tesla has that spot. They could be the brass section, loud and showy.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Why don’t you believe GM won’t release 20 EVs in the next 5 years like they stated? Besides being a GM hater?
      When GM says something, it follows through as promised AND on schedule. Unlike some “other” manufacturers.

      1. Aaron says:

        LOL, oh yes, GM has never missed a deadline, never covered up fatal flaws in their vehicles, and certainly never required a bailout from US taxpayers to avoid bankruptcy due to mismanagement.

        You’ve been really amping up the apologizing lately, Bro. I know it’s slow for a Bolt forum mod these days, what with the adoption rates and the enthusiasm for spending ~$40k on an econobox, but I don’t think trolling online forums is the best use of your time.

        We get it, you drive a Bolt and a Volt, and you love GM. They can do no wrong. However, white knighting GM isn’t going to make adoption rates go up, GM won’t be building anymore Bolts than they’ve planned, and reality won’t bend to your whims.

        You’ll keep trying though, I have no doubt.

        1. Asak says:

          Bringing up tax payer support as criticism of GM is a bad road to go down. Tesla is likely only in existence today because they were bailed out by a well timed loan from the U.S. government. It’s kind of a pot/kettle situation.

          1. Aaron says:

            First, it was a loan, and a rather small loan at that. The $50B that was used to bailout GM wasn’t paid back with interest, as with Tesla, and according to the US Govt. cost taxpayers $11.3B. However, I don’t really care to get into that, as that’s not the point of my comment.

            The point is that GM is as capable as anyone else to make errors, or having deadlines slip. There is the saying, “people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”

      2. Stimpy says:

        Yeah they follow through like the time they said the Bolt would be a 50 state car at launch then proceeded to every-so-slowly roll it out over 11 months.

      3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        bro1999 said:

        “When GM says something, it follows through as promised AND on schedule.”

        Dude, you really need to do something about your tendency to make fatuous statements that can be so easily and quickly disproven.

        P.S. — You’re getting spittle on my computer screen!

        1. Bill Howland says:

          You keep putting up that 230 MPG photo, as if there is something the slightest bit wrong with it. Or do you forget that you constantly put that up to show that GM is somehow in the wrong?

      4. Bill Howland says:

        As a fellow Bolt owner Bro1999 do you know how to turn the wifi off? Mine SAYS it turns it off but it seems to be always on, and its annoying since I have no data plan, and can’t home in a weak wifi since it always defaults to the car’s which doesn’t do me any good.

        Any Ideas?

        1. ffbj says:

          From the home screen, swipe down the Status bar.

          Tap the Settings icon.

          Tap More.

          Tap Mobile network sharing.

          Tap the Mobile Hotspot switch to turn the feature on or off.

          The Wi-Fi hotspot is now enabled or disabled.

          1. ffbj says:

            I think I read something, some time ago, about it resetting to the default, even after you changed the settings to turn it off.
            So people were required to redo the setting, turn it off, every time they started the car.
            A flaw, imo.

          2. BIll Howland says:

            My car has none of that – no ‘MORE’ , nor no “MOBILE”

            It simply has a wifi on or off ‘screen switch’ which seemingly has no effect even if it is off for weeks at a time.

            I have an “LT”, not a “Premiere”

      5. ffbj says:

        The brass is afraid they won’t be heard. It’s not really something that is a concern.
        Happy Thanksgiving, all.

    2. Asak says:

      There’s no reason that truck and SUV sales are necessarily incompatible with EVs. That’s especially true with SUVs.

  17. CDAVIS says:

    Repost Comment:

    Electrification of cars will likely result in over half of the legacy car makers not surviving the transition. GM seems to be one the of the car makers more likely to survive that transition as evidenced by GM’s having brought to market the Volt & Bolt; both very good EV’s.

    And now it seems GM plans to creditably & aggressively expand their EV portfolio. This is a much different direction than some of the other traditional car makers that have only floated “BEV Concepts” and are years away from production. I was (and continue to be) a big fan of the Volt and had the pleasure during the early development of Volt to meet some of the GM Volt Team that are now behind Bolt and GM’s other EV cars in development… I find them to be a very impressive, talented & motivated team. GM to its credit has built up a huge human talent asset with that team.

    The three biggest challenges that GM faces in remaining a winner in the EV space is:

    1. Change the economic Franchise relationship with GM dealers so that the owners/managers of GM Franchise Dealers don’t view GM’s transition to EVs a net negative to the dealership… which currently EVs represents a net threat to franchise dealerships particularly in the Service Department area which is where many dealerships derive a majority of their profits.

    2. Get serious about (*sooner* rather than later) offering GM EV customers a convenient & reliable Supercharger Network that is as good or better than Tesla’s offering. This is a must! It’s not a space that GM is familiar with and so they are currently reluctant to step into it… but it’s time to make that big step *aggressively*.

    3. As the GM EV program transitions from “halo compliance cars” to mainstream cars, expand the managment structure from within the current GM EV Team rather than slowly diluting the current EV Team with current legacy ICE management.

    I’m not saying anything here that is not already obvious.

    I look forward to seeing GM remaining a top EV competitor!

    1. God/Bacardi says:

      Greatly disagree…

      All GM needs to do, EV a Caddy XT4 and sell the FWD for $39995 with optional AWD…

      Yet to expand on your points…

      1. GM should create a 5th brand which would be the exclusive badge for all GM EVs/PHEVs…Any GM dealer, Chevy/Buick/GMC/Caddy is welcome to this brand alongside their ICE offering if they wish…

      2. The easy solution is to have corporate GM give dealerships an incentive (or reduction in their franchise fee) for installing DCFCs for public use…

      3. I believe this is already happening, but the easy solution is to poach top talent from Tesla, FF, Lucid Air, etc…Musk reported apple offered Tesla engineers “offering $250,000 signing bonuses and 60 percent salary increases”…That’s still cheaper than acquiring an entire company like Cruise for $1B…

      1. God/Bacardi says:

        Yet the bottom lines your bullets 1-3 won’t exactly greatly increase sales the way a Caddy XT4 EV for $39995 would…

  18. Nix says:

    I certainly hope they pull off their goals, but the whole fuel cell thing I could do without.

    1. WadeTyhon says:

      I could do without the fuel cell thing too. But so far they’ve only discussed it in relation to military use or large industrial vehicles. Hopefully it stays that way.

  19. stan1 says:

    I strongly fear the path GM has been following leads to bankruptcy. I can’t hope more that the firm stops dragging its feet.

    1. Jacked Beanstalk says:

      So true, man. They’re only first to market with a sub $40K 200+ mile range EV. That’s one foot in the grave right there.

      Once the hybrid Corvette is unchained in 2019 it’s gonna be all over for GM!

  20. Jacked Beanstalk says:

    That rendering of the Buick EV is nightmarishly ugly. It literally looks like something a first year art school dropout would design.

    How is it that the auto company with some of the most advanced engineering chops in the world cannot build a beautiful EV?

Leave a Reply